US revision: Obama and federalism

What is the new White House incumbent’s position on states’ rights?

Working on an article on federal-state relations in the Obama era, I have come across a few examples of how Obama’s stance may be interpreted.

A New York Times article earlier this year suggested that the Obama presidency may mark a shift away from favouring pre-emption. This hint at a shift was confirmed in May when the administration agreed to accept California’s tough car emissions standards. This was followed by a memo from the White House stating that executive departments would only consider pre-emption when absolutely necessary, thereby recognsing the important role played by states as policy laboratories.

Obama’s recognition of the good work carried out by many state governors can be seen in his choice of Cabinet picks. Two former governors, Vilsack and Locke, were appointed. A further two, Sebelius and Napolitano, moved straight from their governor’s mansions to Washington DC.

We should not think, however, that federal-state relations have not been without friction. Obama’s stimulus package received a hostile reaction from a raft of southern governors. Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana, for instance, called the bill “irresponsible”.

It seems, therefore, that the federal-state dynamic is as complex and fluid as ever.