Federal Responses to Three Twenty-First Century Crises: More Continuity than Centralization in American Federalism

Abstract Analysis of the 2001 terrorist attacks, the 2007–2009 financial crisis, and the 2020–2022 COVID-19 crisis found more continuity than discontinuity in American federalism as the federal government mostly employed existing intergovernmental channels and grant programs to address the crises in mostly bipartisan ways. Centralizing responses depend on a number of factors: whether (1) the federal government is unified by a centralizing party, (2) divided government compels compromises, (3) public perceptions of crisis mismanagement lead voters to elect a new centralizing president and Congress, (4) needs for quick responses lead Congress to employ extant intergovernmental tools, (5) the crisis can be blamed on state and local government failures or incapacities, (6) state and local governments are fiscally vulnerable, (7) state and local governments are the leading responders, (8) the federal government is dependent on state and local governments for policy implementation, and (9) the Supreme Court supports or opposes centralizing measures.