Module #5

Blog Entry #8:

Part #1: Re-Read the section on subsidiarity from last week’s PowerPoint slide handout. Also do some research online to learn more about this concept. Define “subsidiarity” in your own words. How is the concept of subsidiarity as discussed in this passage related to “devolution” as described in your textbook?

"Subsidiarity" asserts that political and social issues should be handled at the most local level, as opposed to by an overarching central authority. A central, or in this case, federal/state authority should only become involved in local matters when the local entities themselves cannot handle it/do it themselves. Subsidiarity, in a way, promotes a more intimate relationship between the public and the localities they reside under, as they have, theoretically, more freedom of input. While subsidiarity can seem rather farfetched in today's times, it actually became a reality during the Clinton administration in the form of devolution, where power was delegated from the federal government to state governments and localities (fueled by citizens' beliefs that state/local governments provided more efficient delivery of service and did a better job spending money). Both subsidiarity and devolution appear to be terms that describe something very similar: both terms discuss the delegation of power from a central authority to more local entities and stress the idea that a central authority should involve itself with lower/local institutions only when the local entities cannot perform their duties themselves. 

Part #2: Google “devolution in Kenya” for an ambitious example of how governments might use devolution to achieve desirable level of subsidiarity. Can you think of some examples of devolution from the US? Any time you hear the Federal government say (paraphrasing) “leave it up to the states,” that might be an example of devolution. Similarly, a state government saying “leave it up to the counties,” or a county government saying “leave it up to the individual cities.”

While initially reading about the devolution in Kenya, a turning point within the country that essentially recalibrated the three branches of government, allocating power from the national government to more local county governments, devolution can almost appear as a concept detached from our current notion of government. However, one example that comes to mind is the legalization of same-sex marriage in California. California allowed for same-sex marriage to be legalized, and yet the federal government allowed other states to mark these marriages as invalid/void if they wanted to.

The issue surrounding immigration heavily contrasts the devolution that took place when same-sex marriage was legalized. For example, San Francisco passed the Sanctuary Ordinance in 1989, adding to it the "Due Process for All Ordinance" in 2013 (last amended in 2016) that stressed that city employees could not use city resources to assist ICE in the enforcement of immigration law unless absolutely required by the state/federal government. While this only means that the city declines to take part in active immigration enforcement as opposed to shielding immigrants from said immigration enforcement, it's at least something. With the Trump administration's insistent immigration policy, it targeted sanctuary cities in an attempt to superimpose their jurisdiction on localities despite the city's ordinance.