Please answer each question separately each answer needs to be 250 words... further please respond to 3 post.

Question 1:What possible ramifications might technology, the judicial system, and the electoral process have on the future of federalism? Question 2: Compare and contrast devolution, diffusion, and preemption. Do you see the application of these concepts as effective in the United States? Discuss ramifications for all three and comment on the likelihood of at least two ramifications discussed by your classmates. Respond/provided feedback to the below post, must be at least 150 words. Responds post 1: Federalism is a form of government that allows for shared authority between two levels of government. As our society evolves the need for policy change grows. Technology has played a large role in the advancements of our global systems. Education, transportation, travel, banking, entertainment, healthcare, communication and so much more have evolved due to advancing technology. Most would associate these changes as good, but some of these advances have made things more difficult. With technology residents can communicate much faster, news and media get information out quicker, and access to information on public opinion’s and political views are readily available at our fingertips. That being the case the argument for a federalist society because states have better a better understanding to what local needs are becomes more difficult to get by with. Federal representatives have just as much access to information and with local news media keeping us all up to date on events and issues much of what is needed is viewable with technology, which means a central government can do support local needs just as well as the state level. Even for those issues that our local news outlets might not cover, media sources like Facebook, Instagram, and Video uploads on YouTube get the message out quickly and loudly. Our judicial system impacts federalism through the laws passed on a federal vs. state level that citizens are required to abide by. Take for example the legalization of Marijuana, which has been legalized on a state level but not on the federal level. Not all states adopted this law, but once it was adopted in some and was successful in building state revenue, diffusion took place and other states adopted the law as well. This makes trying cases in court much more difficult and for residents it makes it more complex to understand when it is or isn’t ok to smoke. As an online article points out, federalism giving equal authority to the state also means that there are 50 different ways that the judicial system can govern, “this means little standardization and lots of hart-to-access information”. (Souris, 2018) Neither of which sound effective or functional. Federalism also challenges the structure of our electoral process. State limits as campaign finance reform, ranked-choice voting, and redistricting are all example of this. (Souris, 2018) Changing the way money is involved in the politics is huge. Many citizens have become very sceptic of politics on a federal level, but still trust their state government. However, the reduction of funds would likely not be favored on a federal level. Rank-choice voting being used in some states is a newly implemented system that again other states or even our federal level may not be a fan of. States with smaller populations don’t really need redistricting, but for larger states, this would mean having more than one state representative to speak to the needs of their population. This makes things a little bit more complex, but it does give an opportunity for states that are really large with extremely diverse populations to have access to a representative that covers all the needs. Respond post 2: There is no doubt our world is changing quickly. With the rise of technology and the internet era, the dissemination of information has become a matter of clicking a few buttons or typing out a quick 280-word headline and sending it into the “twittersphere” for the world to see. The rapid change in technology is impacting federalism in a big way. Take for example the 2016 Presidential election. This election was the first to harness the power of social media. Surprisingly, Twitter became a major player for campaigning and remains to be a central form of communication for the current White House. Though Twitter only allows for small bursts of information, tweets are used to grab people’s attention quickly. In a world that moves at jet speed, most people lose interest quickly and tweets are an efficient way to reach key publics. This along with Facebook, online news sources and other social media sites have become not only people’s first source of information, but also the first choice for political candidate’s campaign and marketing efforts. The judicial system has always had a major impact on federalism and will continue to impact how it will evolve in the future. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of laws with either rein in the power of the federal government or extend their powers while reducing the power given to the States. A prime example of this is their interpretation of the Commerce Clause during the nationwide push to lower the legal limit for drinking and driving. The federal government mandated that all states lower the legal limit to .08. Those states that did not lower their legal limit would lose their federal highway funding. This lead to an outcry by many states who believed this was an abuse of power by the federal government. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government. The judicial system will continue to impact the federal system through their interpretations of laws and rulings. Finally, in recent years we have seen the power the electoral system has over federalism. There has been a trend towards populism or lowering the power of the federal government and increasing states’ rights. The more populist we become, the less federalist we are. The rise of populism, reduction of federal authority and increase of states’ rights also increases laissez-faire capitalism which leads to less government regulation. Given some of the current events, I fear there is a movement towards reducing minority participation in electoral process. By requiring pre-registration and IDs to vote, voter participation has been decreased especially amongst minorities. This has led to more conservative voters which, in turn, has increased support of deregulation and a less powerful federal government.