AbolishingFederal System in the United States

Abolishingthe federal System and responding to modern problems

Afederal government involves sharing power or authority amongstdifferent levels of governments over the same geographical area andpeople (Bowman &amp Kearney, 2014). Another alternative system ofgovernment is known as unitary government that involves only onesource of power. There are many countries around the world that haveadopted a unitary system of government. However the United States ofAmerica adopted a federal state of government, which involves themain central, or national government sharing powers or authority withthe federal governments with other fifty states. The main concern iswhether this system of government should be abolished, so as to bemore responsive to modern problems. It is important to understandthat democracy is significant and real in the two systems ofgovernments (Bowman &amp Kearney, 2014).

Lawsthat are implemented in Washington D.C, where the national governmentis located are meant to apply to all individuals who live in thatparticular boundary (Paul, 2014). However, laws that are created andimplemented in all other states, only apply to individuals livingwithin the boundaries of those particular states. In addition, thecongress does not have the power or authority to abolish any of thefifty states.

Conversely,all federal states do not have the power or the authority to assumeany roles meant for the national government (Paul, 2014). Thisbasically means that the United States is governed fully by theconstitution, which is the only source of power and authority. TheUnited State constitution can be defined as the ultimate power thatdefines democracy and the will of the American people.

Thereis a need of abolishing the federal system of government so has tohave flexibility in handling external national matters. This isbecause full sovereignty is based on the central system of governmentas defined by the constitution (Paul, 2014). This means that thereare problems that are seen when handling domestic affairs in theUnited States’ federal system of government.

Regulationof interstate and foreign commerce, naturalization of immigrants,regulating coin money, maintaining navy or an army is exclusivelycarried out by the United State’s national government as defined bythe constitution (Nelson, 2000). Additionally, a republican system ofgovernance is guaranteed in each state of the United States. Thisprovision ensures that a monarchy kind of governance is not createdby the fifty states. In all these states, all national interestssupersede the interests held by the states.

Anotherreason why the federal system of government should be abolished isbecause of overlapping and parallel interests between federal andnational government (Paul, 2014). This is as far as the existingdomestic policy is concerned. This fact means that both the federaland state governments may exercise their powers simultaneously. Oneof the most enjoyed interests which is enjoyed by these twoconcurrent levels of governments is the power or authority to tax(Bowman &amp Kearney, 2014).

Thereare some areas in the United States where the constitution isobserved to be silent in regards to national government. In suchareas, the states are expected to act as long as they do not conflictor interfere with powers that are legally exercisable by the centralgovernment. This consequently means that modern problems faced by theAmerican citizens such as crime, education, health and safety are notclearly defined by the constitution and this brings about the problemwith a federal system of government (Paul, 2014).

Moreover,conflicts between federal and national government was recognized bythe framers of the United States constitution (Nelson, 2000). This isespecially in exercising and using concurrent authorities or powers.For this reason, they adopted and set up various strategies that weredesigned to avoid such conflicts. The first major strategy that wasadopted was the declaration of the supremacy of the United State’sconstitution over all federal all states’ constitutions (Nelson,2000). This means that incase of any conflicts or clashes between thetwo constitutions occurred, the actions of the national or centralgovernment is declared supreme. The same clause is attributed to theprohibition to the federal states’ from exercising any power orauthority that is reserved for national government.

Thequestion of slavery was vehemently fought during Civil War as far asthe differences in opinion on the supremacy and union of the nationalgovernment was concerned (Paul, 2014). Moreover, it never providedclear answers on the division of powers and responsibilities betweenfederal states and the national government. This is despite the factthat the fourteenth Amendment allowed for the expansion of central ornational power.

TheUnited State observed modern changes taking place during the 19thcentury, such a rise of domestic markets, great wealthconcentrations, growth of large cities as well as rise of many socialproblems (Paul, 2014). This means that there was a sharp rise ofcorporate monopolies in the provision of goods and services duringthe early twentieth century that largely contributed to economicpower that was controlled. This problem of federal system ofgovernment indicated to the American people, a government power thatwas threatened.


BowmanO’M. Anne, Kearney C. Richard. (2014). Stateand Local Government: The Essentials.New York. Cengage Brain Publishers.

PaulRon. (2014). Endthe Fed.New York. Grand Central Publishing.

NelsonHenry Robert. (2000). ABurning Issue: A Case for Abolishing the U.S Forest Service.New York. Rowman &amp Littlefield Publishers.