The Fourth Face of Federalism

Bibliographic Data

ID6360462
AuthorsDonald F Kettl (0000-0002-4031-0615, corresponding author)
Year1981
Volume41
Issue3
Pages366-366
Publication date1981-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePublic Administration Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-3352 • E-ISSN: 1540-6210
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.2307/975797
OpenAlexW2329467585
LanguageEN
Citations received8

T he 1970s brought a face to federalism, a collection of private and semi-public groups and agencies that moved into a full partnership with the national, state, and local governments in administering federal policy. This fourth face of federalism emerged from the decade's breed of intergovernmental grant programs. Richard Nixon promised a New Federalism of guaranteed grants, fewer federal rules, and more discretion for state and local governments on what projects could receive support. It was in general revenue sharing for all state and local governments and in manpower and community development programs, mainly for the cities, that this new federalism bore fruit. It was fruit, however, that the cities found difficult to pick, for the programs proved complex to administer. Two programs-the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, enacted in 1973, and Community Development Block Grants, established a year later-became important sources of both revenue and services for local governments. CETA allows recipients, mostly large cities,' wide discretion in establishing their own manpower training and public service employment programs. CD gives cities a nearly free rein in choosing projects for housing rehabilitation, development, and public services.2 Both programs have relatively simple application requirements and both programs leave most of the responsibility for deciding how best to administer local projects in local hands. It was as a solution to the administrative question that the fourth face of federalism emerged. Very few-if any-cities had extensive experience in organizing and running manpower and community development programs before the 1970s. Most of mayors' complaints during the Great Society, in fact, were that the federal government was bypassing city hall in dealing directly with clients like neighborhood groups or in providing money to quasi-municipal bureaus like redevelopment agencies that often resisted local control. CETA and CD ended that era by delivering the money directly to city hall

Face (sociological concept · Federalism · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub