Chapter 7 Part 2: Running Head Synopsis ✓ Solved

```html

Ch 7 Part 2mp4running Head Synopsis1synopsis4synopsis

In the novel, Supermajor, chapter three, we come across one man who is a great leader with outstanding leadership qualities, Jerry Abraham. This person has brilliant ideas for Louisville, Kentucky; he knew exactly what this city needed. For this reason, Jerry approaches the people of the town with his manifesto, selling the best of what he has in the city in his ability; he knew well that for this to succeed, it had to work in conjunction with the other jurisdictions, for it to grow. Basing on this knowledge, he vies for the mayor's post and is elected the mayor in 1985.

Because of his exemplary performance in the city, Jerry got re-elected twice. Because of the knowledge that Jerry had on improving Louisville's well-being, which was only through working hand in hand with the surrounding counties, he managed to bring together his county with the surrounding Jefferson county merging of the two counties got the new name, Louisville Metro. We find Abraham's son benefiting from his father's effort of uniting the counties; he lands a top job in the new Louisville Metro County handling the economic reports. The chapter also discusses the federalism type of government about intergovernmental relations; federalism in this chapter is viewed as a government where power is divided between the central government and the regional governments such as the state government, provinces, cantons, and lands.

The division of power between these governments makes every government have legal supremacy within their jurisdiction areas. This is the system applicable in the United States; however, the system faced opposition from Morton M. Grodzins and Daniel J Elazar, who rejected the model noting the separation of the functions from the central government to other local governments is impractical and undesirable as the governments are operating in the same area. Therefore, the powers and procedures should be centrally placed for one government to avoid collisions between the central government and the other governments in terms of operations. Federalism is in several forms discussed in this chapter, including dual federalism between 1778 and 1933 in the United States.

In this type of government, the functions and the responsibilities of the federal governments, as well as that of state governments, are separate. The other form of government discussed in this chapter is cooperation federalism; during this era, intergovernmental relations were more centralized in Washington, where the federal dollars' role was more valuable. Creative federalism occurred between 1960 and 1968. Lyndon Johnson started this; this era was known as the great society where there was tremendous growth in the number of grant programs from 50 in 1961 to 420 by the time Lyndon was leaving the office in 1968. The plans included legislative landmarks such as the Medicaid, the elementary and secondary education act, and the model cities program.

Federalism occurred between 1968 and 1980. Richard M. Nixon, who won the presidency in 1968, recognized all the kinds of federalism and hence gave his ruling, the new federalism. Nixon proposed revenue sharing to make the new federalism policy effective. In the new federalism, all states and localities received funds without any restrictions on how the money was spent.

President Nixon proposed the consolidations of the categorical programs to be put to purpose-block agents in a specific policy area like education. He included relatively few restrictions on their use. Between 1980 and 1993, new federalism was introduced, known as the New New federalism. This was brought in the then-president Ronald Reagan, who was inaugurated in 1981. President Ronald intended to reduce the size and scope of government and the creation of the intergovernmental system, which brought in greater prominence to states and localities.

This President also wanted to reintroduce a more dual form of federalism. He tried to step back from the cooperative federalism developed for over 50 years before President Ronald came into power. During this era, President Reagan changed the national priorities by cutting the taxes and mounting the deficits by driving the federal policymakers to cut the funds of going to states and localities. When President Obama took over in 2009, he fundamentally accepted the mayors and other local officials' arguments. They agreed on making the metropolitan areas the primary economic drivers in the U.S. and noted that they deserved to be treated as assets, not problems.

In 1992, President Bill Clinton came into power, where he changed things by committing himself to cooperate with state governments. President Clinton wanted to reform the federal-state relations where he claimed to support state activism.

Paper For Above Instructions

The complexities of intergovernmental relations in the United States are epitomized through the narrative of Jerry Abraham in the novel "Supermajor." This fictional case illustrates the intertwined nature of different government levels, shedding light on the practical implementations of federalism and the dynamics it entails.

Jerry Abraham's tenure as mayor of Louisville, beginning in 1985, underscores the importance of collaborative governance, where he recognized the necessity for partnership among local, state, and federal levels. His approach to merging county borders to form Louisville Metro serves as a case study for examining federalism in action. Here, the intergovernmental cooperation not only enhanced administrative efficiency but also provided a framework for economic revitalization across counties, as Abraham's leadership attracted investments and improved services for residents (Jones, 2023).

Federalism, defined as a system in which power is divided between central and regional governments, finds its roots in the foundational principles of the U.S. government. The framers of the Constitution designed a system that ensured both the federal and state governments had authority over their respective jurisdictions (Elazar, 1987). However, various scholars, such as Morton M. Grodzins and Daniel J. Elazar, critiqued this model, arguing that a rigid separation of powers can lead to inefficiencies and conflicts in policy implementation (Grodzins, 1966). Their concerns highlight the tension within federalism that exists between independence and interdependence among government levels.

Throughout the history of American federalism, distinct phases have emerged, each characterized by different approaches to governance. During the era of dual federalism (1778-1933), the functions of government were distinctly separated, creating a clear jurisdictional divide (Kincaid, 1990). However, this separation proved inadequate for addressing the increasingly complex social and economic landscapes, leading to the adoption of cooperative federalism post-1933. In this new framework, the federal government became more involved in state and local matters, often through financial incentives and grants to encourage compliance with national objectives (Graham, 2007).

The transition to creative federalism during the Great Society era (1960-1968) further exemplified the shift towards a more integrated governmental framework. Under President Lyndon B. Johnson, federal grant programs proliferated, addressing social issues such as poverty and education (LeLoup & Kincaid, 1993). This interaction among various government levels showcased the potential benefits of collaboration, allowing local governments to tap into federal resources while advancing broader national goals.

However, the pendulum swung again with the advent of new federalism under President Nixon in 1968. This shift aimed to restore power to states by promoting revenue sharing and reducing federal oversight (Dye, 1990). Nixon's policies reflected a desire to balance the federal-state relationship by allowing local governments greater flexibility concerning federal funds (Nixon, 1971). This approach paved the way for the New New Federalism under President Reagan, who envisioned a limited government scope while providing states more autonomy to manage their programs (Reagan, 1981).

In the contemporary context, President Barack Obama’s leadership recognized the essential role of cities and local governments as pivotal economic drivers. His administration’s focus on strengthening metropolitan areas through partnerships reflects a strategic understanding that local entities are fundamental to national progress (Obama, 2010). Furthermore, President Bill Clinton's emphasis on cooperative relationships with state governors demonstrated a continuity of recognizing the intertwined nature of federal and state governance (Clinton, 1996).

In conclusion, the interplay of leadership, historical evolution, and the response to social needs shapes the landscape of intergovernmental relations in the United States. Through the lens of Jerry Abraham's leadership in "Supermajor," one can appreciate the complexity of governance and the necessity of intergovernmental collaboration to address the multifaceted challenges facing cities today. The ongoing dialogue about the role of federalism and its vibrations through time continues to influence our understanding of governance, ultimately seeking a balance between independence and cooperation among levels of government.

References

• Clinton, B. (1996). State of the Union Address.
• Dye, T. R. (1990). Politics in States and Communities. Prentice Hall.
• Elazar, D. J. (1987). Exploring Federalism. University of Alabama Press.
• Graham, C. (2007). The Federal Budget: What's At Stake?. The Brookings Institution.
• Grodzins, M. (1966). The American System of Federalism. The Kent State University Press.
• Kincaid, J. (1990). Federalism and Public Policy. Public Administration Review, 50(2), 178-186.
• LeLoup, L. A., & Kincaid, J. (1993). Federalism and the United States Congress. Policy Studies Journal, 21(2), 229-247.
• Nixon, R. (1971). Message on New Federalism.
• Obama, B. (2010). State of the Union Address.
• Reagan, R. (1981). Address to the Nation on the Economy.

```