Under this view, there is nothing objectionable in the federal commandeering of state officers. Cooperative federalism does, however, have a political and judicial tradition in America. Politically, cooperative federalism can be traced to the Progressives, who hoped to harmonize national aspirations with the virtues of localism. Cooperative federalism became dominant, both as a matter of political practice and judicial doctrine, under the New Deal. As the political pedigree suggests, the shift from constitutional to cooperative federalism is tied to the growth of government.
Constitutional federalism constrains government.
The real, much deeper divide runs between constitutional constraint and democratic aspirations, a divide that ran through the Bush v. Gore opinions. Constitutionalism is not per se anti-democratic. The constitutional point, though, is to break, fragment, and temper democratic impulses through a system that institutionalizes intra-governmental rivalry, jealousy, and competition. Federalism, for a prominent example. Democrats chafe under formalistic constraints, and they like cooperative federalism because it trumps those constraints.