This chapter will return to analyze in depth one of the core designs of the “Spring Constitution”—federalism—and how, under the extreme political background of the “Winter of Stalemate,” it has become alienated, leading to excessive states’ rights, thereby plunging the nation into internal struggles and structural paralysis on major policy issues such as the environment, immigration, and education.

First Thesis: The Original Intent of Federalism and Its Modern Alienation

I. The Ideal of Federalism: Laboratories and Checks and Balances

The original intent behind the “Spring Constitution’s” design of federalism was based on two major advantages:

Risk Distribution and Prevention of Tyranny: Dispersing power to the states served as a line of defense against centralized power.

“Laboratories of Democracy”: States could conduct policy experiments at the local level; successful experiences could be expanded nationwide, while failed experiments would not endanger the entire Union.

This design was dynamic in the nation’s early years. However, in the modern era of globalization, high population mobility, and global crises, the core function of federalism has become distorted.

II. States’ Rights Under Polarization: From “Laboratories” to “Ideological Bastions”

Under the extreme political climate of the “Winter of Stalemate,” federalism is no longer a neutral policy experimentation ground but has evolved into a battleground for ideological struggle.

Zero-Sum Games at the State Level: With Congress paralyzed (as discussed in Chapter Twelve), the two parties have shifted their battleground to state governments. States’ rights are used as “weapons” to oppose the ideology of the federal government.

“Mutually Antagonistic Policies”: State governments are no longer independent policy experimenters but actively pursue policies that openly conflict with the federal government or with states of opposing ideologies. For example, on issues such as the environment and immigration, red states (Republican-led) pursue aggressive deregulation or hardline border policies, while blue states (Democratic-led) pursue strict environmental protections or lenient immigration policies.

This internal struggle between states, and between states and the federal government, has plunged national governance and the implementation of national policy into extreme fragmentation and internal attrition.

Second Thesis: The Paralysis of National Policy and the Fragmentation of Governance

III. Environmental Policy: The Inability to Achieve Unified Climate Action

Climate change and environmental protection are quintessential global challenges requiring unified action at the national level. Yet under the federalist framework, American environmental policy has fallen into paralysis:

The Difficulty of “Minimum Standards”: Although the Environmental Protection Agency attempts to set national standards, state governments can obstruct them through legal challenges and non-cooperation in enforcement, greatly diminishing the effectiveness of federal policy.

Single-State Efforts Are Diluted: Even if some states (such as California) pursue the most aggressive carbon emission standards, the efforts of these individual states remain limited in their global impact because other states continue to allow emissions. Federalism makes the United States, as a whole, appear slow and divided in responding to the climate crisis.

IV. Immigration: Chaos and Division at the Border

Immigration is a constitutional power exclusive to the federal government, yet under the political manipulation of “Winter,” it has become a casualty of internal struggles over states’ rights:

“Unilateral Action” by Border States: State governments at the border attempt to take over federal immigration enforcement powers through state-level military or legal actions, directly confronting the federal government.

Disparities in Internal Policies: States vary enormously in the social services they provide to undocumented immigrants, such as education, healthcare, and driver’s licenses. This not only intensifies the chaos of the immigration issue but also creates disputes between states over resource allocation.

This fragmentation of federalism locks the resolution of the immigration issue into a cycle of political posturing and legal battles, preventing the nation from forming an effective and humane national policy.

V. Education and Healthcare: Inequality in Resources and Quality

Under the federalist system, education and healthcare have exacerbated inequality in resources and quality, accelerating social division:

Geographic Disparities in Education: Local property taxes are the primary source of funding for public education, giving schools in affluent areas overwhelming advantages while schools in poor areas lack resources. The vast geographic disparities in education quality are a direct institutional cause of the freezing of class mobility (as discussed in Chapter Sixteen).

Chaos in the Healthcare System: The implementation and expansion of Medicaid largely depend on state government decisions. This results in vast differences in citizens’ access to basic healthcare services depending on which state they reside in; citizens’ health and right to survival depend on the political leanings of their place of residence.

Third Thesis: Institutional Attrition and the Inability to Self-Correct

VI. The Intervention of the Supreme Court and the “Redefinition” of Federalism

The internal struggles within federalism ultimately require resolution by the Supreme Court. However, the politicization of the Supreme Court (as discussed in Chapter Fifteen) imbues its rulings with ideological coloring.

Strengthening States’ Rights: In “Winter,” the conservative majority on the Supreme Court tends to strengthen states’ rights, limiting federal regulatory power over the environment, commerce, and other areas. This effectively constitutes a legal-level “return of power,” further complicating the federal government’s ability to implement national policy.

“Decentralization” of Governance: The judicial system’s “redefinition” of federalism accelerates the decentralization of national governance. In the face of global competition that requires concentrated strength, this trend is fatal.

VII. The Lock-In Effect of Federalism and the Cost of Attrition

Federalism carries immense historical inertia and is extremely difficult to amend. The cost of its alienation in “Winter” is enormous:

Sacrifice of National Efficiency: National policy cannot be implemented uniformly; national strength is consumed in large part by legal battles and political confrontations between states and the federal government, and between states themselves.

Exacerbation of Social Inequality: Resources, rights, and even citizens’ basic health and safety vary enormously depending on where they live.

VIII. Chapter Conclusion: A Divided Whole

The alienation of federalism in the “Winter of Stalemate” demonstrates that its designed principle of “checks and balances” has, under extreme politics, become “fragmentation of governance” and “paralysis of national policy.”

As a whole, the United States faces common domestic and international challenges, yet it cannot respond with a unified voice or unified action. It has become a “divided whole,” its internal attrition so severe that it seriously undermines America’s global competitiveness and internal stability. The impossibility of resolving this problem provides the necessary background for analyzing how money politics systematically locks this fragmented system in place.

NEXT: Chapter 21: Interest Groups: The Fourth Power Outside the Constitution — Money Politics and the Death of Representative Government