Unit 1

Multiple Choice

The Americans with Disabilities Act, which provides protections for the disabled, is an example of a federal mandate
In the early part of the twenty-first century, public opinion polls showed that a majority of Americans believed it should be illegal to burn the American flag. As a result, many members of Congress introduced amendments to make it illegal to burn or desecrate the American flag. However, these efforts have been unsuccessful. Which of the following statements best explains why these efforts have been unsuccessful? The framers made the amendment process difficult in order to protect individual rights.
The debates between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were primarily about which of the following issues? The scope of power of the central government
Which of the following is argued by James Madison in The Federalist paper number 10? A system of republican representation helps to limit the excesses of factionalism.
All the following were concerns about the Articles of Confederation that led to the calling of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 EXCEPT dissatisfaction over safeguards of individual rights and liberties
Which of the following best captures the author's argument regarding the forms of democracy? Pluralist democracy, though it involves groups at different stages of the process of developing policy, excludes a significant portion of the population.

E. E. Schattschneider, The Semisovereign People, 1960

The vice of the groupist theory is that it conceals the most significant aspects of the system. The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly chorus sings with a strong upper-class accent. Probably about 90 percent of the people cannot get into the pressure system.

The notion that the pressure system is automatically representative of the whole community is a myth fostered by the universalizing tendency of modern group theories. Pressure politics is a selective process ill designed to serve diffuse interests. The system is skewed, loaded, and unbalanced in favor of a fraction of a minority.
According to James Madison, which of the following best controls the effects of faction? A large republic
The term “bicameralism” refers to the establishment of two legislative chambers that have different structures and rules
States and localities have the most discretion in establishing policy when federal funding is derived from block grants
Which of the following is an example of checks and balances, as established by the Constitution? The requirement that presidential appointments to the Supreme Court be approved by the Senate
Of the following, which has been used most to expand the power of the national government? The commerce clause of the Constitution
Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution does which of the following? Emphasizes both national sovereignty and federalism.
One example of constitutional checks and balances is the House can impeach federal judges and the president, and the Senate holds the impeachment trial
Which of the following is an accurate description of the decision in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)? The federal government had the authority to establish a national bank, and Maryland’s tax was unconstitutional.
Which of the following is an accurate description of the decision in United States v. Lopez (1995) ? The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was struck down as unconstitutional because it exceeded the commerce clause.
Which of the following is the best example of a constitutional concept that supports the vision of the United States as a union of states, rather than a union of individual citizens? The electoral college
Enumerated powers of the federal government include all the following EXCEPT the power to regulate intrastate commerce
Which of the following scenarios best exemplifies Madison’s argument in The Federalist 46? States creating universal health care for their state even though the federal government does not endorse such a policy.
Which of the following is NOT a trait of a liberal democracy? Achieving income equality
The framers of the Constitution intended to establish a representative republic
Which of the following describes the social contract theory as advanced by John Locke? It is an agreement in which the government promises to protect the natural rights of people.
In The Federalist papers, James Madison argues that political liberty is best protected by the fragmentation of political power in a large republic
The theory that all interests are and should be free to compete for influence in government, resulting in healthy democratic compromise and balance, is called pluralism
Members of Congress receive many phone calls, meeting invitations, and e-mails from various competing interest groups asking for support on their preferred public policies. This situation best exemplifies which of the following models of democracy? Pluralist
The Connecticut (Great) Compromise drafted at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 is significant for which of the following reasons? It proposed a Senate with equal representation for each state and a House of Representatives with membership established according to the population of each state.
Which of the following best describes the influence of social contract theory on the Constitution of the United States? The framers attempted to legitimize the Constitution through an appeal to popular sovereignty.
The practical effect of this clause has been to allow the national government to extend its powers beyond those enumerated in the Constitution

The following questions refer to the following clause from the Constitution:

"The Congress shall have power...to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."
The clause in the United States Constitution that states that federal law will prevail in the event of a conflict between federal and state law is known as the supremacy clause
The supremacy clause in the Constitution states that federal law takes precedence over state law when the laws conflict

Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist 21

The next most palpable defect of the subsisting Confederation, is the total want of a SANCTION to its laws. The United States, as now composed, have no powers to exact obedience, or punish disobedience to their resolutions, either by pecuniary [fines], by a suspension or divestiture of privileges, or by any other constitutional mode. There is no express delegation of authority to them to use force against delinquent members; and if such a right should be ascribed to the federal head, as resulting from the nature of the social compact between the States, it must be by inference and construction... There is, doubtless, a striking absurdity in supposing that a right of this kind does not exist...

Based on The Federalist 21, which of the following arguments about government would Hamilton likely agree with? As a practical matter, the laws of the national government ought to have supremacy over state laws.
In the passage, Hamilton is concerned that under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government does not have sufficient constitutional powers to gain compliance from state governments. Which of the following is a way that the Constitution allows the federal government to address this problem? The federal government can pass laws that allow it to fine or tax individuals directly.
Which of the following scenarios illustrates a solution for the problem of getting states to comply with federal government policies, as described in the passage? The federal government can withhold highway funds from states that do not raise the age to drink alcohol to 21.

James Madison, The Federalist 10

"A pure democracy… can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction... Such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths...

The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended...

It may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people."

Which of the following statements best reflects James Madison’s beliefs about political representation as expressed in the passage? People are best represented by a few politicians chosen to voice their issues.
Which of the following best describes Madison’s primary concern about representative government? Those who seek to represent the people may be tempted to act in their own interests instead.
Which of the following sections of the United States Constitution most concerns Madison according to the passage? Article I, Section 2—“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”
The House of Representatives impeaches the president. Which of the following scenarios represents how bicameralism is used as a check on the vote to impeach? The Senate deliberates the case and votes to determine the president’s guilt or innocence.
In 1974, the House of Representatives approved a resolution granting the Judiciary Committee authority to investigate impeachment of President Nixon for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress. Which constitutional ideal of democracy is demonstrated in this scenario? Limited government
The Declaration of Independence states “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” This was a revolutionary change from the system of British monarchy, which was based on the divine right of kings. For which of the ideals of democracy does this quote provide a foundation? Popular sovereignty

Free Response

Patriot Act

Prompt

On October 26, 2001, the 342-page USA PATRIOT ACT quickly passed through Congress and was signed into law just 45 days after 9/11. It expanded the federal government’s ability to access phone and e-mail communications to an unprecedented level. It gave the FBI the authority to obtain personal information on people suspected of terror-related activities without the approval of judges.

Broad support for these additional security measures led to this quick response by Congress and the president, but it also ignited a long-standing debate in American government regarding the balance between civil liberties and social order. Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union launched campaigns opposing the measures and cautioning against the erosion of civil liberties in the wake of the 9/11 attack.

Question Respond to all parts of the question. In your response, use substantive examples where appropriate.

Describe a section of the Constitution that a group such as the American Civil Liberties Union would likely say is most affected by the USA PATRIOT ACT.
Explain how checks and balances could work to ensure that the section of the Constitution identified in Part A would be protected.
Over time, some of the measures of the USA PATRIOT ACT have been challenged by state governments who do not wish to cooperate with the federal government. Explain a concept of American government and politics that this action illustrates.

Response

Section of the Constitution Affected by the USA PATRIOT ACT

A group like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) would likely point to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as being most affected by the USA PATRIOT Act. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, stating that a warrant must be supported by probable cause and must specifically describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. The provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, particularly those allowing for increased surveillance and the collection of telecommunication and electronic information without a judge's prior approval, could be seen as infringing upon these protections. For example, Section 215 of the Act allowed the FBI to order any person or entity to turn over "any tangible things" for an investigation to protect against terrorism, significantly expanding the government's ability to access personal records without a warrant based on probable cause.

Checks and Balances to Protect the Constitution

The system of checks and balances is designed to ensure that no single branch of government becomes too powerful, and it can help protect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including those under the Fourth Amendment. This system can work in several ways to safeguard civil liberties against potential overreach through laws like the USA PATRIOT Act:

- **Judicial Review**: The courts can declare laws or actions by the executive branch unconstitutional if they violate the Constitution. In the context of the PATRIOT Act, affected individuals or organizations can challenge the legality of surveillance and data collection practices in court. For example, courts have heard challenges to various provisions of the Act on grounds that they violate Fourth Amendment rights.

- **Legislative Oversight**: Congress has the authority to oversee the implementation of the PATRIOT Act and amend or repeal provisions that are found to infringe on constitutional rights. Congressional committees can conduct hearings to scrutinize the Act's enforcement and its impact on civil liberties, potentially leading to legislative adjustments to ensure a better balance between security needs and constitutional protections.

- **Sunset Provisions**: Some sections of the PATRIOT Act were subject to sunset clauses, meaning they would expire after a certain period unless reauthorized by Congress. This mechanism forced periodic review of the Act's provisions, allowing Congress to assess their necessity and compatibility with constitutional rights and to make adjustments as needed.

State Governments Challenging the PATRIOT ACT

The challenges posed by state governments to the measures of the USA PATRIOT Act illustrate the concept of federalism, which is a system of government in which power is divided between a national (federal) government and various state governments. Under the U.S. Constitution, both the states and the federal government have specific powers, and the Tenth Amendment reserves to the states or the people those powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution.

When state governments resist cooperation with federal mandates from the PATRIOT Act, they are asserting their rights under the principles of federalism. They may argue that certain federal requirements infringe upon state sovereignty or the rights of their citizens. This tension reflects the ongoing negotiation of power between state and federal levels of government, a fundamental aspect of American political structure. For instance, states and localities have adopted resolutions or ordinances that limit local cooperation with federal authorities under the PATRIOT Act, citing concerns over civil liberties and state autonomy. This action embodies the broader struggle to balance national security interests with the protection of individual freedoms and the autonomy of state governments within the federal system.

Amending the Constitution

Prompt

Respond to all parts of the question. In your response, use substantive examples where appropriate.

The framers believed that a constitution was necessary to create a stable political system that would protect individual rights. However, understanding the need for political change, they included a process to amend the constitution. Develop an argument that takes a position on whether the process to amend the United States Constitution should be simplified.

Use at least one piece of evidence from one of the following foundational documents:

The Federalist 10 Brutus 1 Article V of the United States Constitution In your essay, you must:

✓ Respond to the prompt with a defensible claim or thesis that establishes a line of reasoning.

✓ Support your claim with at least TWO pieces of specific and relevant evidence.

One piece of evidence must come from one of the foundational documents listed above. A second piece of evidence can come from any other foundational document not used as your first piece of evidence, or it may be from your knowledge of course concepts.

Response

The process to amend the United States Constitution, as outlined in Article V, is intentionally rigorous, requiring either a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress or a convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures, and then ratification by three-fourths of the states. This framework was designed to ensure that any changes to the Constitution would reflect a broad consensus, rather than the fleeting passions of the moment. While some argue that this process should be simplified to more easily address contemporary issues, a closer examination of the framers' intentions and the historical context suggests that the complexity of the amendment process is both necessary and beneficial for safeguarding democratic principles and individual rights.

Claim: The process to amend the Constitution should not be simplified, as its rigorous nature is essential for maintaining the stability of the political system and ensuring that amendments reflect a wide-ranging consensus rather than transient majorities.

Evidence from Foundational Documents:

Article V of the United States Constitution provides a clear, though challenging, pathway for amendments. This design is deliberate, aiming to balance the need for change with the importance of stability. By requiring substantial agreement across diverse political and social landscapes, Article V ensures that amendments are the product of careful deliberation and broad-based support, minimizing the risks of hasty or ill-considered changes to the foundational law of the land.
The Federalist No. 10, written by James Madison, emphasizes the dangers of factions and the importance of controlling their effects. Madison argues that an extensive republic, such as that established by the U.S. Constitution, helps control the mischief of factions by diluting their power and ensuring that legislation (including amendments) reflects the diverse interests of a large population. Simplifying the amendment process could undermine this protection, making it easier for majority factions to impose their will at the expense of minority rights and the common good.

Additional Evidence:

Brutus No. 1, although critical of the proposed Constitution for granting too much power to the federal government, inadvertently supports the case for maintaining a rigorous amendment process. The concerns raised about the potential for tyranny and the over-centralization of power highlight the importance of a careful and deliberate process for constitutional amendments. Simplifying this process could exacerbate the very issues Brutus warns against, allowing for rapid shifts in power dynamics and making it easier for transient majorities to erode fundamental liberties.

Conclusion:

The framers of the Constitution, aware of the need for both stability and adaptability, crafted a deliberately challenging amendment process. This process serves as a safeguard against the whims of temporary majorities and ensures that any alterations to the Constitution have been subjected to rigorous scrutiny and broad debate. While the complexity of the amendment process may seem like an impediment to change, it is, in fact, a vital protection for the rights of individuals and the principles of democratic governance. In an era of polarized politics and rapid social change, the wisdom of the framers in making constitutional amendments difficult is all the more relevant, ensuring that changes to the foundational law of the land are the result of consensus and careful consideration, not the temporary passions of the current political climate.

Amending the Constitution Formally and Informally

Prompt

The United States Constitution has endured for more than two centuries as the framework of government. However, the meaning of the Constitution has been changed both by formal and informal methods.

Identify two formal methods for adding amendments to the Constitution.

Describe two informal methods that have been used to change the meaning of the Constitution. Provide one specific example for each informal method you described.

Explain why informal methods are used more often than the formal amendment process.

Response

The United States Constitution has established a legal and institutional framework that has allowed for adaptation and change over more than two centuries. This adaptability can be attributed to both formal amendments and informal methods that have evolved the interpretation and application of the Constitution.

Formal Methods for Adding Amendments to the Constitution:

Proposal by Congress: The most common method for amending the Constitution involves an amendment being proposed by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. After proposal, the amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures or conventions in three-fourths of the states.
Proposal by a National Convention: Called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures, a national convention can propose amendments to the Constitution. This method, provided for in Article V of the Constitution, has yet to be used for amending the Constitution but serves as a mechanism for states to initiate amendments directly.

Informal Methods Changing the Constitution's Meaning:

Judicial Interpretation: Courts, especially the Supreme Court, have the power to interpret the Constitution and its amendments, effectively shaping its application through rulings. These interpretations can significantly alter how the Constitution is understood and applied.
- Example: The case of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) is a seminal example of judicial interpretation altering the Constitution's meaning. The Supreme Court's decision that "separate but equal" facilities are inherently unequal effectively overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) decision and mandated the desegregation of public schools, changing the interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Social and Cultural Change: Shifts in societal values and norms can also lead to changes in how the Constitution is understood and applied, even without formally amending the text. These changes can influence the interpretation of the Constitution by lawmakers, executives, and especially judges.
- Example: The expansion of LGBTQ+ rights, culminating in the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), reflects how social and cultural changes influenced the Court's interpretation of the Constitution. The decision that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriage shows a significant shift in the understanding of rights and equality under the Constitution, influenced by broader societal changes.

Why Informal Methods Are Used More Often:

Informal methods are used more frequently than the formal amendment process due to the high thresholds for proposing and ratifying formal amendments. The requirement of a supermajority for both proposal and ratification makes formal amendments challenging to achieve, especially in a politically divided nation. In contrast, judicial interpretations and societal changes can adapt the Constitution's application to new circumstances and values without needing to overcome the barriers of the formal amendment process. This flexibility allows the Constitution to remain relevant in a changing society and address issues that the framers could not have anticipated, while still maintaining the stability and integrity of the constitutional framework. Informal methods provide a dynamic avenue for constitutional evolution, reflecting the evolving landscape of American legal, social, and political life.

Balance the Power in Federalism on Policy Making

Prompt

The United States Constitution establishes a federal system of government. Under federalism, policymaking is shared between national and state governments. Over time, the powers of the national government have increased relative to those of the state governments.

Develop an argument about whether the expanded powers of the national government benefit or hinder policymaking.

Use at least one piece of evidence from one of the following foundational documents:

The Articles of Confederation Brutus 1 The Federalist 10 In your response you should do the following:

✓ Respond to the prompt with a defensible claim or thesis that establishes a line of reasoning. ✓ Support your claim with at least TWO pieces of accurate and relevant evidence. • One piece of evidence must come from one of the foundational documents listed above. • A second piece of evidence can come from any other foundational document not used as your first piece of evidence, or it may be from your knowledge of course concepts. ✓ Use reasoning to explain why your evidence supports your claim or thesis. ✓ Respond to an opposing or alternative perspective using refutation, concession, or rebuttal.

Response

The debate over the balance of power between the national and state governments is foundational to the United States' federal system of government. This argument contends that the expanded powers of the national government benefit policymaking, particularly in areas requiring uniformity and resources beyond the capacity of individual states.

Claim: The expansion of national government powers, within constitutional limits, benefits policymaking by facilitating coordinated action, ensuring uniform standards across states, and addressing issues that transcend state boundaries.

Evidence from Foundational Documents:

The Federalist No. 10, written by James Madison, argues for a strong central government as a means of controlling factions and preventing a tyranny of the majority that could arise in smaller republics. Madison's advocacy for a large republic under a federal system supports the idea that a strong national government can more effectively govern a diverse and extensive nation. This is particularly relevant in policymaking areas like civil rights, environmental protection, and national security, where uniform policies are essential for fairness and effectiveness.
The Articles of Confederation provide a historical example of the limitations of a weak national government. Under the Articles, the federal government lacked the authority to regulate commerce, levy taxes, or enforce laws, leading to economic disarray and interstate conflicts. This context underscores the necessity of expanding national powers to create a more stable and effective system of governance, as later established by the Constitution. The inadequacies of the Articles highlight the benefits of a stronger national government in unifying the states under a coherent policy framework.

Additional Evidence:

From contemporary examples, the national government's role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic illustrates the importance of expanded federal powers in policymaking. The ability to coordinate nationwide health responses, distribute vaccines, and provide economic relief measures showcases the advantages of a centralized approach to crisis management, which would be challenging to achieve with a fragmented state-led response.

Reasoning:

The evidence supports the claim by demonstrating that a strong national government can address complex, nationwide issues more effectively than individual states acting independently. Federalist No. 10's argument for a large republic to control factions and ensure justice, along with the failures of the Articles of Confederation, illustrates the necessity and benefits of a capable central authority in creating cohesive and efficient policies.

Addressing Opposing Perspectives:

Opponents might argue, drawing from Brutus No. 1, that expanding national powers threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties by concentrating too much authority in the federal government. While this perspective raises valid concerns about federal overreach, it overlooks the flexibility of federalism and the checks and balances built into the U.S. Constitution. The expansion of national powers has often been in response to the needs of a growing, increasingly interconnected society where state-by-state policies would be ineffective or inequitable. Moreover, the existence of judicial review and the possibility of amending the Constitution provide mechanisms to correct instances where the national government might exceed its appropriate bounds.

Conclusion:

The expansion of the national government's powers, when exercised within the framework established by the Constitution, enhances policymaking by enabling comprehensive, uniform policies that address the complexities of a modern nation. While vigilance against undue federal encroachment on state authority and individual freedoms is necessary, the benefits of a strong national government in leading and coordinating policy across diverse and widespread communities are clear and significant.

Housing and Urban Development Grants

Prompt

Republican President Gerald Ford signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, which created a new grant program. The new program replaced many of the housing programs directly administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Prior to the act, the federally administered HUD programs drew frequent criticism for their lack of bureaucratic efficiency. Rather than a one-size-fits-all national program, the grant program provided access to federal funding to states, local governments, nonprofits, and businesses to help support community development.

The grants from the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 are awarded by state or local governments to various projects. Big cities are automatically entitled to a certain level of funding but must submit a plan to HUD each year. Local governments may also obtain funding but must apply through their state governments.

The grants require community input about projects and encourage local participation in project development. These projects can include providing housing, building libraries, renovating old buildings, and supporting food banks. Congress allocated $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2020 to the program.

Question Republican President Gerald Ford signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, which created a new grant program. The new program replaced many of the housing programs directly administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Prior to the act, the federally administered HUD programs drew frequent criticism for their lack of bureaucratic efficiency. Rather than a one-size-fits-all national program, the grant program provided access to federal funding to states, local governments, nonprofits, and businesses to help support community development.

The grants from the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 are awarded by state or local governments to various projects. Big cities are automatically entitled to a certain level of funding but must submit a plan to HUD each year. Local governments may also obtain funding but must apply through their state governments.

The grants require community input about projects and encourage local participation in project development. These projects can include providing housing, building libraries, renovating old buildings, and supporting food banks. Congress allocated $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2020 to the program.

After reading the scenario, please respond to 1, 2, and 3 below.

Referencing the scenario, describe the type of grant established in the legislation and explain how it affects the relationship between the states and the federal government.
Explain why states might prefer the type of funding provided for the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to the type of funding provided for previous programs directly administered by HUD.
Describe the constitutional amendment that most supports the power of state governments in this situation, and explain how it relates to the scenario.

Response

The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 established a block grant program, specifically the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. This type of grant significantly impacts the relationship between states and the federal government by decentralizing the control over how federal funds are allocated and used for housing and community development projects. Unlike previous federally administered programs, which were directly managed by HUD and often criticized for inefficiency, this act allows states, local governments, nonprofits, and businesses more autonomy in determining the needs and priorities of their communities. By providing access to federal funding through a block grant, the act fosters a partnership model where states and local governments have the flexibility to tailor the use of funds to their specific community development needs, thereby enhancing the efficacy and responsiveness of the federal ai1.
States might prefer the type of funding provided by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 for several reasons. First, the block grant approach reduces bureaucratic red tape and provides more flexibility compared to the previous programs directly administered by HUD. This flexibility allows states and local governments to prioritize spending based on their unique needs rather than adhering to strict federal guidelines that may not align with local priorities. Second, the requirement for community input and local participation in project development ensures that the projects funded are more likely to meet the actual needs of the community, leading to more effective and impactful use of federal funds. Finally, the act's approach encourages innovation and experimentation in addressing housing and community development challenges, as states and local entities can pilot new solutions without the constraints of a one-size-fits-all federal progra1.
The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution most supports the power of state governments in this situation. The Tenth Amendment states that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. This amendment underpins the principle of federalism by delineating the division of power between the federal government and the states. In the context of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, the Tenth Amendment supports the notion that states have the sovereignty to address issues of housing and community development within their territories as these areas are not explicitly reserved for the federal government under the Constitution. The block grant program aligns with this constitutional principle by allowing states and local governments the autonomy to use federal funds in a manner that they determine best meets the needs of their communities, thus reinforcing the power of state governments in the federal system.