The Patchwork Republic

It’s understandable that the approaching midterm elections will be seen as a national referendum on the direction of the country. But it’s important to see that the United States is not just polarized in its rhetoric, in its support of political parties or in its cultural interests. The country is increasingly governed as a patchwork republic, one in which core public functions are administered differently (often very differently) across the states, and are justified according to competing understandings of governmental authority.

Voting as a Federal Battleground

This is rather clear from the administration of elections themselves. The federal government does not run federal elections. States and localities do. Yes, Congress has passed laws that set certain baseline rules and protections. But state and local officials register voters, manage polling places, count ballots and certify results. Recent presidential efforts to assert control over election administration are directly challenging that allocation of power. These days, the very act of conducting an election reveals a deeper conflict over the meaning of federalism.

Public Policy Is Increasingly Diverging

That same conflict appears across substantive public policies. The old story was that polarization stimulates policy differences because policymaking power has been devolved to the states. But observers now recognize a few more pathways to policy divergence.

When the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization returned abortion regulation to the states, the majority quoted Justice Scalia: “The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations, upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.” Yet recent evidence suggests that some conservative states enacted laws more restrictive than the preferences of the average resident preferred, while liberal states retained permissive regimes. That is not the idea of democratic responsiveness that many Americans have in mind.

What’s more, the federal government has also increasingly threatened punishment to keep subnational actors from making policies it doesn’t like. It has gone beyond threats, too. The US Environmental Protection Agency withdrew California’s Clean Air Act waiver after the state struck a deal with automakers to maintain tough vehicle-emissions standards. Federal grant funds were withheld from “sanctuary” cities unless they complied with a variety of federal requests. During the pandemic, subnational governments that aligned views about masking or lockdowns with the administration in Washington were often praised or rewarded, while opponents were criticized or denied support.

A Divide Over How Authority Is Exercised

I think a deeper American divide is not only over which policies government should pursue, but also over how authority should be exercised when managing public affairs. If governance means the exercise of public authority in the management of public affairs, then values such as legality, impartiality, accountability, transparency, integrity and efficiency are not merely things for officials to consider. These values shape how individual programs are implemented and how a political system manages the larger question of whether authority should be centralized or fragmented.

Local Sparks and the Big Federal Fan

Seen in this light, the fight over redistricting is only the electoral tip of a much larger iceberg. Both parties are indeed trying to reshape the electoral landscape before November. At the same time, subnational institutions are polarized, and they are shaping fiscal and regulatory power across the nation. James Madison hoped that a well-constructed union would prevent local sparks from becoming national flames. But there are an awful lot of sparks across the country right now, and the federal government has very a big fan.

The Global Implications of a Divided Republic

This has worldwide implications. In The Federalist, No. 4, John Jay warned that “whether firmly united under one national government, or split into a number of confederacies...foreign nations will know and view [America] exactly as it is; and they will act toward us accordingly.” A country that increasingly governs itself through rival regimes looks incoherent from abroad, if not less powerful. America’s commitments seem more contingent on which political faction controls which institutions at which moment. Our divisions are no longer just a feature of our politics. They have become a dominant feature of our state.