The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The US should continue using the Federal System

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 2/27/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 644 times Debate No: 70582
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




First round is acceptance
Second is Argument
Third is rebuttals
Fourth is closing remarks
Definitions: Federal System: pertaining to or of the nature of a union of states under a central government distinct from the individual governments of the separate states
What I am arguing: that the Federal system should be kept in the US
What my opponent is arguing: for an alternate system other than a federation (must define system in acceptance)


Federalism by definition is a political concept in which a group of members are bound together by covenant with a governing representative head. Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments, creating what is often called a federation.if we look at the Federalism in the United States we can barley see that this is the evolving relationship between state governments and the federal government of the United States. American government has evolved from a system of dual federalism to one of associative federalism. In "Federalist No. 46," James Madison asserted that the states and national government "are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers." Alexander Hamilton, writing in "Federalist No. 28," suggested that both levels of government would exercise authority to the citizens' benefit: "If their [the peoples'] rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress Because the states were preexisting political entities, the U.S. Constitution did not need to define or explain federalism in any one section but it often mentions the rights and responsibilities of state governments and state officials in relation to the federal government.
if we look at the structure of the federal system composed of : bank presidents, boards of directors, advisory councils and functions , we can see that the american people , which we find at the down deep of the structure ,that are barley not satisfied with such a system that is generating a huge economical crisis .
now lets take a look on the shared powers delegated to the national government and others reserved to the state , and we find out that they are sharing these privileges that i'am going to mention briefly , standing on a basic structure : provide for public welfare,administer criminal justice,charter banks ,raising taxes and borrowing money.
as we see , the common interactions are not enough to assure us a static economy ( because a state only runs on economical structure) so that i think that we should create a system that shares all the powers of the national government and the states , like creating federal courts , declaring wars ,admitting new states etc ...
so i'am against this Federal system because it does not evolve currency care .
Debate Round No. 1


s://; alt="" width="440px;" height="225px;" />

("Map of unitary and federal states" by Lokal_Profil. Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.5 via Wikimedia Commons)

That map shows Federations in green and Unitary States in blue. So quick definitions taken from Google so that way my respectable opponent knows what they are arguing about. I am arguing in favor of the United States of America staying a federation (a state operating under a federal system0 which is defined in the following way: a group of states with a central government but independence in internal affairs

I will be arguing against of the United States of America becoming a Unitary State defined as: a sovereign state governed as a single entity. The central government is supreme, and the administrative divisions exercise only powers that the central government has delegated to them.

I will note that that definition of unitary state makes it sound like the USA would be one, however the 10th amendment of the US Constitution is what makes us a true federation.

So the question is as follows: should we stay a federation? My answer is absolutely! In this round I will be elaborating on the points I will bring up in the rest of this debate for why we should keep the federal system.

  1. We established a Federal system because the UK (which is a unitary state) had been very tyrannical when governing the first 13 colonies. We realised that this system would not work so that it why we established a federation. Yes the Articles of Confederation were flawed and almost had too much federalism in them, but we adapted and we have made one of the best federations on Earth. No our government isn't perfect, but our system for governing is.

  2. Federal States are some of the most successful countries in the world; take Germany as an example. Germany has one of the largest and most stable economies in the world today (4th in the world). And Germany is not alone, the US is the largest economy in the world, Brazil is 7th in the world , Russia is 9th and India is 10th. Switzerland is ahead of the US in GDP per capita (9th) Switzerland also has a stable, high tech economy. All of that goes to show how successful federations are in the world.

  3. Most Unitary States were former empires. Im not saying that empires are bad or anything but I will say that empires were corrupt and very tyrannical. However most federations are much less corrupt due to the much more widespread distribution of power.



CyberOptics forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Well that is what we call a forfit everyone. That ends this debate. Of course vote pro due to forfit.
Also if anyone wants to debate me on this just send me a message.


CyberOptics forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Vote pro due to forfeit.


CyberOptics forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by ceaser8901 2 years ago
I would like you to argue for a Unitary state but you can argue for something else
Posted by Anarcho-Socialist 2 years ago
Can I argue for an even more decentralized state, rather than a unitary state? Something like the EU or the CSA.
Posted by ceaser8901 2 years ago
You may be right JP_Hatecraft, but that is not what I will be debating.
Posted by JP_Hatecraft 2 years ago
There are more options then just federal and unitary state.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture