Dual vs. Cooperative Federalism

Dual federalism holds that the national and state governments operate in separate spheres, each supreme within its own domain. It describes much of the period from the founding to the 1930s, when the federal government handled matters such as foreign affairs, the mail, tariffs, and coinage, and states governed most domestic life. The Supreme Court enforced the separation in cases such as Hammer v. Dagenhart in 1918, which struck down a federal child labor law as invading state authority over manufacturing. Political scientists later called this layer cake federalism.

Cooperative federalism, which political scientist Morton Grodzins compared to a marble cake in 1960, describes intertwined responsibilities in which federal, state, and local governments jointly fund and run programs. It expanded with the New Deal, through programs like unemployment insurance and aid to dependent children under the Social Security Act of 1935, and with the Interstate Highway program of 1956 and the Great Society grants of the 1960s, including Medicaid. Constitutional scholar Edward Corwin wrote of the passing of dual federalism in 1950.

Later Presidents reshaped the model. Richard Nixon's New Federalism created general revenue sharing in 1972, Ronald Reagan consolidated programs into block grants in 1981, and the 1996 welfare law converted aid to families into a block grant. Federal funds now make up roughly a third of total state spending, and scholars describe variations such as coercive federalism, in which Washington uses mandates and grant conditions, and uncooperative federalism, in which states resist from within joint programs. Supporters of cooperation say it pools resources for national goals, while critics say it blurs accountability.