Identify and explain the concept of federalism.

Defining federalism has never been a simple task. As colonies the states had developed independently, and even after the Revolutionary War they remained “distinct, different, and insular communities.”¹⁷ Consequently, bringing the states together in a federal system was fraught with controversy. The states liked their independence and autonomy, and many people were suspicious of the new Constitutional arrangement that would require the states to give up power to the national government. Indeed, it was the states’ reluctance to surrender even the smallest amount of sovereignty that made the government under the Articles of Confederation so weak.

The events that had prompted the states to send delegates to the Constitutional Convention, however, had also made them much more willing to accept limitations on state power than they had been before. If a stronger national government could help solve the states’ trade and commerce problems, they were willing to relinquish some of their independence. There was controversy, however, about just how much independence would have to be given up to make the national government strong enough to achieve the ends it was being created to pursue. This controversy continues today.

Redefining "Federalism"

The Articles of Confederation had established a “federal” system in the truest sense of the word. In the mid-to-late 1700s, a federation or federal relationship meant an alliance between sovereign, independent, and autonomous states or nations. Such was the arrangement under the Articles, which had created a “loose league of friendship” governed by a Confederal Congress with no authority to compel the states to do anything. It could simply request that the states comply with its recommendations. (Recall the difficulty the national government had trying to respond to Shays’ Rebellion.) As internal problems and external crises became more severe, however, the states began to recognize that the Articles were insufficient for their needs. Having admitted that a stronger national government was necessary, the states were still not anxious about giving up authority or autonomy to a national government. Far from lending support to a “consolidated” government, one in which the states would be totally and completely absorbed into a larger nation with one government, they preferred a continued federal relationship between the states and the national government.

¹⁷. Philip B. Kurland and Ralph Lerner, The Founders' Constitution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987).