It should be remembered that according to Bowman (2002), “Federalism is the theory or advocacy of federal political orders, where final authority is divided between sub-units and a center” (p. 11). It can be stated that federalism is the benchmark stability that sustains a nation on a long term. Thus it can well be stated that the best possible level or sector of service delivery is the method of compiling the major proceedings and issues related to the states and negotiate a process that would enable the greater good for all the states in general, even if it causes difficulty for some specific states. This is because the role of federalism is to ensure the greater good of the federation of states and not to look after the benefit of a specific state if it becomes detrimental for the cumulative issue. Thus for a country with several religious factions, this is the best possible option.
However, with several religious factions, political violence is a major threat. So, ruling like the Brady Bill is necessary. Bowman (2002) noted that “The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993” (p.17), also referred to as the Brady Bill, was approved as a change to the “Gun Control Act of 1968” (p.17). It enforces a holding back period of at the most five days for the procurement of a handgun through legal trade, and the potential procurers are subjected to a background check investigation in the course of that waiting period.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
Nevertheless, in accordance to the doctrine of Horizontal Federalism, we can say that this is one of the most important and fundamental aspects of the doctrines ruled by a Federal Government. Basically, there are four concepts of Horizontal Federalism that are really important, capacity (the scope of a state's sovereign authority), constraint (rights or immunities that limit state power), centralization (express or implied federal preemption or authorization of state action), and comity (the need for states to respect each other even when capacity exists free from constraint or central control). Correct identification of the concepts will find out minimum three different aspects that might cause instability in the Federal jurisdiction. Generally, individual decisions based on Federal Laws might sometime misinterpret the problem, and hence the outcome could be problematic. Thus this is a balance of state and the central government. Once these are in action, it is difficult for either state or the central government to assume sole power.
We can give an example here. There are ongoing debates in America about the Arms Act and the laws that rule the trade and commerce along the interstates. Here we have to recall the fact that, according to Bowman (2002), started as “one of the greatest historical debates of America, the conflict between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists” (p.14). Here, in the Federalist Debates, the opposing group was critical of the presence of a strong Government in the central administration and mentioned that the state governments should be both strong and independent, and it will give better protection to the civil rights of the common people of America. The Federalists mentioned that it is always important to have a powerful central government, and it will ensure the survival of the country. The central government can help the states to function among themselves in a better way, which will be beneficial for all. But the debate between the two groups really framed the US Constitution.
As a result, this form of government structure is considered to be ideal for a country with several religious factions. These are the main reasons that the framers implemented these steps. However, these distinct laws without any meaningful distinction can harm the basic purpose of the doctrine. So there are ample opportunities to revisit the laws of the country and finally come up with something that will be accepted nationwide.