{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025490196078431372, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.503184713375796, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Federalism in Flux: Three Candidate Models to Explain Trends in Federal Decentralization

Federations are characterized not only as \centralized" or \peripheralized", but as \centralizing" or \peripheralizing"|indicating that a federal system’s nature is dynamic and that those dynamics can be captured by a single measure. They are trends. This paper contributes to the emerging literature in federal dynamics by considering three models to explain the formation of federal trends and their dynamics: interest-based pressure, path dependence, and cultural spillovers. I argue that of the three candidate models, the cultural spillovers model has the best potential to capture trends across policy domains. Furthermore, equipped with this model, we may better understand moments of acceleration, leading to tips in the balance of power between federal and state governments that lead to a new era of centralization or peripheralization. Prepared for the annual meeting of the International Political Science Association,