Anti-Federalist

"It is admitted that to prohibit the general government, from keeping up standing armies, while yet they were authorised to raise them in case of exigency, would be an insufficient guard against the danger. A discretion of such latitude would give room to elude the force of the provision.
It is also admitted that an absolute prohibition against raising troops, except in cases of actual war, would be improper; because it will be requisite to raise and support a small number of troops to garrison the important frontier posts, and to guard arsenals; and it may happen, that the danger of an attack from a foreign power may be so imminent, as to render it highly proper we should raise an army, in order to be prepared to resist them. But to raise and keep up forces for such purposes and on such occasions, is not included in the idea, of keeping up standing armies in times of peace. "
Anti Federalist #10 Brutus

         This passage implies that it is unnecessary for governments to obtain and have standing armies when it is not needed, such as in moments of peace when there are no known tensions or issues needed defense. I chose this passage because it opposes Madison's passage about maintaining active troops although they can be a little dangerous, Madison imposes that attacks can be sudden and tensions can arise at any moment so an active military are necessary. Brutus thinks of the negative impact and the abilities of  having an active army at a time of peace.

         Horizontal federalism ranges from state to state and is based off of these interstitial relationship however vertical federalism is the older version where the government is put on a pedestal and follows constitutional ways, and only involves the government.

~Cindy Dickson