Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Gregory Ablavsky
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Early Republic ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Northwest Ordinance ◽  
Federal Authority ◽  
Alternate Model ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The U.S

This introduction outlines the central argument of Federal Ground. Federal authority in the Northwest and Southwest Territories, the book contends, stemmed less from foundational texts like the Northwest Ordinance than from the demands of territorial residents, who looked on the federal government not as an institution but as a resource and successfully pushed it to serve their ends. The introduction explores the contrast between the formal, nearly unchecked authority that the U.S. Constitution granted the federal government in the territories and the reality that these supposed territories were Native homelands and borderlands where imperial powers had come and gone with little change in control. It then grapples with the amorphous nature of federal government in the territories, divided among cabinet officials, local territorial officers, and key intermediaries like Governors Arthur St. Clair and William Blount, and recounts how these diverse officials believed themselves constrained to try to understand the territories’ inhabitants. It also explores the difficult question of how to measure federal state power in the early republic, contrasting the fiscal-military state with the alternate model of an adjudicatory state, in which territorial citizens turned to federal law to claim rights. It notes the benefits of considering the two territories together and previews the individual chapters and their arguments.

Federal Ground

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Ablavsky
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Northwest Ordinance ◽  
Federal Authority ◽  
New States ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Federal Jurisdiction ◽  
The Right

Federal Ground depicts the haphazard and unplanned growth of federal authority in the Northwest and Southwest Territories, the first U.S. territories established under the new territorial system. The nation’s foundational documents, particularly the U.S. Constitution and the Northwest Ordinance, placed these territories under sole federal jurisdiction and established federal officials to govern them. But, for all their paper authority, these officials rarely controlled events or dictated outcomes. In practice, power in these contested borderlands rested with the regions’ preexisting inhabitants—diverse Native peoples, French villagers, and Anglo-American settlers. These residents nonetheless turned to the new federal government to claim ownership, jurisdiction, protection, and federal money, seeking to obtain rights under federal law. Two areas of governance proved particularly central: contests over property, where plural sources of title created conflicting land claims, and struggles over the right to use violence, in which customary borderlands practice intersected with the federal government’s effort to establish a monopoly on force. Over time, as federal officials improvised ad hoc, largely extrajudicial methods to arbitrate residents’ claims, they slowly insinuated federal authority deeper into territorial life. This authority survived even after the former territories became Ohio and Tennessee: although new states spoke a language of equal footing and autonomy, statehood actually offered former territorial citizens the most effective way yet to make claims on the federal government. The federal government, in short, still could not always prescribe the result in the territories, but it set the terms and language of debate—authority that became the foundation for later, more familiar and bureaucratic incarnations of federal power.

The American Colonization Society and the Civil War

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian N. Page
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Early Republic ◽  
The South ◽  
American Colonization Society ◽  
The U.S

Page calls for a new assessment of the American Colonization Society by shifting the focus from the often-discussed Early Republic and Antebellum years to the period of the U.S. Civil War. This period is important because it covers the time in which an essentially northern-managed society suffered an abrupt severance from its associates in the South while the federal government enacted emancipation, recognized Liberia as an independent nation, and finally officially endorsed colonization. The society’s efforts during the Civil War reveal a great deal about its leaders’ understanding of their mission as well as the government’s relationship with colonization.

scholarly journals Senate Delegations and Federalism: The Dynamics of State Representation

1995 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 445-460
Author(s):  
Christopher L. Markwood ◽  
Michael R. Malaby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Representation ◽  
Federal Authority ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Effective Representation ◽  
The U.S ◽  
State Delegations

The integrity of the individual states as components of the United States" system of federalism depends upon effective representation of the states interests at the national level. The states’ delegations to the U.S. Senate are of prime importance in this capacity, especially when deciding between federal authority and state discretion. We find that the votes of state delegations to the 101st U.S. Senate on issues of federalism can be broken into four conceptual areas, and that the effectiveness of the representation of state federalism interests depends upon the specific federalism concept under consideration.

Health Planning and the U.S. Federal Government

1972 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 367-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. L. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Health Planning ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Planning Techniques ◽  
Current Health ◽  
Financial Plan ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Hill ◽  
The U.S

The history of health planning efforts within the federal government is summarized, starting with enactment of the Hill—Burton legislation in 1946. Shortcomings in planning by the central government and in its guidance of the states are noted. The recent development of certain federal health planning techniques—a program structure, the five—year program and financial plan, and program analyses—is summarized. Political and administrative constraints on planners, within the system of federal—state—local relationships, are explored. The degree to which planning is applicable to current health problems, including those of rising prices and misuse of resources, and future federal reactions to these problems, are commented upon.

Federal Sovereignty

2021 ◽  
pp. 109-138
Author(s):  
Gregory Ablavsky
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Social Relationships ◽  
The Other ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Federal Authority ◽  
Indian Country ◽  
Federal Control ◽  
Secretary Of War

In the territories, the federal government confronted what it regarded as endemic violence between Natives and U.S. citizens based on long-standing racial animosity. At the urging of Secretary of War Henry Knox, the federal government sought to establish itself as a neutral arbiter between both sides, a vision of what the chapter calls federal sovereignty expressed in the Trade and Intercourse Acts. These laws sought to distinguish and separate “Indian country” from “ordinary jurisdiction,” and they established a federal criminal regime to punish both Natives and U.S. citizens who committed crimes against the other, in an effort to replace practices of retaliation. Yet this effort to establish federal sovereignty largely failed. In part, federal officials misunderstood territorial realities, where Natives and whites were entangled by economic and social relationships that could not be easily divided. But they also misunderstood the jurisdictional and institutional limitations within federal law. In particular, their approach converted the question of justice for Natives into a debate over the scope of federal authority in the territories, in which territorial citizens strongly resisted what they regarded as heavy-handed federal control.

The Acceptance of Party Unity in Parliamentary Democracies

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Willumsen
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Parliamentary Democracies ◽  
Survey Questions ◽  
Ideal Policy ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Policy Incentives

The central argument of this book is that voting unity in European legislatures is not primarily the result of the ‘disciplining’ power of the leadership of parliamentary parties, but rather the result of a combination of ideological homogeneity through self-selection into political parties and the calculations of individual legislators about their own long-term benefits. Despite the central role of policy preferences in the subsequent behaviour of legislators, preferences at the level of the individual legislator have been almost entirely neglected in the study of parliaments and legislative behaviour. The book measures these using an until now under-utilized resource: parliamentary surveys. Building on these, the book develops measures of policy incentives of legislators to dissent from their parliamentary parties, and show that preference similarity amongst legislators explains a very substantial proportion of party unity, yet alone cannot explain all of it. Analysing the attitudes of legislators to the demands of party unity, and what drives these attitudes, the book argues that what explains the observed unity (beyond what preference similarity would explain) is the conscious acceptance by MPs that the long-term benefits of belonging to a united party (such as increased influence on legislation, lower transaction costs, and better chances of gaining office) outweigh the short-terms benefits of always voting for their ideal policy outcome. The book buttresses this argument through the analysis of both open-ended survey questions as well as survey questions on the costs and benefits of belonging to a political party in a legislature.

scholarly journals Examining the role of governmsent in shaping disability inclusiveness around COVID-19: a framework analysis of Australian guidelines

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Colon-Cabrera ◽  
Shivika Sharma ◽  
Narelle Warren ◽  
Dikaios Sakellariou
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Disability Services ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Australian Government ◽  
Disabled People ◽  
Framework Analysis ◽  
Unemployed People ◽  
Guidance Documents

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered the ways in which disabled people are made more vulnerable due to structural inequalities. These vulnerabilities are the result of the interaction between individual and structural factors that shape how risk is experienced by disabled people. In Australia, these vulnerabilities are influenced by the way disability services and care for disabled people are delivered through a consumer-directed approach. We analysed the policies and documentation made by the Australian Government and state and territory governments during the pandemic to explore whether these were disability-inclusive. We aimed to unpack how these policies shaped disabled people as vulnerable citizens. Methods Guided by documentary research, we used framework analysis to examine the policies of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. We analysed legislation that was given royal assent by the federal, state and territory governments, and documents (reports, fact sheets, guidance documents, etc.) published by the federal government and the state of Victoria (given that this state experienced the brunt of the epidemic in Australia) between February 2020 to August of 2020. Results We found that most of the resources were not aimed at disabled people, but at carers and workers within disability services. In addition, most policies formulated by the Australian Government were related to the expansion of welfare services and the creation of economic stimulus schemes. However, while the stimulus included unemployed people, the expansion of benefits explicitly excluded disabled people who were not employed. Most of the legislation and documents offered accessibility options, though most of these options were only available in English. Disability oriented agencies offered more extensive accessibility options. Conclusions The findings indicate a large number of documents addressing the needs of disabled people. However, disability-inclusiveness appeared to be inconsistent and not fully considered, leaving disabled people exposed to greater risk of COVID-19. Neoliberal policies in the health and welfare sector in Australia have led to an individualisation of the responsibility to remain healthy and a reliance on people as independent consumers. Governments need to take a clear stance towards the emergence of such a discourse that actively disvalues disabled people.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document