UK Devolution and US Federalism (AQA A-Level Politics): Revision Notes
UK Devolution and US Federalism
Understanding the similarities and differences between US federalism and UK devolution is essential for comparing constitutional arrangements in both countries. Whilst both systems involve the distribution of power away from central government, they differ fundamentally in their nature, scope and legal status.
The key distinction lies not just in how power is distributed, but in the constitutional status of that distribution - whether it can be easily reversed or is permanently embedded in the constitutional framework.
Constitutional status and entrenchment
The most significant difference between US federalism and UK devolution lies in their constitutional status.
Federalism in the USA is an entrenched principle, protected by the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution. This means it cannot be easily repealed or abolished. Any attempt to remove or significantly alter the federal system would require a constitutional amendment, which demands supermajority support in Congress and ratification by three-quarters of state legislatures. This constitutional protection makes federalism a permanent and fundamental feature of American government.
In contrast, UK devolution was established through ordinary parliamentary statute - specifically Acts of Parliament passed in 1998 under Tony Blair's Labour government. Because parliamentary sovereignty means Parliament can make or unmake any law, devolution could theoretically be reversed by a future Parliament. The devolved powers have been delegated rather than alienated, meaning Westminster retains ultimate legal authority over these powers. However, whilst legally possible, reversing devolution is politically extremely unlikely given its widespread support and integration into UK governance.
Historical context
The Recent Origins of UK Devolution
Devolution is a relatively recent development in UK politics. It was initially a controversial policy that faced consistent opposition from the Conservative Party before Labour implemented it in the late 1990s. This historical opposition demonstrates how devolution represents a significant constitutional shift rather than a longstanding principle of British government. In contrast, federalism has been embedded in the American constitutional system since 1789.
Law-making powers and legislative divergence
The extent of law-making powers differs substantially between US states and UK devolved regions, though the gap has been narrowing.
US states possess considerable law-making authority. They can make decisions on fundamental issues such as the death penalty, which some states retain whilst others have abolished. States exercise significant control over criminal justice, education policy, healthcare provision and electoral systems. This creates substantial variation in laws and policies across America.
UK devolved regions initially had more limited powers, but these have expanded over time. Growing legislative divergence now exists across different parts of the UK.
Worked Example: Legislative Divergence in the UK
The expansion of devolved powers has created significant policy differences across UK regions:
- Top earners in Scotland pay higher income tax rates than those in England
- University students face far higher tuition fees in England compared to Scotland
- Each devolved region uses different electoral systems: Scotland and Wales employ the additional member system (AMS), whilst Northern Ireland uses the single transferable vote (STV) system
These examples demonstrate how devolution has created meaningful policy variation within a previously uniform system.
Convergence of the two systems
The Systems Are Moving Towards Each Other
Interestingly, the USA and UK appear to be moving towards each other in this area. In America, the reach of federal government has increased markedly in recent decades. Major federal initiatives in healthcare (such as the Affordable Care Act) and education have reduced the autonomy of individual states. Meanwhile, in the UK, devolved assemblies have gained increasing powers, including the ability to partially determine their own electoral systems for regional elections.
However, US states retain powers that UK devolved regions do not possess, such as the complete freedom to decide which electoral systems they use for all their elections. Additionally, many US state laws are challenged in courts when they conflict with federal law or the Constitution, particularly in areas like abortion and campaign finance.
Coverage and uniformity
Perhaps the most important difference between the two systems concerns their scope and application across each nation.
The Asymmetric Nature of UK Devolution
UK devolution applies only to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The vast majority of the UK's population lives in England, which has no devolved parliament or assembly. Decisions affecting England are made by Westminster MPs. Whilst English local councils exist, their powers are tightly circumscribed and they possess nothing comparable to the primary legislative powers of the devolved regional assemblies. This creates an asymmetric constitutional arrangement.
US federalism, by contrast, applies uniformly across all 50 states. Every state enjoys legislative equality and operates under the same federal system. This provides constitutional consistency across the entire nation. However, all state laws must conform with both federal law and the Constitution, which can limit state autonomy in practice.
Exam guidance
Tips for Answering Exam Questions
When addressing exam questions on this topic, ensure you:
- Reference the historical context and explain how devolution is a much more recent phenomenon in the UK
- Highlight that devolution was initially controversial, with Conservatives consistently opposing it before Tony Blair's Labour government implemented the policy
- Use specific examples to illustrate differences in law-making powers
- Explain both the differences and the convergence between the two systems
- Consider the theoretical versus practical implications of parliamentary sovereignty
Summary
Key Points to Remember:
-
Federalism is constitutionally entrenched in the USA (Tenth Amendment) and cannot be easily repealed; devolution in the UK is based on parliamentary statute and could theoretically be reversed, though this is politically unlikely
-
US states have historically possessed greater law-making powers than UK devolved regions, but the gap is narrowing as federal power increases in America whilst devolution expands in the UK
-
UK devolution is asymmetric, applying only to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, leaving England without its own parliament; US federalism applies uniformly across all 50 states
-
Devolution represents a delegation not alienation of powers - Westminster retains ultimate sovereignty
-
Both systems are experiencing convergence, with increasing federal power in the USA and expanding devolved powers in the UK