Horizontal Federalism: Exploring Interstate Interactions

Abstract

States interact with each other in ways that have consequences for the American federal system. The focus of this article is interstate cooperation-multistate efforts to pursue shared agendas or solve common problems. Three mechanisms are examined: interstate compacts, multistate legal actions, and uniform state laws. The data show that during the 1990s, states engaged in all of these behaviors but at differing rates. Furthermore, the explanations for interstate cooperation vary. Government capability proved to be an important explanation but in opposite ways: more capable states join multistate legal actions, and less capable states adopt uniform state laws. The implications for the federal system are considerable: effective interstate cooperation may offer an alternative to federal legislation. For state officials, the implications are equally significant: interstate cooperation spawns administrative networks that fall outside traditional structures.I thank Erica Carter, H. Lee Smith, and Gregory Plagens for their assistance in the collection of the data used in this research.Of the four independent variables, policy liberalism and partisanship are positively correlated with each other, as are policy liberalism and government capability, but neither correlation exceeds r 5 0.41.

An Integrated Model of U.S. State Attorney General Behavior in Multi-State Litigation

“…Similarly, state courts also have little influence on AG behavior, as judges cannot constrain an AG's common law or parens patriae authority to investigate or prosecute cases (Ross 1990). Finally, Provost (2003Provost ( , 2006 finds virtually no state government influence on AG multi-state litigation decisions while Bowman (2004) finds only modest government influence. Thus, I expect that other actors in state government will have little to no influence on AG multi-state participation.…”

Examining Intergovernmental and Interorganizational Response to Catastrophic Disasters

“…Partnerships and networks have both been used in collaborative efforts although they are not necessarily the integrated collaboration (Bowman, 2004;Donahue & Joyce, 2001;Kamensky, Burlin, & Abramson, 2004;Kapucu, Augustin, & Garayev, 2009;Mandell, 2001;Waugh, 2004;Waugh & Sylves, 1996;Wright, 1998).…”

“…The horizontal relationships created through governance can be used to identify better ways to respond to catastrophic disasters. However, politics and power issues remain prominent among agencies seeking individual credit for collective action (Bowman, 2004;Mandell, 2001). Although intergovernmental relations can take form as a partnership or collaboration, other relationships are created through reorganization, regulation, capacity building, conflict management, and individual and group communication depending on the need of the agencies and the issue.…”

Collective Action and the Evolution of Intergovernmental Cooperation

“…Increasingly, jurisdictions are reaching beyond their boundaries to join with other governments to address myriad contemporary challenges. Cooperative arrangements among governments range widely, from municipal service agreements to collaborative watershed partnerships to joint policy ventures among states (Bowman, ; Feiock & Scholz, ). In general, these arrangements are undertaken to address a gap in governance, that is, the inability of existing mechanisms and institutions to produce viable solutions (McKinney & Johnson, ).…”