Why We Need a White House Summit on Federalism
Whether it's Harris or Trump, a presidential convening in 2025
Whoever wins the Oval Office in November should host a White House Summit on Federalism during his/her first year.
There’s a long history of presidents convening leaders in this way to discuss and publicize important matters. Now is the time to do that with the powers and responsibilities of state governments.
Americans should know more about their governors, state cabinet officials, state legislators, and state supreme court justices. They should appreciate the indispensable role state-level institutions play in our democratic system. American governing would be stronger and American politics would will be healthier if state capitals (instead of Washington) were at the center of our public life.
Here are five reasons this is so important right now.
First, historically, American presidents have disproportionately come from governorships. That’s a good thing. Not only do such leaders enter the Oval Office with executive-branch experience, they also understand the authority and duties of state governments. That can naturally check the growth of Washington. Interestingly, we’ve had several eras when a string of governors became presidents. Two periods stand out.
For 43 of the 52 years between 1893 and 1945, the White House was occupied by a former governor (Cleveland, McKinley, T. Roosevelt, Wilson, Coolidge, F. Roosevelt). From 1977 through 2009, we had 28 of 32 years of former governors in the White House (Carter, Reagan, Clinton, W. Bush).
I believe that it is not a coincidence that Washington grew out of control and federal governing became unpopular and unwieldy from 1945-1977 when we had an unbroken streak of six non-governor presidents (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford). Similarly, regardless of whether Trump or Harris wins, by 2029, we will have had 20 consecutive years of non-governor presidents (Obama, Trump, Biden, Harris/Trump). That’s not good.
We need to reintroduce America—particularly America’s journalists, commentators, and policy types—to state-level governing.
Second, in the last few years, the U.S. Supreme Court has changed several areas of jurisprudence. This has major implications for both state policymaking (state legislative and executive branches) and state jurisprudence (state courts).
For instance, the Dobbs decision moved most abortion-related questions back to the states. Through a series of decisions, the Court reduced the power of the federal administrative state. This means that states will have more freedom from Washington’s agencies and that states may want to legislate and/or regulate in areas where federal bureaucracies will now be constrained. Several Court decisions have changed the understanding of what makes for a constitutional gun regulation. Several Court decisions have prohibited states from discriminating against faith-based organizations.
Although each of these matters has gotten some attention, the broader theme—more and altered decision-making for states—has not. The public and those it listens to should know more about this trend and about the smart, able people serving on state supreme courts and in state political offices.
Third, in recent history, governors have often led on the most pressing issues of the era. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, a bipartisan group of reform-oriented governors were the energy behind the invaluable education accountability movement. Later governors (including Thompson of Wisconsin and Engler of Michigan) were largely responsible for welfare reform. Later Wisconsin’s Walker and Indiana’s Daniels led a wave of budget and school reforms. These are just modern examples of an American tradition. During the early 20th century, Progressive-Era reforms on health and labor were spearheaded by governors.
Although Uncle Sam needs to address immigration, China, and the federal budget calamity, most of America’s most pressing issues are squarely in the domain of state governments: higher education, family policy, crime, housing, K-12 education. America needs great public leadership and great policy. That means we need a new era of great governors and state leadership.
Fourth, in recent years, too many people have simply forgotten about federalism—what it is, why it matters, why it’s especially important in America, why it’s doubly important in a period of polarization. One cause of our amnesia is partisanship, which has erased most governing principles from our memory banks. Too many political actors today gravitate toward a muscular central government so long as people they like are in charge. When Donald Trump was in office, some on the right accepted his centralizing tendencies because he was the GOP leader. Others on the right grew fond of industrial policy and stronger federal administrators because they could advance conservative goals. Some on the left suddenly became open to more state-level authority because it was seen as thwarting Trumpism.
We need an extended national conversation about federalism’s non-partisan virtues—that is, how it can help America as a whole, not just specific political interests. We need to talk about why we have a 10th Amendment. About what “police powers” mean. How federalism suits a pluralistic, continental nation. How federalism enables policy experimentation. How federalism facilitates localism and civil society. How federalism facilitates democracy. How federalism protects liberty.
Lastly, American public life today is simply healthier the closer it is to home. The more we are consumed by distant figures and distant controversies, the more we feel out of control, the more we demonize opponents, the more we fall prey to conspiracy theories. Washington today is not only dysfunctional in its governing; it also seems to make people angrier, more partisan, and less effective.
There are highly able, responsible people in state capitals. Public opinion surveys continually show that state and local institutions are more trusted than those far away. Many governors are remarkably popular. If we want people to trust American governing again and more frequently engage in productive public life, we’d be wise to direct them away from Washington and toward the states.
A White House Summit on Federalism wouldn’t change American governing and politics on its own. But it could remind people of an essential American tradition and restart important governing conversations. It could redirect the attention of reporters and commentators, energize today’s state-level leaders, and help convince tomorrow’s leaders to stay closer to home.