2007
DOI: 10.1093/publius/pjm014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Politics of Coercive Federalism in the Bush Era

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
50
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…With the few exceptions noted below the federal government has been the centralising authority for decades during both Democratic and Republican administrations (Posner 2007). Mandates and preemptions are two common federal policy actions with centralising effects.…”
Section: Intergovernmental Relations Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the few exceptions noted below the federal government has been the centralising authority for decades during both Democratic and Republican administrations (Posner 2007). Mandates and preemptions are two common federal policy actions with centralising effects.…”
Section: Intergovernmental Relations Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some observations regarding the use of mandates and preemptions in the United States, made, for example, by Posner (2007), point in a different direction. He shows that the phenomenon of coercive federalism, diagnosed earlier by Kincaid (1990), has prevailed under both parties controlling the White House and Congress.…”
Section: Partisanship and Issue Saliencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, history also shows that by and large, governors of all parties can be bribed into consenting to centralizing competencies. Posner (2007) gives education policy as an example. Here, governors have tended to lobby for a centralized definition of standards of education, hoping that such standards would be associated with increased federal grants.…”
Section: Collusive Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kincaid (1990) notes that "the erosion of federal fiscal power and of constitutional and political limits on federal regulatory power in the 1970s and 1980s has produced a more coercive system of federal preemptions of state and local authority and unfunded mandates on state and local governments" (p.139). Although there have been efforts to increase collaboration and restoration as devolution, coercive federalism continued through the second Bush era (Conlan & Dinan, 2007;Posner, 2007). state funding.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%