Essay on Federal mandates in the U.S. Congress

Student’s Name:
ID Number:
Attendance Number:
Section:
Date of Submission:

Federal mandates in the U.S. Congress:
Federal mandates can be termed as the special norms or policies that are developed by the U.S. government that promotes an action of power and responsibility that is to be implemented through administration, execution of judicial action related to the state governments or even the private sector (Nivola, 2002).
Through the federal mandates, the state as well as local governments have to fund the activities, plans, policies and other structural framework that is passed from the national government to them. There are many policies developed by the State government themselves that ensure effective working towards the achievement of the goals that are set for the nation. It involves the “Civil Rights Act of 1957, Voting Rights Act of 1965”, etc (Krane, 2007).
Three examples of unintended consequences in urban cities:
1. State government “Policy Activism activity”. It can be discussed through the example of exercising the policy independence when George Bush was the President involves development of such laws for the states. This provides the states with a supreme power over the people in terms of the law and judiciary that are to be envied upon the people when they commit any crime (Krane, 2007).
2. The development of the “legislation model of California” regarding the identity theft disclosures shows the work done by the state government regarding the development of independent policies. These are the independent policies that provide the government in the California state to develop an effective legislation across the state and make more and more people engaged towards a common goal that has been set by the state government (Krane, 2007).
3. There was an adoption of the new technique called as “Four Ballot Measuring system” that restricted the access of the people who are not the citizens of the country from the public services (Krane, 2007).this provided the people who were the citizens of the state with an advantage over the people who were not the citizens. This was partiality in the development of policies from the state government and many people did not favor it and hence, they resisted its implementation. They carried legal as well as bargaining procedures for opposing the enactment of this new system in the state jurisdiction by the government.
Resistance by the localities through legal and other strategies:
The policies that were developed by Bush, sometimes, had serious consequences on the states and it had to suffer consistent resistance from the people in the states. One such resistance was observed through the “bipartisan resistance” of the statements and initiatives that were developed by George Bush (Krane, 2007). It were related to the intergovernmental relations within America and it provided excessive and irrelevant control to the national government over the state. In such instances, there is different levels of execution of opposition against the strategies and policies that are developed by the government, but are not accepted by the people living in the respective states (Nivola, 2002).
The states have enjoyed the success of implying the policies in majority of the cases as they have the supreme power to control and mold the population for the benefit of the nation and make them understand the significance of the federal mandates that are developed and imposed by the government.

References
Krane, D. (2007). The middle tier in American federalism: State government policy activism during the Bush presidency. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 37(3),, 453-477.
Nivola, P. S. (2002). Tense commandments: Federal prescriptions and city problems. . Brookings Institution Press.

Skills

Posted on

March 10, 2018

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.