De facto devolution and urban defunding: The priority of persons over places

被引:37
作者
Kincaid, J [1 ]
机构
[1] Lafayette Coll, Meyner Ctr Study State & Local Govt, Easton, PA 18042 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1111/0735-2166.00009
中图分类号
TU98 [区域规划、城乡规划];
学科分类号
0814 ; 082803 ; 0833 ;
摘要
Much attention has been focused on devolution of federal functions to states and localities; yet, little devolution is evident. Many forces are generating interest in devolution, but opposition remains potent Meanwhile, a bipartisan process of de facto devolution involving a defunding of urban programs has been under way for two decades. Defacto devolution has been driven predominantly by a shift in federal policy making from places to persons whereby the political incentives for federal officials now lie more in responding to the rights and interests of individuals than to the prerogatives and interests of state and local governments. This article, therefore, examines forces for and against devolution; the devolution records of Congress, the presidency, and the Supreme Court; de facto devolution in the context of federal emphases on persons; and implications for cities.
引用
收藏
页码:135 / 167
页数:33
相关论文
共 77 条
[11]  
CLINTON WJ, 1998, 13083 OFF WHIT HOUS
[12]  
Coleman William, 1990, INTERGOVERNMENTAL PE, V16, P19
[13]  
Conlan T., 1988, NEW FEDERALISM INTER
[14]  
*COUNC STAT GOV, 1996, REST BAL AM FED SYST
[15]  
*DEM LEAD COUNC, 1997, NEW DEMOCRAT S JUL, V9
[16]   TEA-21: Transportation policy, pork barrel politics, and American federalism [J].
Dilger, RJ .
PUBLIUS-THE JOURNAL OF FEDERALISM, 1998, 28 (01) :49-69
[17]  
Donahue J. D., 1997, Disunited states
[18]  
Eggers W.D., 1995, Revolution at the Roots: Making our Government Smaller, Better, and Closer to Home
[19]  
EISINGER P, 1997, LAFOLLETTE POLICY RE, V8, P1
[20]  
FERRY S, 1998, GOVT TECHNOLOGY, V11, P8