In: Economics
Madison argued for the proposed constitution: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”
Q. Is that still true today? What are some things (policy areas) that the federal government is involved in/controls today that might contradict Madison’s statement?
Madison’s argument as now limited
relevance as there is a supremacy clause in the US constitution. It
means that wherever there is a conflict between the federal and
state laws, then federal laws will supersede and it will be
considered as the supreme law of the land. Hence, the US
constitution has given the power to the Federal government to
exercise its control if the federal government wants to intervene.
It can be done, by its judiciary function by use of common laws in
the Supreme Court. Or, the president can also take the executive
order to implement a policy, in compliance to the US constitution.
So, there is a distribution of power between the federal government
and the states, but federal government of today, can find ways to
supersede the decisions taken up by the states.
Federal government controls military development & maintenance,
foreign relations and international trade. So, any state, cannot
take decision on its own to enter into the trade agreement with
countries other than the states of the USA. It is in contradiction
to the Madison’s argument that talks about the limited power given
to the federal government. Besides, the homeland securities is
another federal area of work that wield strong control by the
Federal government.