What is meant by the concept “laboratories of democracy”? Essay Example
The concept “laboratories of democracy” elaborates the existence of a certain system of state autonomy within the federal structure whereby a state and local governments develop laws and policies (Bowman, Ann and Kearney, 44). While developing these laws and policies they act as social laboratories because they create and test them to ensure they are democratic. Developed laws and policies are tested for democracy without doing any harm to the nation.
One of the advantages of federalism is that it creates laboratories of democracy. This is because the state can experiment policies and local governments learn from the success and failures of those policies. I believe that state and local government are the best laboratories for laws and regulations because working independently increases the likelihood of developing many innovative solutions without risking the whole nation. The idea that th
...e state and local governments are excellent laboratories for democracy was “popularized in the New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann case by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis” (Robbins and Kalyani, 179) This idea is derived from the federal system of U.S. whereby federal government and the local governments control the overlapping of different administrative functions. Local governments are the ideal laboratories because they enhance testing of new laws and regulations. A good example occurred in 2012 whereby Washington and Colorado enacted laws legalizing recreational use of marijuana. Although the use of marijuana is illegal nationally and all states, the legalization of marijuana in Washington and Colorado is to experiment whether drug legalization is beneficial or detrimental to the community. If the experiment goes well, similar laws could be enacted in other states and later in the whole
country. However, if detrimental the abolishment will continue while Washington and Colorado will be forced to drop such a law. This clearly shows that states act as laboratories for experimenting policies and laws without putting the whole country into risk (Bruce, Swanstrom, Seidelman, and DeLuca, 36).
Allowing states to act independently increases the chances of developing new ideas on laws and regulations. Being “laboratories of democracy” the state and local government’s increases innovation in creating laws and regulations. In this case, there exists progressive federalism whereby the national government spearheads a kind of tournament between the states to develop the best solution to a national problem (Bowman, Ann and Kearney, 44). The state that develops the winning approach with a policy showing the best effects to the society keeps the policy while the other states are forced to adopt the policy even if it does not align with the state’s political ideology. This implies that when these laws succeed in the laboratory states, the other states and the national government can copy the laws. If the experimentation fails in one state, others states can learn from the failure and improve the policies. After improving the policies, other states can be used to experiment in order to determine if improvement can lead to positive effect to the society. On the other hand, government experimentation on the credibility of new laws is made possible by the existence of different states in U.S. When the government wants to enact a new law, it experiments with specific states but not the whole country. If the law is successful then it is nationalized (Robbins and Kalyani, 179). From the above explanation,
it is clear that the state and local governments are the ideal laboratories of creating laws and regulations because they facilitate the testing of new laws without putting the nation into risk.
Work Cited
- Bowman, Ann O. M, and Richard C. Kearney. State and Local Government: The Essentials. , 2014. Print.
- Miroff, Bruce, Todd Swanstrom, Raymond Seidelman, and Tom DeLuca. The Democratic Debate. , 2014. Print.
- Robbins, Kalyani. The Law and Policy of Environmental Federalism: A Comparative Analysis. , 2015. Print.
- Absolutism essays
- Appeal essays
- Bourgeoisie essays
- Contras essays
- Corporate Governance essays
- Corruption essays
- Democracy essays
- Democratic Party essays
- Developed Country essays
- Dictatorship essays
- Elections essays
- European Union essays
- Federalism essays
- Foreign essays
- Foreign policy essays
- Gentrification essays
- Hillary Clinton essays
- Income Tax essays
- International Relations essays
- John Marshall essays
- John Stuart Mill essays
- Left-Wing Politics essays
- Liberty essays
- Military essays
- Monarch essays
- Monarchy essays
- Political Corruption essays
- Political Party essays
- Political Science essays
- President Of The United States essays
- Public Service essays
- Red Cross essays
- Reform essays
- Republic essays
- Revenge essays
- Social Security essays
- Sovereign State essays
- State essays
- Supply essays
- Terrorism essays
- United Nations essays
- World Trade Organization essays
- Â John Locke essays
- 9/11 essays
- A Good Teacher essays
- A Healthy Diet essays
- A Modest Proposal essays
- A&P essays
- Academic Achievement essays
- Achievement essays