Unit 6C: Comparative UK and US Politics Alan Dobson Professor at the Department of Politics at the University of Dundee writes for the BBC Parliament

Every flag has its territory

Until recently there was a stark contrast between the federal system in the USA and the highly centralized system of the unitary state in Britain with its weak local and municipal government.

Since the development of devolution and the powers of self government granted to the Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont in Belfast, to the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff, and most significantly to the Scottish Parliament and the Executive in Edinburgh matters have changed and there are now more points of similarity.

ALSO IN THIS UNIT: Unit 6C - Comparative UK and US Politics Constitutions and Judiciaries Assemblies Executives Elections and Political Parties Pressure Groups Reading list

When the USA came into being one of the more radical ideas of the Founding Fathers was the suggestion that sovereignty could be divided.

The federal government in Washington was to operate in parallel with the individual state governments of Alabama, Georgia, New York and so on.

Each government would have its own clearly defined role over which it would exercise authority.

The federal government would preside over the national currency, trade, foreign policy, defence, and over disputes between the states.

State governments would look after law and order, roads, sewers, lighting, education and so on.

There was supposed to be no sense of one government being superior, more powerful or authoritative than the other. However, over time and in three distinct phases the federal government expanded its power.

In the Civil War it became clear that in the final resort a state could not secede peacefully from the Union.

In the New Deal the federal government grasped the power to run the national economy.

And in the 1960s and 1970s the federal judiciary ensured that there were national standards of civil rights applied in the states.

The consequence of all this was a decline in the power of the states which has troubled many politicians.

Attempts have been made to revive federalism, but the sticking point is always money, which limits the independent power of the states.

Pros and cons of a federal government

The federal government a is reluctant to change its dominant position, in terms of its ability to raise money through taxation, and allow states more autonomy through greater revenue raising powers.

Until recently that power over money also meant that local government in Britain was dependent ultimately upon central government and therefore had little ability to pursue policies that differed from those of the government at Westminster.

This is still largely the case though there has been some decentralization, for example regarding the government of the City of London and the government of the constituent parts of the UK.

The most significant devolution has been in Scotland where the Scottish Parliament has limited power to raise taxes of its own and therefore it also has a commensurate degree of independence from London, which it has already exercised by abolishing the payment of up-front fees for higher education and through its policy of care for the elderly.

At one end of the spectrum devolution has changed the face of territorial politics in Britain, and at the other end the European Union has also had impact, which has diminished British national sovereignty.

Again one of the key elements here is the EU's ability to raise revenue, in this case through the value added tax system.

Current thought about territorial politics places much emphasis upon recent political and technological changes, which enhance possibilities for different types of governance at different levels, which could more effectively meet the democratic needs of the 21st century.

� Professor Alan Dobson 2004
Department of Politics
University of Dundee