
How to restore public trust: Bring back federalism
This wasn't the vision of the Founders. In a time of deep division, a key principle of our nation's founding quietly stands out as a potentially unifying force: federalism. The word might sound like an idea pulled from a dusty civics textbook, but the sharing of power between national and state governments is one of the most practical, time-tested tools we have to restore trust, encourage innovation, and preserve our democratic institutions.
Montesquieu, Locke, and America's founders were right: To prevent the abuse of power, power must be divided. This is done not only through separation of powers, but also by America's federal system of sovereign states. This isn't just political theory but a blueprint for balance.
Federalism isn't something we should wait on Washington to restore; states must take the lead — and we're doing just that in Utah.
The COVID-19 pandemic gave us a front-row seat to the benefits and challenges of federalism. While the federal government offered resources, it was governors and mayors who had to make the hard calls. States tried different approaches to everything from school closures to vaccine distribution. Some succeeded, some stumbled. But collectively, their actions demonstrated the value of letting local leaders respond to local needs.
That is the beauty of federalism: it lets states serve as testing grounds for new ideas. Utah has taken done this through creative Medicaid reforms. Colorado and Oregon have led the way on drug policy and environmental efforts. Florida and Texas have focused on economic growth through deregulation. These experiments offer real-world lessons from which other states can learn and act accordingly.
Just as important, federalism also reconnects people to the democratic process. When decisions are made closer to home, it's easier to engage and rebuild trust. In a time of fading confidence in national institutions, state and local governments offer a bridge to real, responsive leadership.
Some worry federalism could lead to inequality or injustice — and that risk is real. But the answer isn't more centralization; it's better partnerships. Federalism means the federal government protects rights, promotes fairness, and upholds the Constitution, while states meet the unique needs of their communities.
Utah is leading the way in restoring this balance. The 2025 legislative session brought the passage of HB488, a bold law that expands the state's Federalism Commission, builds public education programs around constitutional principles, and funds outreach efforts to rebalance state and federal roles and responsibilities. The new law ensures that Utah state agencies will now actively evaluate federal actions to identify when Washington has overstepped.
Utah will also host an ongoing dialogue with other states to explore what more can be done to rebalance our federal system. This isn't just theory—it's action.
Utah's efforts focus on restoring a structure that transcends politics. A robust, balanced, federalism not only limits federal overreach and protects individual liberty, but it also fosters local innovation and preserves democracy. By multiplying the number of representative governments that can resist unconstitutional excesses, federalism serves as an important means of preserving our democratic institutions.
In discussing federalism, progressive scholar and dean of Yale Law School, Heather Gerken, stated: 'My main goal is to convince people that federalism, which most people associate with conservatism, doesn't have a political valence.' And California's governor Gavin Newsom recently argued: 'Federalism is the cornerstone of our democracy. It's the United STATES of America.'
In NFIB v. Sebelius, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts reminded us that 'the states are separate and independent sovereigns. Sometimes they have to act like it.'
That time is now.
Restoring balance in the roles of state and federal government won't be easy. Washington must show restraint. States must build capacity. Citizens must be informed and engaged. But the building blocks are already in place. The Constitution gives us the framework. And increasingly, the people are demanding change.
The Constitution's version of federalism is dynamic, which means the robust federalism we create today need not be a replica of what was, but it can be adapted to our modern circumstances, needs, and values.
The next chapter on federalism cannot be written in Washington. It must be crafted in statehouses, classrooms, and our communities.
Jason E. Thompson is an entrepreneur and public servant currently serving in the Utah House of Representatives and is a member of the Utah Federalism Commission. Troy E. Smith, Ph.D., is a fellow at the Center for the Study of Federalism, and Director of the Constitutional Federalism Initiative at the Center for Constitutional Studies at Utah Valley University.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
5 minutes ago
- New York Times
Senate Passes Its First Spending Bills, but Battles Lie Ahead
The Senate on Friday overwhelmingly passed the first of its spending bills for the coming year, with bipartisan approval of measures to fund military construction projects, veterans and agriculture programs and legislative branch agencies. But the broad agreement over the $506 billion package of bills, typically the least controversial of the annual federal spending measures, masked a bitter fight in Congress over how to fund the government past a Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. Senators pushed through the legislation after several intense days of haggling as part of an agreement to allow the chamber to make progress on funding the government before senators leave Washington for a monthlong summer recess. 'We are on the verge of an accomplishment that we have not done since 2018 — and that is pass appropriation bills across the Senate floor prior to the August recess,' Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, said on the floor. Still, debate over the package hinted at the bigger spending challenges that lie ahead. Democrats, furious about the White House's efforts to subvert Congress's power in the purse, are wary of striking spending deals with Republicans when President Trump and his team have signaled they intend to continue ignoring or defying lawmakers' spending dictates, even those enacted into law. And Republicans are fighting among themselves over how closely to hew to the Trump administration's spending targets. The package approved on Friday night would provide $452 billion for veterans programs, $300 billion of it mandatory spending to fund veterans benefits; $19.8 billion for military construction and family housing projects; $27.1 billion for agricultural programs; and $7.1 billion for the operations of Congress and legislative agencies. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Senate passes first funding package ahead of shutdown cliff
'It's taken a great deal of work, good faith and negotiation to get to this point,' Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine). 'Congress has a responsibility, a constitutional responsibility under Article I, for the power of the purse. We are executing that responsibility.' The package would provide almost $154 billion for military construction and veterans programs. It would send more than $27 billion to the Agriculture department and FDA. Both represent a roughly 2 percent boost over current levels. The Senate rejected an amendment from Sen. Jeff Merkley, an appropriator and the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, that would bar the rescission, or clawback, of funds in the bill by the White House. Democrats are worried that the administration will send another rescissions package ahead of the fall funding deadline, which would likely implode any hopes of getting a larger funding deal. Still, Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, defended the smaller deal reached among senators, saying that the package 'rejects damaging cuts from Trump and House Republicans.' The Senate adopted by voice vote an amendment from Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Alex Padilla of California that would bar the use of any funds in the bill to reduce services provided by the Veterans Crisis Line. Senators rejected other amendments from Democrats including one that would have halted funding of the Agriculture Department reorganization and another to require a report on staffing reductions at the VA. They also rejected amendments from Sens. John Kennedy (R-La.) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.) that would have made deeper cuts to the Agriculture-FDA bill. The chamber also voted 75-21 to reject a proposal from Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin that would bar lawmakers from taking credit for earmarks. It would require the funding to be revoked if a lawmaker were to ever tout their earmarks in interviews, mailings, speeches or even on the campaign trail.


Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Federal judge defers ruling on Alina Habba's legal authority
A federal judge on Friday deferred ruling on Alina Habba's legal authority as a prosecutor after President Trump tapped her to lead the U.S. attorney's office for New Jersey. The big picture: A lawyer sought to get a criminal case in New Jersey dismissed by questioning Habba's legitimacy to lead the U.S. attorney's office in the state and arguing that the way the Trump administration restored her authority over the office was "unconstitutional." Catch up quick: In March, Trump appointed his then-presidential counselor Habba to serve as interim U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey. That allowed her to work in an acting capacity for 120 days while awaiting Senate confirmation. With Habba's confirmation stalled, the local district court appointed a new prosecutor to serve until the vacancy was filled. Attorney General Pam Bondi terminated the appointment hours later. Trump then withdrew Habba's nomination as the U.S. attorney so that she could be appointed to the position of first assistant U.S. attorney, making her the acting leader of the office. Driving the news: Judge Matthew Brann of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania wrote in the opinion that the motion to dismiss the case is both denied in part and deferred in part. The defendant, Julien Giraud Jr. who is facing charges in a drug and gun-related case, is entitled to injunctive relief "precluding Ms. Habba from participating in their prosecution if they are correct that she was appointed in violation of statute or the Constitution." That injunctive relief, the judge wrote, should extend to Assistant United States Attorneys "purporting to operate pursuant to Ms. Habba's authority." The judge added, "Because relief will be available to them if they are correct, the court should reach the merits of the Girauds' claims," Brann added. Context: Attorney Thomas Mirigliano asked the court to dismiss the indictment or stop Habba and any other attorney acting under "her purported authority" from prosecuting the case.