Citizens’ roles in government vary across different systems, such as federal, confederation, and unitary. In a federal system, citizens engage with the government at multiple levels—national, state, and local—giving them a broad range of influence. They can vote on various issues at different levels, which allows for more direct involvement in decisions. In a confederation, power is primarily with regional governments, and citizens typically interact with their state or regional leaders more than the central government. The central government has limited authority, so local governments hold more power in decision-making. In a unitary system, decision-making is concentrated at the national level, and local governments have less control. Citizens primarily engage with the national government, as the local governments simply follow its direction.

The division of power refers to how authority is distributed among different levels of government. In federal systems, for example, power is shared between the national government and state or local governments, with each level having its own set of responsibilities. This structure ensures that no single branch or level of government becomes too powerful. Each branch, such as the executive, legislative, and judicial, checks and balances the others, so power is more evenly distributed and monitored.

The federal government shapes the actions of state and local governments mainly through financial leverage and legal requirements. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, the federal government strongly influenced New York’s response. The federal government set guidelines on travel restrictions, social distancing, and healthcare mandates, which states had to follow to receive federal funding. For New York, this meant implementing specific public health measures, including restrictions on large gatherings and the closure of certain businesses.

Additionally, the federal government played a role in managing the crisis through financial support. It provided aid to individuals who lost their jobs, businesses that were struggling, and hospitals facing increased demand. This funding often came with conditions, requiring states and local governments to adhere to federal guidelines. On the legal side, federal courts, including the Supreme Court, reviewed state decisions. For example, some of New York’s restrictions, such as limits on religious gatherings, were challenged in court, and federal courts intervened, showing the limits of state autonomy in times of national crises.

The federal government’s actions during the pandemic demonstrated how it can influence state and local governance through both policy mandates and funding. This interaction highlights the balance of power between the federal government and states, especially in handling public health emergencies.