Oxide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxide

The unit cell of rutile, an important oxide of titanium. Ti(IV) centers are grey; oxygen centers are red. Notice that oxygen forms three bonds to titanium and titanium forms six bonds to oxygen.

An oxide (/ˈɒksaɪd/) is a chemical compound containing at least one oxygen atom and one other element in its chemical formula. "Oxide" itself is the dianion (anion bearing a net charge of –2) of oxygen, an O^2– ion with oxygen in the oxidation state of −2. Most of the Earth's crust consists of oxides. Even materials considered pure elements often develop an oxide coating. For example, aluminium foil develops a thin skin of Al₂O₃ (called a passivation layer) that protects the foil from further oxidation.

Stoichiometry

Oxides are extraordinarily diverse in terms of stoichiometries (the measurable relationship between reactants and chemical equations of an equation or reaction) and in terms of the structures of each stoichiometry. Most elements form oxides of more than one stoichiometry. A well known example is carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. This applies to binary oxides, that is, compounds containing only oxide and another element. Far more common than binary oxides are oxides of more complex stoichiometries. Such complexity can arise by the introduction of other cations (a positively charged ion, i.e. one that would be attracted to the cathode in electrolysis) or other anions (a negatively charged ion). Iron silicate, Fe₂SiO₄, the mineral fayalite, is one of many examples of a ternary oxide. For many metal oxides, the possibilities of polymorphism and nonstoichiometry exist as well. The commercially important dioxides of titanium exists in three distinct structures, for example. Many metal oxides exist in various nonstoichiometric states. Many molecular oxides exist with diverse ligands as well.

For simplicity sake, most of this article focuses on binary oxides.

Formation

Oxides are associated with all elements except a few noble gases. The pathways for the formation of this diverse family of compounds are correspondingly numerous.

Metal oxides

Many metal oxides arise by decomposition of other metal compounds, e.g. carbonates, hydroxides, and nitrates. In the making of calcium oxide, calcium carbonate (limestone) breaks down upon heating, releasing carbon dioxide:

${\displaystyle {\text{CaCO}}_3^{}⟶\text{CaO}+{\text{CO}}_2^{}}$

The reaction of elements with oxygen in air is a key step in corrosion relevant to the commercial use of iron especially. Almost all elements form oxides upon heating with oxygen atmosphere. For example, zinc powder will burn in air to give zinc oxide:

${\displaystyle 2\text{Zn}+{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶2\text{ZnO}}$

The production of metals from ores often involves the production of oxides by roasting (heating) metal sulfide minerals in air. In this way, MoS₂ (molybdenite) is converted to molybdenum trioxide, the precursor to virtually all molybdenum compounds:

${\displaystyle 2{\text{MoS}}_2^{}+7{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶2{\text{MoO}}_3^{}+4{\text{SO}}_2^{}}$

Noble metals (such as gold and platinum) are prized because they resist direct chemical combination with oxygen.

${\displaystyle \text{NiS}+\frac{3}{2}{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶\text{NiO}+{\text{SO}}_2^{}}$

Non-metal oxides

Important and prevalent nonmetal oxides are carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. These species form upon full or partial oxidation of carbon or hydrocarbons. With a deficiency of oxygen, the monoxide is produced:

${\displaystyle {\text{CH}}_4^{}+\frac{3}{2}{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶\text{CO}+2{\text{H}}_2^{}\text{O}}$

${\displaystyle \text{C}+\frac{1}{2}{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶\text{CO}}$

With excess oxygen, the dioxide is the product, the pathway proceeds by the intermediacy of carbon monoxide:

${\displaystyle {\text{CH}}_4^{}+2{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶{\text{CO}}_2^{}+2{\text{H}}_2^{}\text{O}}$

${\displaystyle \text{C}+{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶{\text{CO}}_2^{}}$

Elemental nitrogen (N₂) is difficult to convert to oxides, but the combustion of ammonia gives nitric oxide, which further reacts with oxygen:

${\displaystyle 4{\text{NH}}_3^{}+5{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶4\text{NO}+6{\text{H}}_2^{}\text{O}}$

${\displaystyle \text{NO}+\frac{1}{2}{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶{\text{NO}}_2^{}}$

These reactions are practiced in the production of nitric acid, a commodity chemical.

The chemical produced on the largest scale industrially is sulfuric acid. It is produced by the oxidation of sulfur to sulfur dioxide, which is separately oxidized to sulfur trioxide:

${\displaystyle \text{S}+{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶{\text{SO}}_2^{}}$

${\displaystyle {\text{SO}}_2^{}+\frac{1}{2}{\text{O}}_2^{}⟶{\text{SO}}_3^{}}$

Finally the trioxide is converted to sulfuric acid by a hydration reaction:

${\displaystyle {\text{SO}}_3^{}+{\text{H}}_2^{}\text{O}⟶{\text{H}}_2^{}{\text{SO}}_4^{}}$

Structure

Oxides have a range of structures, from individual molecules to polymeric and crystalline structures. At standard conditions, oxides may range from solids to gases. Solid oxides of metals usually have polymeric structures at ambient conditions.

Molecular oxides

• Some important gaseous oxides
• 

  Carbon dioxide is the main product of fossil fuel combustion.

• 

  Carbon monoxide is the product of the incomplete combustion of carbon-based fuels and a precursor to many useful chemicals.

• 

  Nitrogen dioxide is a problematic pollutant from internal combustion engines.

• 

  Sulfur dioxide, the principal oxide of sulfur, is emitted from volcanoes.

• 

  Nitrous oxide ("laughing gas") is a potent greenhouse gas produced by soil bacteria.

Although most metal oxides are crystalline solids, some oxides are molecules. Examples of molecular oxides are carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. All simple oxides of nitrogen are molecular, e.g., NO, N₂O, NO₂ and N₂O₄. Phosphorus pentoxide is a more complex molecular oxide with a deceptive name, the real formula being P₄O₁₀. Tetroxides are rare, with a few more common examples being iridium tetroxide, ruthenium tetroxide, osmium tetroxide, and xenon tetroxide.

Reactions

Reduction

See also: Carbothermic reduction

Reduction of metal oxide to the metal is practiced on a large scale in the production of some metals. Many metal oxides convert to metals simply by heating, (see Thermal decomposition). For example, silver oxide decomposes at 200 °C:

${\displaystyle 2{\text{Ag}}_2^{}\text{O}⟶4\text{Ag}+{\text{O}}_2^{}}$

Most often, however, metals oxides are reduced by a chemical reagent. A common and cheap reducing agent is carbon in the form of coke. The most prominent example is that of iron ore smelting. Many reactions are involved, but the simplified equation is usually shown as:

${\displaystyle 2{\text{Fe}}_2^{}{\text{O}}_3^{}+3\text{C}⟶4\text{Fe}+3{\text{CO}}_2^{}}$

Some metal oxides dissolve in the presence of reducing agents, which can include organic compounds. Reductive dissolution of ferric oxides is integral to geochemical phenomena such as the iron cycle.

Hydrolysis and dissolution

Because the M-O bonds are typically strong, metal oxides tend to be insoluble in solvents, though they may be attacked by aqueous acids and bases.

Dissolution of oxides often gives oxyanions. Adding aqueous base to P₄O₁₀ gives various phosphates. Adding aqueous base to MoO₃ gives polyoxometalates. Oxycations are rarer, some examples being nitrosonium (NO⁺), vanadyl (VO²⁺), and uranyl (UO2+2). Of course many compounds are known with both oxides and other groups. In organic chemistry, these include ketones and many related carbonyl compounds. For the transition metals, many oxo complexes are known as well as oxyhalides.

Nomenclature and formulas

The chemical formulas of the oxides of the chemical elements in their highest oxidation state are predictable and are derived from the number of valence electrons for that element. Even the chemical formula of O₄, tetraoxygen, is predictable as a group 16 element. One exception is copper, for which the highest oxidation state oxide is copper(II) oxide and not copper(I) oxide. Another exception is fluoride, which does not exist as one might expect—as F₂O₇—but as OF₂.

Devolution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devolution

 

See also: Subsidiarity and Subsidiarity (European Union)

The Parliament of Åland

Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization. Devolved territories have the power to make legislation relevant to the area, thus granting them a higher level of autonomy.

Devolution differs from federalism in that the devolved powers of the subnational authority may be temporary and are reversible, ultimately residing with the central government. Thus, the state remains de jure unitary. Legislation creating devolved parliaments or assemblies can be repealed or amended by central government in the same way as any statute. In federal systems, by contrast, sub-unit government is guaranteed in the constitution, so the powers of the sub-units cannot be withdrawn unilaterally by the central government (i.e. not without the process of constitutional amendment). The sub-units therefore have a lower degree of protection under devolution than under federalism.

Australia

Australia is a federation. It has six states and two territories with less power than states.

The Australian Capital Territory refused self-government in a 1978 referendum, but was given limited self-government by a House of Assembly from 1979, and a Legislative Assembly with wider powers in 1988.

The Northern Territory refused statehood in a 1998 referendum. The rejection was a surprise to both the Australian and Northern Territory governments.

Territory legislation can be disallowed by the Commonwealth Parliament in Canberra, with one notable example being the NT's short-lived voluntary euthanasia legislation.

Canada

Although Canada is a federal state, a large portion of its land mass in the north is under the legislative jurisdiction of the federal government (called territories, as opposed to provinces). This has been the case since 1870. In 1870 the Rupert's Land and North-Western Territory Order effected the admission of Rupert's Land and the North-Western Territory to Canada, pursuant to section 146 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Rupert's Land Act, 1868. The Manitoba Act, 1870, which created Manitoba out of part of Rupert's Land, also designated the remainder of both the Northwest Territories (NWT), over which Parliament was to exercise full legislative authority under the Constitution Act, 1871.

Yukon was carved from the Northwest Territories in 1898 but remained a territory. In 1905, the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were carved from the Northwest Territories. Portions of Rupert's Land were added to the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, extending those provinces northward from their previous narrow band around the St. Lawrence and lower Great Lakes. The District of Ungava was a regional administrative district of Canada's Northwest Territories from 1895 to 1912. The continental areas of said district were transferred by the Parliament of Canada with the adoption of the Quebec Boundary Extension Act, 1898 and the Quebec Boundaries Extension Act, 1912. The status of the interior of Labrador that was believed part of Ungava was settled in 1927 by the British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which ruled in favour of the Dominion of Newfoundland. The offshore islands to the west and north of Quebec remained part of the Northwest Territories until the creation of Nunavut in 1999.

Since the 1970s, the federal government has been transferring its decision-making powers to territorial governments. This means greater local control and accountability by northerners for decisions central to the future of the territories. In 1999, the federal government created Nunavut pursuant to a land claim agreement reached with Inuit, the indigenous people of Canada's Eastern Arctic. Since that time, the federal government has slowly devolved legislative jurisdiction to the territories. Enabling the territories to become more self-sufficient and prosperous and to play a stronger role in the Canadian federation is considered a key component to development in Canada's North. Among the three territories, devolution is most advanced in Yukon.

On June 18, 2021, the Labrador Inuit self-government Nunatsiavut stated that it had begun the process of seeking devolution of child protection services from the Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Children, Seniors, and Social Development with the goal for negotiations to conclude within three years.

Northwest Territories

The Northwest Territories (NWT) was governed from Ottawa from 1870 until the 1970s, except for the brief period between 1898 and 1905 when it was governed by an elected assembly. The Carrothers Commission was established in April 1963 by the government of Lester B. Pearson to examine the development of government in the NWT. It conducted surveys of opinion in the NWT in 1965 and 1966 and reported in 1966. Major recommendations included that the seat of government should be located in the territory. Yellowknife was selected as the territorial capital as a result. Transfer of many responsibilities from the federal government was recommended and carried out. This included responsibility for education, small business, public works, social services and local government. Since the report, the government of Northwest Territories has taken over responsibilities for several other programs and services including the delivery of health care, social services, education, administration of airports, and forestry management. The legislative jurisdiction of the territorial legislature is set out in section 16 of the Northwest Territories Act.

Now, the government of Canada is negotiating the transfer of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development's remaining provincial-type responsibilities in the NWT. These include the legislative powers, programs and responsibilities for land and resources associated with the department's Northern Affairs Program (NAP) with respect to:

• Powers to develop, conserve, manage, and regulate of surface and subsurface natural resources in the NWT for mining and minerals (including oil and gas) administration, water management, land management and environmental management;
• Powers to control and administer public land with the right to use, sell or otherwise dispose of such land; and
• Powers to levy and collect resource royalties and other revenues from natural resources.

The Government of the Northwest Territories, the Aboriginal Summit and the Government of Canada have each appointed a Chief Negotiator to work on devolution. A Framework Agreement was concluded in 2004. The target date for the completion of devolution talks for the NWT was March 2007. However, stumbling blocks associated with the transfer of current federal employees to the territorial government, and the unresolved issue of how much money the Northwest Territories will receive for its resources has delayed the conclusion of a devolution agreement for the NWT.

Nunavut

In 1966, the federal government established the Carruthers Commission to look at the issue of government in the north. After extensive study and consultation, the Commission concluded that division of the NWT was probably both advisable and inevitable. There was a recognition that Northerners wanted to run their own affairs and must be given the opportunity to do so. At the same time, however, it noted that governmental reform was required before this could happen. It recommended the establishment of a new system of representative government. As a result, in the late 1960s and 1970s, the federal government gradually created electoral constituencies and transferred many federally run programs to the territorial government. Northerners took on more and more responsibility for the day-to-day running of their own affairs. In 1982 a plebiscite was held in the NWT asking the question, "Do you think the NWT should be divided?" Fifty-three percent of eligible voters participated in the plebiscite, with 56.4 percent of them voting "yes". Voter turnout and support for division was particularly strong in the Eastern Arctic. The Inuit population of the eastern section of the territory had become increasingly receptive of the idea of self-government. It was viewed as the best way to promote and protect their culture and traditions and address their unique regional concerns.

Both the NWT Legislative Assembly and the federal government accepted the idea of dividing the territory. The idea was viewed as an important step towards enabling the Inuit, and other residents of the Eastern Arctic, to take charge of their own destiny. There were some reservations, however. Before action could be taken, certain practical considerations had to be addressed. First of all, outstanding land claims had to be settled. Second, all parties had to agree on a new boundary. Finally, all parties had to agree on the division of powers between territorial, regional and local levels of government. The various governments and native groups worked closely together to realize these goals. The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was ratified by the Inuit in November 1992, signed by the Prime Minister of Canada on May 25, 1993, and passed by the Canadian Parliament in June of the same year. It was the largest native land claim settlement in Canadian history. It gave the Inuit title over 350,000 square kilometres of land. It also gave the Inuit capital transfers from the federal government of over $1.1 billion over the next 14 years. This money will be held in trust with the interest to be used in a variety of different projects, including financing for regional businesses and scholarships for students. The Inuit also gained a share of resource royalties, hunting rights and a greater role in managing the land and protecting the environment. The land claims agreement also committed the Government of Canada to recommend to Parliament legislation to create a new territory in the eastern part of the Northwest Territories.

While negotiations on a land claims settlement progressed, work was also taking place to determine potential jurisdictional boundaries for a new Eastern Territory. A proposal was presented to all NWT voters in a May 1992 plebiscite. Of those voting, 54 percent supported the proposed boundary. The Government of the Northwest Territories, the Tungavik Federation of Nunavut (the Inuit claims organization) and the federal government formally adopted the boundary for division in the Nunavut Political Accord. The final piece of the equation fit into place on June 10, 1993, when the Nunavut Act received Royal Assent. It officially established the territory of Nunavut and provided a legal framework for its government. It fixed April 1, 1999, as the day on which the new territory would come into existence.

The government of Nunavut is currently negotiating with the government of Canada on a devolution agreement. Nunavut Tunngavik, the organization of Inuit of Nunavut, is also a participant to negotiations to ensure that Inuit interests are represented.

Devolution over natural resources to the government of Nunavut moved forward with the appointment of a Ministerial Representative for Nunavut Devolution. The Representative has held meetings with interested parties including the Boards established under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA), territorial and federal government departments in order to determine if devolution will occur and if so the future mandate of devolution. The government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik have appointed negotiators.

Yukon

In 1896, prospectors discovered gold in Yukon, which prompted a massive gold rush that saw the population of Yukon grow very rapidly. By 1898, Dawson grew into the largest Canadian city west of Winnipeg, with a population of 40,000. In response, the Canadian government officially established the Yukon Territory in 1898. The North-West Mounted Police were sent in to ensure Canadian jurisdiction and the Yukon Act provided for a commissioner to administer the territory. The 1898 statute granted the Commissioner in Council "the same powers to make ordinances... as are possessed by the Lieutenant Governor of the North-west Territories, acting by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly thereof". In 1908 amendments to the Yukon Act transformed the Council into an elected body.

Over time the territorial government exercised expanded functions. Relevant developments include the following:

• By the mid-1960s, schools, public works, welfare, and various other matters of a local nature had come under territorial administration.
• Increased authority of elected Council members over the ensuing period contributed to significant changes in the Yukon Commissioner's role. In 1979, instructions from the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Minister) directed the Commissioner to allow elected members and the Executive Council to make important policy decisions, specifying that his/her actions should normally be based on the advice and taken with the consent of the elected Executive Council.
• As in the Northwest Territories, federal responsibilities were transferred to the Yukon government in the 1980s. In 1988 the Minister and the Yukon Government Leader signed a Memorandum of Understanding committing the parties to smooth the progress of devolution of remaining province-like responsibilities to the Yukon Government. Responsibilities transferred since then include fisheries, mine safety, intra-territorial roads, hospitals and community-health care, oil-and-gas and, most recently, natural resources.
• Discussion to transfer land- and resource-management responsibilities to the Yukon Government began in 1996, followed by a formal federal devolution proposal to the Yukon Government in January 1997. In September 1998 a Devolution Protocol Accord to guide devolution negotiations was signed. On August 28, 2001, a final draft of the Devolution Transfer Agreement was completed for consideration. The Yukon Devolution transfer Agreement was concluded on October 29, 2001, with the Government of Canada enabling the transfer of remaining province-like responsibilities for land, water and resource management to the Government of Yukon on April 1, 2003.

Mexico

The Federal District

All constituent states of Mexico are fully autonomous and comprise a federation. The Federal District, originally integrated by Mexico City and other municipalities, was created in 1824 to be the capital of the federation. As such, it was governed directly by the central or federal government and the president of Mexico appointed its governor or executive regent. Even though the municipalities within the Federal District were autonomous, their powers were limited. In 1928, these municipalities were abolished and transformed into non-autonomous delegaciones or boroughs and a "Central Department", later renamed as Mexico City. In 1970 this department was split into four new delegaciones, and Mexico City was constitutionally defined to be synonymous and coterminous with the entire Federal District. (As such, the boroughs of the Federal District are boroughs of Mexico City).

In the 1980s, the citizens of the Federal District, being the most populated federal entity in Mexico, began to demand home rule: a devolution of autonomy in order to directly elect their head of government and to set up a Legislative Assembly. In 1987, an Assembly of Representatives was created, by constitutional decree, whose members were elected by popular vote. The devolution of the executive power was not granted until 1997 when the first head of government was elected by popular vote. Finally, in 2000, power was devolved to the delegaciones, though limited: residents can now elect their own "heads of borough government" (jefes delegacionales, in Spanish), but the delegaciones do not have regulatory powers and are not constituted by a board of trustees, like the municipalities of the constituent states.

The autonomy, or home rule, of the Federal District, was granted by the federal government, which in principle has the right to remove it. The president of Mexico still holds the final word in some decisions (e.g. he must approve some posts), and the Congress of the Union reviews the budget of the Federal District and sets the limit to its debt.

Some left-wing groups and political parties have advocated, since the 1980s, for a full devolution of powers by transforming the Federal District into the thirty-second constituent state of the Federation (with the proposed name of "State of the Valley of Mexico", to be distinguished from the state of México; another proposed name is "State of the Anahuac").

Indigenous peoples

In a recent amendment to the Constitution of Mexico, the country was defined as a "pluricultural nation" founded upon the "indigenous peoples". They are granted "free-determination" to choose the social, economic, cultural and political organization for which they are to elect representatives democratically in whatever manner they see fit, traditionally or otherwise, as long as women have the same opportunities to participate in their social and political life. There are, however, no prescribed limits to their territories, and they are still under the jurisdiction of the municipalities and states in which they are located; the indigenous peoples can elect representatives before the municipal councils. In practice, they are allowed to have an autonomous form of self-government, but they are still subject to the rights and responsibilities set forth by the federal constitution and the constitution of the states in which they are located.

France

Main article: Decentralisation in France

In the late 1980s a process of decentralisation was undertaken by the French government. Initially regions were created and elected regional assemblies set up. Together with the departmental councils these bodies have responsibility for infrastructure spending and maintenance (schools and highways) and certain social spending. They collect revenues through property taxes and various other taxes. In addition a large part of spending is provided by direct grants to such authorities.

There also are groups calling for devolution or full independence for Occitania, the Basque Country, Corsica, Alsace, and Brittany.

Spain

Main article: Nationalities and regions of Spain

The Spanish Constitution of 1978 granted autonomy to the nationalities and regions of which the Kingdom of Spain is composed. (See also autonomous communities and cities of Spain)

Under the "system of autonomies" (Spanish: Estado de las Autonomías), Spain has been quoted to be "remarkable for the extent of the powers peacefully devolved over the past 30 years" and "an extraordinarily decentralised country", with the central government accounting for just 18% of public spending; the regional governments 38%, the local councils 13% and the social-security system the rest.

In 2010 the Constitutional Court had ruled that non-binding referendums could be held and subsequently several municipalities held such referendums.

On December 12, 2013, the Catalan Government announced that a referendum would be held on self-determination. The central government of Spain considers that a binding referendum is unconstitutional and cannot be held. On October 1, 2017, the regional government held a referendum despite having been declared illegal by the Spanish courts. Subsequently, several leaders were arrested and imprisoned on charges of "sedition" and "rebellion". The regional president fled to Brussels, but has so far escaped extradition as those offenses are not part of Belgian law or the European Arrest Warrant. On December 21, 2017, fresh elections were held in which pro-independence parties held a slim majority and a broad coalition of constitutionalist parties expressed disappointment and concern for the future.

United Kingdom

Main article: Devolution in the United Kingdom

 

Northern Ireland Assembly

 

Scottish Parliament

 

Senedd (Welsh Parliament)

Various institutions established as part of the devolution of power in the UK

In the United Kingdom, devolved government was created for Northern Ireland in 1921 by the Government of Ireland Act 1920, for Wales and Scotland in September 1997 following simple majority referendums, and in London in May 1998. Between 1998 and 1999, the Scottish Parliament, Senedd (Welsh Parliament), Northern Ireland Assembly and London Assembly were established by law. The Campaign for an English Parliament, which supports English devolution (i.e. the establishment of a separate English parliament or assembly) was formed in 1998.

A referendum was held in Scotland on 18 September 2014 which asked citizens whether Scotland should be an independent country. By a margin of approximately 55 percent to 45 percent, people living in Scotland rejected the proposal. The leaders of the three largest British political parties pledged on 16 September 2014 a new devolution settlement for Scotland in the event of a No vote, promising to deliver "faster, safer and better change", and as a result of this vote and promises made during the referendum campaign, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced plans to devolve additional powers to the Scottish government, the nature of which would be determined by the Smith Commission. These powers were subsequently transferred in the Scotland Act 2016. Following the outcome of the Brexit vote on 23 June 2016, calls for further devolution have been raised, including differential membership of the European single market for the devolved areas of the United Kingdom.

The Yorkshire Party is a regionalist political party in Yorkshire, a historic county of England. Founded in 2014, it campaigns for the establishment of a devolved Yorkshire Assembly within the UK, with powers over education, environment, transport and housing. In the 2021 West Yorkshire mayoral election, the Yorkshire Party came 3rd, ahead of major parties.

United States

See also: State constitution (United States), Home Rule in the United States, and Municipal corporation

Fort Hall Indian Casino, Idaho. Gambling is allowed within Native American reservation lands while illegal on non-reservation land geographically in the same state.

In the United States the federal government and state governments are sovereign. As Native American tribes and the governments they formed pre-date the formation of the United States, their legal position as sovereigns co-exists alongside the individual states and the Federal government. The Legal relationships with Native American tribes and their government structures are the jurisdiction of Congress. This relationship is unique to each of the more than 500 tribes and also involves International Treaties between various tribes and Spain, Great Britain, and the eventual United States. Territories are under the direct jurisdiction of Congress. Territorial governments are thus devolved by acts of Congress. Political subdivisions of a state, such as a county or municipality, are a type of devolved government and are defined by individual state constitutions and laws.

District of Columbia

Main article: District of Columbia home rule

In the United States, the District of Columbia offers an illustration of devolved government. The District is separate from any state, and has its own elected government. In many ways, on a day-to-day basis, it operates much like another state, with its own laws, court system, Department of Motor Vehicles, public university, and so on. However, the governments of the 50 states are reserved a broad range of powers in the U.S. Constitution, and most of their laws cannot be voided by any act of U.S. federal government. The District of Columbia, by contrast, is constitutionally under the sole control of the United States Congress, which created the current District government by statute. Any law passed by the District legislature can be nullified by congressional action, and indeed the District government could be significantly altered or eliminated by a simple majority vote in Congress.

Supranational union

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supranational_union

A supranational union is a type of international organization that is empowered to directly exercise some of the powers and functions otherwise reserved to states. A supranational organization involves a greater transfer of or limitation of state sovereignty than other kinds of international organizations.

The European Union (EU) has been described as a paradigmatic case of a supranational organization, as it has deep political, economic and social integration, which includes a common market, joint border control, a supreme court, and regular popular elections.

Another method of decision-making in international organisations is intergovernmentalism in which state governments play a more prominent role.

Origin as a legal concept

After the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, Albert Einstein spoke and wrote frequently in the late 1940s in favour of a "supranational" organization to control all military forces except for local police forces, including nuclear weapons. He thought this might begin with the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, and grow to encompass most other nations, presenting this as the only way to avoid nuclear war. He broached the idea in the November 1945 and November 1947 articles in The Atlantic Monthly that described how the constitution of such an organization might be written. In an April 1948 address at Carnegie Hall, he reiterated: "There is only one path to peace and security: the path of supranational organization." Thanks to his celebrity, Einstein's ideas on the subject generated much discussion and controversy, but the proposal did not generate much support in the West and the Soviet Union viewed it with hostility.

With its founding Statute of 1949 and its Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which came into force in 1953, the Council of Europe created a system based on human rights and the rule of law. Robert Schuman, French foreign minister, initiated the debate on supranational democracy in his speeches at the United Nations, at the signing of the council's Statutes and at a series of other speeches across Europe and North America.

The term "supranational" occurs in an international treaty for the first time (twice) in the Treaty of Paris, 18 April 1951. This new legal term defined the community method in creating the European Coal and Steel Community and the beginning of the democratic re-organisation of Europe. It defines the relationship between the High Authority or European Commission and the other four institutions. In the treaty, it relates to a new democratic and legal concept.

The Founding Fathers of the European Community and the present European Union said that supranationalism was the cornerstone of the governmental system. This is enshrined in the Europe Declaration made on 18 April 1951, the same day as the European Founding Fathers signed the Treaty of Paris.

"By the signature of this Treaty, the participating Parties give proof of their determination to create the first supranational institution and that thus they are laying the true foundation of an organised Europe. This Europe remains open to all nations. We profoundly hope that other nations will join us in our common endeavour."

This declaration of principles that included their judgement for the necessary future developments was signed by Konrad Adenauer (West Germany), Paul van Zeeland and Joseph Meurice (Belgium), Robert Schuman (France), Count Sforza (Italy), Joseph Bech (Luxembourg), and Dirk Stikker and Jan van den Brink (The Netherlands). It was made to recall future generations to their historic duty of uniting Europe based on liberty and democracy under the rule of law. Thus, they viewed the creation of a wider and deeper Europe as intimately bound to the healthy development of the supranational or Community system.

This Europe was open to all nations who were free to decide, a reference/or an invitation and encouragement of liberty to the Iron Curtain countries. The term supranational does not occur in succeeding treaties, such as the Treaties of Rome, the Maastricht Treaty, the Treaty of Nice or the Constitutional Treaty or the very similar Treaty of Lisbon.

Distinguishing features of a supranational union

A supranational union is a supranational polity which lies somewhere between a confederation that is an association of sovereign states and a federation that is a single sovereign state. The European Economic Community was described by its founder Robert Schuman as midway between confederalism which recognises the complete independence of states in an association and federalism which seeks to fuse them in a super-state. The EU has supranational competences, but it possesses these competences only to the extent that they are conferred on it by its member states (Kompetenz-Kompetenz). Within the scope of these competences, the union exercises its powers in a sovereign manner, having its own legislative, executive, and judicial authorities. The supranational Community also has a chamber for organised civil society including economic and social associations and regional bodies.

The union has legal supremacy over its member states only to the extent that its member state governments have conferred competences on the union. It is up to the individual governments to assure that they have full democratic backing in each of the member states. The citizens of the member states, though retaining their nationality and national citizenship, additionally become citizens of the union, as is the case with the European Union.

The European Union, the only clear example of a supranational union, has a parliament with legislative oversight, elected by its citizens. To this extent, a supranational union like the European Union has characteristics that are not entirely dissimilar to the characteristics of a federal state like the United States of America. However, the differences in scale become apparent if one compares the United States federal budget with the budget of the European Union (which amounts only to about one percent of combined GDP) or the size of the federal civil service of the United States with the Civil Service of the European Union.

Supranationalism in the European Union

Historically the concept was introduced and made a concrete reality by Robert Schuman when the French Government agreed to the principle in the Schuman Declaration and accepted the Schuman Plan confined to specific sectors of vital interest of peace and war. Thus commenced the European Community system beginning with the European Coal and Steel Community. The six founder States (France, Italy, West Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg) agreed on the goal: making "war not only unthinkable but materially impossible". They agreed about the means: putting the vital interests, namely coal and steel production, under a common High Authority, subject to common democratic and legal institutions. They agreed on the European rule of law and a new democratic procedure.

The five institutions (besides the High Authority) were a Consultative Committee (a chamber representing civil society interests of enterprises, workers and consumers), a parliament, and a Council of government ministers. A Court of Justice would decide disputes coming from governments, public or private enterprises, consumer groups, any other group interests or even an individual. A complaint could be lodged in a local tribunal or national courts, where appropriate. Member states have yet to fulfil and develop the articles in the Paris and Rome treaties for full democracy in the European Parliament and other institutions such as the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions.

Schuman described supranational unions as a new stage in human development. It contrasted with destructive nationalisms of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries that began in a glorious patriotism and ended in wars. He traced the beginning concept of supranationality back to the nineteenth century, such as the Postal Union, and the term supranational is used around the time of the First World War. Democracy, which he defined as "in the service of the people and acting in agreement with it", was a fundamental part of a supranational community. However, governments only began to hold direct elections to the European Parliament in 1979, and then not according to the treaties. A single electoral statute was specified in the treaty for Europe's first community of coal and steel in 1951. Civil society (largely non-political) was to have its own elected chamber in the Consultative Committees specific to each Community as democratically agreed, but the process was frozen (as were Europe's parliamentary elections) by Charles de Gaulle and other politicians who opposed the Community method.

Today supranationalism only exists in the two European Communities inside the EU: the Economic Community (often called the European Community although it does not legally cover all State activities) and Euratom (the European Atomic Energy Community, a non-proliferation community, in which certain potentialities have been frozen or blocked). Supranational Communities provide powerful but generally unexploited and innovatory means for democratic foreign policy, by mobilising civil society to the democratically agreed goals of the Community.

The first Community of Coal and Steel was agreed only for fifty years. Opposition, mainly by enterprises which had to pay a small European tax of less than 1% and government ministers in the council, led to its democratic mandate not being renewed. Its jurisprudence and heritage remains part of the European Community system.

De Gaulle attempted to turn the European Commission into a political secretariat under his control in the Fouchet Plan but this move was thwarted by such democrats in the Benelux countries as Paul-Henri Spaak, Joseph Luns and Joseph Bech as well as a large wave of other pro-Europeans in all the Community countries.

The supranational Community method came under attack, not only from de Gaulle but also from other nationalists and Communists. In the post-de Gaulle period, rather than holding pan-European elections under a single statute as specified in all the treaties, governments held and continue to hold separate national elections for the European Parliament. These often favour the major parties and discriminate against smaller, regional parties. Rather than granting elections to organised civil society in the consultative committees, governments created a three-pillar system under the Amsterdam Treaty and Maastricht Treaty, mixing intergovernmental and supranational systems. Two pillars governing External policy and Justice and Home affairs are not subject to the same democratic controls as the Community system.

In the Lisbon Treaty and the earlier nearly identical Constitutional Treaty, the democratic independence of the five key institutions is further blurred. This moves the project from full democratic supranationalism in the direction of not just intergovernmentalism but the politicisation of the institutions, and control by two or three major party political organisations. The Commission defines key legal aspects of the supranational system because its members must be independent of commercial, labour, consumer, political or lobby interests (Article 9 of the Paris Treaty). The commission was to be composed of a small number of experienced personalities, whose impartiality was beyond question. As such, the early presidents of the Commission and the High Authority were strong defenders of European democracy against national, autocratic practice or the rule of the strong over the weak.

The idea in the Constitutional and Lisbon Treaties is to run the European Commission as a political office. Governments would prefer to have a national member in the commission, although this is against the principle of supranational democracy. (The original concept was that the commission should act as a single impartial college of independent, experienced personalities having public confidence. One of the Communities was defined in the treaty with a Commission with fewer members than the number of its member states.) Thus, the members of the commission are becoming predominantly party-political, and composed of sometimes rejected, disgraced or unwanted national politicians.

The first president of the High Authority was Jean Monnet, who never joined a political party, as was the case with most of the other members of the Commissions. They came from diverse liberal professions, having made recognised European contributions.

Governments also wish to retain the secrecy of their deliberations in the Council of Ministers or the European Council, which discusses matters of the most vital interest to European citizens. While some institutions such as the European Parliament have their debates open to the public, others such as the Council of Ministers and numerous committees are not. Schuman wrote in his book, Pour l'Europe (For Europe), that in a democratic supranational Community "the Councils, committees and other organs should be placed under the control of public opinion that was effectual without paralysing their activity nor useful initiatives".

Categorising European supranationalism

Joseph H. H. Weiler, in his work The Dual Character of Supranationalism, states that there are two main facets to European supranationalism, although these seem to be true of many supranational systems. These are:

• Normative supranationalism: The Relationships and hierarchy which exist between Community policies and legal measures on one hand and the competing policies and legal measures of the member states on the other (the executive dimension)
• Decisional supranationalism: The institutional framework and decision making by which such measures are initiated, debated, formulated, promulgated and, finally, executed (the legislative-judicial dimension)

In many ways, the split sees the separation of powers confined to merely two branches.

Comparing the European Union and the United States

In the Lisbon Treaty, the distribution of competences in various policy areas between member states and the European Union is redistributed in three categories. In 19th century U.S., it had exclusive competences only. Competences not explicitly listed belong to lower levels of governance.

EU exclusive competence	EU shared competence	EU supporting competence	U.S. exclusive competence
The Union has exclusive competence to make directives and conclude international agreements when provided for in a Union legislative act.	Member states cannot exercise competence in areas where the Union has done so.	The Union can carry out actions to support, co-ordinate or supplement member states' actions.	U.S. federal government in the 19th century.
the customs union the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market monetary policy for the member states whose currency is the euro the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy common commercial (trade) policy	the internal market social policy, for the aspects defined in this Treaty economic, social and territorial cohesion agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources environment consumer protection transport trans-European Networks energy the area of freedom, security and justice common safety concerns in public health matters, for the aspects defined in this Treaty Common Foreign and Security Policy	the protection and improvement of human health industry culture tourism education, youth, sport and vocational training civil protection (disaster prevention) administrative cooperation	Internal improvements Subsidies (mainly to shipping) Tariffs Disposal of public lands Immigration law Foreign policy Copyrights Patents Currency

Democratic deficit in the EU and other supranational unions

See also: Democratic deficit in the European Union

In a supranational union, the problem of how to reconcile the principle of equality among nation states, which applies to international (intergovernmental) organisations, and the principle of equality among citizens, which applies within nation states is resolved by taking a sectoral approach. This allows an innovatory, democratic broadening the number of actors to be included. These are present not only in the classical Parliament which has slightly different functions but also in the Consultative Committees such as the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions which the treaties give powers equivalent to parliaments in their own areas but which are at present still developing their potential. In the European Union, the Lisbon Treaty mixes two principles (classical parliamentary government with a politically elected government) and a supranational community with a totally independent European Commission. Governments are also trying to treat the Lisbon Treaty as a simple classical treaty, or even an amendment to one, which does not require citizens' support or democratic approval. The proposed Lisbon Treaty and the earlier Constitutional draft still retain in the European Union elements of a supranational union, as distinct from a federal state on the lines of the United States of America. But this is at the expense of the democratic potentialities of a full supranational union as conceived in the first Community.

Other international organisations with some degree of integration

Global map showing several regional organisations of non-overlapping memberships as of the early 2020s.

The only union generally recognised as having achieved the status of a supranational union is the European Union.

Although the Soviet Union was created under an initial ideological appearance of forming a supranational union, it never de facto functioned as one, and constitutionally was a federation; see Republics of the Soviet Union § Constitutional status for details.

There are a number of other regional organisations that, while not supranational unions, have adopted or intend to adopt policies that may lead to a similar sort of integration in some respects.

• African Union (AU)
• Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
• Benelux, a political union of Belgium, The Netherlands, and Luxembourg. Though part of the EU, EU treaties contain an exception that EU law is subservient to Benelux integration.
• Caribbean Community (CARICOM)
• Central American Integration System (SICA)
• Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), a successor organization to the Soviet Union
• Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations
• Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (Gulf Cooperation council) (GCC)
• Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO)
• Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)
• Group of 77 (G77) is a coalition of 134 developing countries, designed to promote its members' collective economic interests and create an enhanced joint negotiating capacity in the United Nations. It was founded by non-aligned states during the Cold War.
• Organization of Ibero-American States (OEI)
• Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC)
• Organization of Turkic States
• Pacific Alliance, a Latin American trade bloc
• South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
• Union of South American Nations (USAN)
• Union State, a union of Russian Federation and Belarus

Other organisations that have also discussed greater integration include:

• Arab League into an "Arab Union"
• Pacific Islands Forum into the "Pacific Union"
• Eurasian Customs Union into the "Eurasian Economic Union"
• Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) into the "Latin American Union"
• East African Community into the "East African Federation"
• Economic Community of Central African States (CEMAC)
• Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)