PS 104 Exam 1

advertising

"Advertising" in this context refers to appeals or appearances without issue content that get the member's name in front of the public in a favorable way. Advertising includes activities associated with "working the district," such as attending town meetings; appearing in a parade

position taking

"Position taking" refers to any public statement—such as a roll call vote, speech, editorial, or position paper—about a topic of interest to constituents or interest groups. This may be the toughest aspect of a member's job, because, on many issues, the member is likely to alienate a certain segment of the population no matter what position he or she takes. they try to appeal to specific audiences in their districts

The "liberal tradition" in America

"the absence of feudalism"; but also "we have never had a real [i.e. European] conservative tradition" Tradition of moderation and pragmatism. "Louis Hartz-the liberal tradition in America); importance of compromise.

How is politics defined? (lecture)

"who gets what, when, and how" or "the authoritative allocation of value" limited resources in society so there are always ?s about how they should be allocated key point: govt power is coercive and politics is about how this power will be exercised and who gets to use it. We define politics as the process that determines what government does—whether and how it provides different public and private goods-APT

party leadership in Congress

-majority and minority parties of each house pick their leaders of Congress. -The Speaker of the House is the leader of the majority party -the speaker is aided by the Majority Whip, and the conference or caucus chair. -serves as a the presiding officer of the House of Representatives. -The leaders can only exercise powers that their party members give them.

The 10th and 11th Amendments???????

10th: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -moved toward more state autonomy since 1985, age discrimination, background checks for handguns, and placement of radioactive waste. assisted suicide and marajuana. The 11th Amendment to the US Constitution says that US courts cannot hear cases and make decisions against a state if it is sued by a citizen who lives in another state or a person who lives in another country. Role of the Courts, cont. State sovereignty and the 11th Amendment: limits on Congress's power to legislate. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida (1996) age discrimination (Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 2000). American with Disabilities Act and the states (Alabama v. Garrett, 2001). In general, these cases have led to a reduction of national power and enhancement of state and local power.

role of court between federal and states

14th amendment was passed so states would not deny rights to the newly freed slaves, states have to provide due process protection. court took a hands off stance on enforcing this amendment at first which lead to Jim Crow. dual federalism: process of selective incorporation final started applying bill of rights to states (over 100 years) which overrode dual federalism lines. 14th amendment took a long time

The "Great Compromise"

1787; This compromise was between the large and small states of the colonies. The Great Compromise resolved that there would be representation by population in the House of Representatives, and equal representation would exist in the Senate. Each state, regardless of size, would have 2 senators. All tax bills and revenues would originate in the House. This compromise combined the needs of both large and small states and formed a fair and sensible resolution to their problems. smaller states wanted more power, and larger states wanted fair representation.

descriptive representation

A belief that constituents are most effectively represented by legislators who are similar to them in such key demographic characteristics as race, ethnicity, religion, or gender. People tend to respond to representative more positively if they have any of these.

Coercive federalism

A form of federalism in which the federal government pressures the states to change their policies by using regulations, mandates, and conditions (often involving threats to withdraw federal funding). strings attached An extreme version of fiscal federalism is coercive federalism, which is the use of federal mandates or conditions to force or entice the states to change their policies to match national goals or policies established by Congress

Miranda rights

A list of rights that police in the United States must read to suspects in custody before questioning them, pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in Miranda v. Arizona.

Picket fence federalism

A more refined and realistic form of cooperative federalism in which policy makers within a particular policy area work together across the levels of government.

Dual federalism

A system of government in which both the states and the national government remain supreme within their own spheres, each responsible for some policies.

Cooperative federalism

A system of government in which powers and policy assignments are shared between states and the national government. They may also share costs, administration, and even blame for programs that work poorly. The type of federalism that emerged in this era is called cooperative federalism, or "marble cake" federalism, as opposed to the "layer cake" model of dual federalism.9 As the image of a marble cake suggests, the boundaries of state and national responsibilities are less well defined than they are under dual federalism. With the increasing industrialization and urbanization of the late 1930s and 1940s, along with the Great Depression, more complex problems arose that could not be solved at one level of government.

Checks and balances

A system that allows each branch of government to limit the powers of the other branches in order to prevent abuse of power.

classical liberalism

A term given to the philosophy of John Locke and other 17th and 18th century advocates of the protection of individual rights and liberties by limiting government power.

Federalists

A term used to describe supporters of the Constitution during ratification debates in state legislatures. (national power)

casework

Activities of members of Congress that help constituents as individuals; cutting through bureaucratic red tape to get people what they think they have a right to get.

impeachment

An action by the House of Representatives to accuse the president, vice president, or other civil officers of the United States of committing "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

reelection primary

An incumbent president seeking re-election usually faces no opposition during their respective party's primaries, especially if they are still popular.

Is our Constitution "fragile" because gridlock is built into its design? Or is the problem simply that Congress is not fulfilling its lawmaking responsibilities? (Appelbaum and Spalding in TED)

Appelbaum argues that our Constitution is more fragile than we might think. He says that our Founders' debates over institutional structures were between those who feared legislative tyranny (royalists) and those who feared executive tyranny (parliamentarians). He claims the royalists won and created a "mixed monarchy" in which the president had more power than King George III. However, the fragility of our presidential system of separated powers comes from the fact path our president cannot run the show by himself. In many other nations that have our system of govt, such impasses often lead to military coups or the collapse of the political system. Unless we recognize our system's fragility, we may not persist. yeah our system of separation of powers is fragile, if our legislature can't get along and our president can't run the show while they fight. Spalding places the blame for our recent problems more squarely at the feet of Congress. By abdicating its law-making responsibilities, Congress has given too much authority to the bureaucratic executive. Congress has slowly allowed its control over lawmaking to slip away as it engages in limited oversight of the bureaucracy and allows the president to dominate through executive orders. The only solution is for Congress to strengthen its constitutional muscles as a co-equal branch of govt by reestablishing its legislative authority and relearning the art of lawmaking. The clear means to do this is the power of the purse. no congress is just not doing the things they need to be doing to assert their power, and if they did that we would be fine. President Obama and President Trump's overreach

Amending the Constitution

Article 5; needs approval of two-thirds of Congress or three-fourths of the states

What are the advantages of giving more powers to the states? (Lecture, APT chapter 3).!!!!!!!

As a Protection Against Tyranny - One of the most important points of federalism in dividing the power between the national government and state governments, and spreading the national government's power among three branches that serve as a check and balance on each other, is that it serves as a deterrent to tyranny and runaway power. The protections we have in our system against a tyrannical, runaway government are one of the most important points to why the system was designed the way it was. Diffusing Power - The form of federalism that we have in our country, where power is shared with state governments, and where the federal government is separated into three branches, serves as a means to make sure that all power is not centralized into a single person or group of people, since excessive power among a single group tends to be corrupting. Increasing Citizen Participation - By not centralizing all power into the hands of a national government, but sharing that power with state governments, which are closer to the level of the common citizen, our founders actually increased a citizen's ability to effect their government, government policy, and lawmaking. More Efficient - When some of the power of the government is dispersed among the states, giving states the right to solve some of their own problems, you allow for more efficiency within the system. To try to have a national solution to all problems, which could be refered to as a 'cookie-cutter method' of law and policy making, you end up with solutions that are more effective in some states, and less effective in others. To allow states to create solutions to their own problems, using policies and laws that work best in their state, means that each state can come up with its own solution, making government more efficient. Conflict Management - By allowing different communities and states to create their own policies, they allow for people with irreconcilable differences, or very strong disagreements, to live in separate areas, and create their own solutions, or policies, that would be totally disagreeable to the other people in other states or regions of the country. Innovation in Law and Policy is Encouraged - By allowing for many state governments, different sets of policies can be tried, and the ones found most effective at solving its problems can then be implemented in other states, or on the national level. Imagine Christopher Columbus trying to get funding to voyage across the Atlantic Ocean if there was a unified Europe back then, with its head saying 'no!' to him; instead, he had several governments from which he could try to get his funding - he got turned down by several governments before Spain gave him the okay. The same principle applies today with our many states - something that is rejected in one state can most likely be tried in another state, with competition leading the way, based on effectiveness of those laws. State Governments Can be More Responsive to Citizen Needs - The closer a government entity is to its citizens, the more likely it is the respond to the needs of citizens. States are more likely to listen to citizen needs, and respond to them, than the national government would be.

Why is government necessary (why do we have a government)?What are the three themes of the textbook? What are the sources of conflict in American politics (Chapter 1, APT)

As we prepare to address this question, let's agree on a definition: government is the system for implementing decisions made through the political process. All countries have some form of government, which in general serves two broad purposes: to provide order and to promote the general welfare. Politics is conflictual, politics is everywhere, and political process matters ("you determine the substance and I control the rules, and I will win every time") compromise is necessary economic interests (free market, redistributive tax policies), cultural values (blue vs red, marriage rights, abortion), ideology (libertarians), and identity politics: racial, gender, and ethnic differences.

The economic interpretation of the Constitution

Charles Beard's theory that the creators of the Constitution were members of the economic elite, primarily concerned with protecting their own interests, especially property and wealth. Said constitution was designed to serve interests of manufacturers, money lenders, land speculators, slave owners, and bond holders. Theory that the framers of the Constitution represented the well-to-do classes and was designed to protect their interests

Civil liberties vs. civil rights

Civil Liberties are about freedoms we possess, mostly outlined in the bill of rights. Civil Rights involves equal treatment/protection under the law. always in conflict

The "necessary and proper" clause

Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) setting forth the implied powers of Congress. It states that Congress, in addition to its express powers, has the right to make all laws necessary and proper to carry out all powers the Constitution vests in the national government.

conference committee

Committee appointed by the presiding officers of each chamber to adjust differences on a particular bill passed by each in different form.

congressional committees

Conference, joint, select and standing committees. Each committee does the majority of work on bills before presented for voting on the floor. pg 403

oversight

Congressional review of the activities of an executive agency, department, or office. the effort by Congress, through hearings, investigations, and other techniques, to exercise control over the activities of executive agencies.

What are the most important compromises reached at the Constitutional convention? Which powers are clearly granted in the Constitution to the President, and which are given to Congress? What are the important areas of shared powers? Why has the Constitution survived for more than 200 years? What are the main differences between the positions of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists? What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a strong central government???????????? How are the arguments of the Federalists still relevant today? (Kammen in TED, lecture, APT chapter 2)?

Connecticut proposed the Great compromise, which solved the problem of representation in the federal government by creating a House with representation by population and a Senate with equal representation. In other words, this solved the debate between small states and large states by allowing large states to have more power in the House and smaller states to have more power in the senate. Three-fifth compromise, solved the problem involving taxes and representation with slaves. Finally, the electoral college was the final compromise. It solved the debate on how to elect the president. president: appointments, veto, commander in chief, diplomatic powers congress: article one grants lots of specific powers (including the right to draft legislation), declare war, power of purse. impeachment. Connecticut proposed what became known as the Great Compromise, or Connecticut Compromise. The plan suggested establishing a Congress with two houses: the Senate would have two senators from each state, and in the House of Representatives each state's number of representatives would be based on its population. The Great Compromise settled matters of representation in the federal government. The three major compromises were the Great Compromise, the Three-Fifths Compromise, and the Electoral College. Presidential powers: enumerated powers: commander in chief, appointments, diplomatic powers, veto power. Congress powers: many specific powers under Article 1, impeachment, power of the purse. According to Article I of the Constitution, the legislative branch (the U.S. Congress) has the primary power to make the country's laws. shared powers: war powers, congress declares war and the president conducts it. advantages and disadvantages of having a strong central govt: it can quell domestic dissatisfaction and rebellions, can levy taxes and regulate trade, responsiveness to invaders. Cons: can lead to tyranny, race to the bottom (welfare), uneven distribution of resources and wealth and need for services. advantages: as a protection against invaders, tax collection, quicker to respond to emergencies, quicker to apply a federally than through each state individually. disadvantages: State Governments Can be More Responsive to Citizen Needs, prevents innovations from states, can encourage an abuse of power. why has the constitution survived? Although the flexibility of the Constitution helps explain the longevity, that flexibility comes at a price: ambiguity and gaps in constitutional language. One reason that Kammen argues it is important to understand the origins of American constitutionalism is that many judges today use their understanding of the Founders' intentions to inform their decisions. main differences between the positions of the Federalists and Anti-federalists: The Federalists wanted a stronger national government and weaker state governments, while the Anti-federalists wanted a weaker national government and stronger state government. Others opposed the creation of a national government that would have power over the states. They were called Anti-Federalists. They believed that each state should have the right to decide its own laws. They also thought the Constitution gave the president and Congress too much power. The Federalists wanted a strong government and strong executive branch, while the anti-Federalists wanted a weaker central government. The Federalists did not want a bill of rights —they thought the new constitution was sufficient. The anti-federalists demanded a bill of rights. Federalist were for a system of strong federal courts while Anti-federalists were for limits on the federal courts. How are the arguments of the federalists still relevant today? their debate of state vs federal still rings true to this day. continuous debate surrounding the constitution's interpretation. justices do not always agree with one another's and the rest of the nation did not always agree with the justices. Those realities gave rise to an ongoing pattern that might be called conflict-within-consensus. did not want a second convention because feared an erasion of the first, they did provide a way to change the document but they made the process complicated and slow. They did not believe that the fundamental law of a nation should be altered, and most Americans have accepted that constraint. but state govt constitutions changed all of the time The Federalists argued that the federal courts had limited jurisdiction, leaving many areas of the law to the state and local courts. The Federalists felt that the new federal courts were necessary to provide checks and balances on the power of the other two branches of government. advantages of strong federal govt: able to use welfare programs to fight inequality, environmental regulations go across state lines (would be huge problem if left to state), globalization and trade, national security, some things just need to be dealt with at the national level. arguments about federalism: state power vs national power. marijuana and right to die. very same thing happening today (health reform, some states denying to expand medicare). lot of Supreme Court cases today.

"full faith and credit" clause

Constitution's requirement that each state accept the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. Article IV of the Constitution includes provisions that favor both the state-centered and the nation-centered perspectives. For example, its full faith and credit clausespecifies that states must respect one another's laws, granting citizens the "Full Faith and Credit" of their home state's laws if they go to another state.

The separation of powers

Constitutional division of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, with the legislative branch making law, the executive applying and enforcing the law, and the judiciary interpreting the law

National supremacy

Constitutional doctrine that whenever conflict occurs between the constitutionally authorized actions of the national government and those of a state or local government, the actions of the federal government will prevail. Second, the national supremacy clause of the Constitution (Article VI) says that any national law is the supreme law of the land and takes precedence over any state law that conflicts with it.

cruel and unusual punishment

Court sentences prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Although the Supreme Court has ruled that mandatory death sentences for certain offenses are unconstitutional, it has not held that the death penalty itself constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

Block grants

Federal grants given more or less automatically to states or communities to support broad programs in areas such as community development and social services Block grants are financial aid to states for use within a specific policy area, but within that area the states have discretion on how to spend the money. TANF

Categorical grants

Federal grants that can be used only for specific purposes, or "categories," of state and local spending. They come with strings attached, such as nondiscrimination provisions. Categorical grantsare for specific purposes—they have strings attached. Funds that help states run their Medicaid programs, for example, are delivered as categorical grants.

New federalism

Federal-state relationship proposed by Reagan administration during the 1980s; hallmark is returning administrative powers to the state governments. Turned over powers and responsibilities of some U.S. federal programs to state and local governments and reduced the role of national government in domestic affairs (states are closer to the people and problems) devolution. state govt is "closer to the people" more responsive. Ronald Reagan's statement in his 1981 inaugural address. Bill Clinton and welfare reform in 1997 (TANF).

good faith exception

For example, the Court established a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule, allowing evidence to be used as long as the officer believed that he or she had conducted a legal search. In this specific case, the officer had a warrant with the wrong address.

What other factors influence the level of incumbency safety? What are some of the differences between the House and the Senate (lecture and APT Chap. 11) How does a bill become a law?

Homestyles: personal, reelection, primary, geographic: behave differently and explain their actions differently depending on which group they are talking to. depending on how they think of their constituency, they act differently The relative infrequency with which members of Congress are defeated in their attempts for reelection One explanation for increasing incumbency advantage is rooted in the diversity of congressional districts and states. Members typically respond to the diversity in their districts by developing an appropriate home style: a way of relating to the district. A home style shapes the way members allocate resources, the way incumbents present themselves to their district, and the way they explain their policy positions. campaign fund raising, constituency service, redistricting, national influences. -90-96 % of incumbents in the House are reelected every year. led to call for term limits. lower in the Senate. Explanations for incumbency safety: -Advantages of holding office (name re-campaign finance, weak challengers, home style redistricting). senate: elected every 6 years, speaks for more national interests, people generally dislike congress, meant to tame the more passionate house house: elected every 2, focuses on short term issues or local issues 1. A member of Congress introduces the bill. 2. A subcommittee and committee craft the bill. 3. Floor action on the bill takes place in the first chamber (House or Senate). 4. Committee and floor action takes place in the second chamber. 5. The conference committee works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. (If the two chambers pass the same version, steps 5 and 6 are not necessary.) page 6. The conference committee version is given final approval on the floor of each chamber. 7. The president either signs or vetoes the final version. 8. If the bill is vetoed, both chambers can attempt to override the veto with a two-thirds vote in both chambers. it must be passed in identical form by both the House and the Senate and signed by the president. If the president vetoes the bill, it can still be passed with a two-thirds vote in each chamber.

credit claiming

In "credit claiming," the member of Congress takes credit for something of value to voters—most commonly, pork-barrel policies targeted to benefit specific constituents or the district as a whole. The goods must be specific and small enough in scale that the member of Congress may believably claim credit. By specializing and becoming an expert on a given issue, members provide valuable information to the institution as a whole and also create a basis for credit claiming.(stronger in house)

The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In the United States, the due process rights of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments include the right to a fair trial, the right to consult a lawyer, freedom from self-incrimination, the right to know what crime you are accused of, the right to confront the accuser in court, and freedom from unreasonable police searches. the 1st: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. the 2nd: The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope. The Fourth Amendment says: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." the fifth: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. the sixth amendment: The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. the 8th amendment: cruel and unusual punishment. now moving toward banning the death penalty. the 14th: The Citizenship Clause granted citizenship to All persons born or naturalized in the United States. The Due Process Clause declared that states may not deny any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law." The Equal Protection Clause said that a state may not deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

bad tendency test

Interpretation of the First Amendment that would permit legislatures to forbid speech encouraging people to engage in illegal action. In U.S. law, the bad tendency principle is a test which permits restriction of freedom of speech by government if it is believed that a form of speech has a sole tendencyto incite or cause illegal activity.

pork barrel politics

Legislation that gives tangible benefits (highways, dams, post offices) to constituents in several districts or states in the hope of winning their votes in return.

Apprenticeship

Legislative norm Apprenticeship--not clear how strong this ever was, but quite weak today. (when you first get into congress, stay silent, learn the ropes, wait until it is your turn to make changes after you have gained some experience) Wellstone/Humphrey story.

The norms of reciprocity

Legislative norm Reciprocity--encourages wasteful spending (logrolling or "back-scratching"). Universalism vs. minimum winning coalitions.

Specialization, and courtesy

Legislative norms Specialization--encourages expertise. (the more of an expert that you are the further you will be able to advance your career and gain respect) Courtesy--keeps the institution running smoothly. Hershey, PA, retreat. Lately, the norm has been breaking down. (the way they speak to each other)

When should the Constitution be amended? How does the U.S. Constitution compare to state constitutions in terms of the amending process???????????? Is a new Constitutional convention a good idea (Levinson, Abbot, and Olson in TED).

Levinson: The U.S. Constitution is radically defective in a number of important ways. Unfortunately, changing the constitution is extremely difficult, for both political and constitutional reasons. But the difficulty of the task does not make it any less important that we first become aware of the magnitude of the deficiencies in the current Constitution and then turn our minds, as a community of concerned citizens, to figuring out potential solutions. we should be able to vote on a proposal to amend or not amend the constitution. Abbot: The Texas Plan. but far from dissuading the effort to amend our Constitution, we should encourage it. the benefits of the Texas plan are many because any change effectuated by an assembly of the people will force the federal govt-whether in big or small ways- to take the constitution seriously again. and the downsides of such an assembly are virtually nonexistent, given that any change to our constitution's text requires such overwhelming nationwide support. the only true downside comes from doing nothing and allowing the federal govt to continue ignoring the very document that created it. Olson: fear of a runaway convention, most state goats are not as eager as Texas to curtail the powers of the feds. Yes, the federal govt has slipped its constitutional bounds, and yes, that's infuriating. Just don't confuse a plan for talking, which is what these amount to, with a plan for actually changing things, and always beware of a cure that might kill the patient. How does the U.S. Constitution compare to state constitutions in terms of the amending process? State constitutions are more open to amendments. Amendments can be proposed by legislature, a constitutional commission, or citizens' petition and can be accepted by referendum. The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate (and then by 3/4th of the states) or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. (and then 3/4ths of the states) state constitutions are much longer, most easier to amend. process could go off the rails? rewrite constitution? no details at all about how the constitution would work (voting). voting and representation messed up when? inequality in the senate, make the constitutional right to vote explicit, income inequality, equal right amendment.

Why was Madison concerned about factions? What solutions to the "violence of faction" did he suggest? What is the system of "checks and balances" and "separation of powers"? What views of human nature were held by the Founders and how did these views help shape the Constitution? (Federalist Papers #10 and #51)

Madison was concerned about factions, which are groups of people with the same goals or interests, because he believed that they would be able to create majority tyranny. In other words, the suppression of the rights and liberties of the minority by the majority. In Federalist 10, he says that the two solutions would either be to remove the causes of factions (take away people's liberties or make everyone the same) or control the effects of factions. After concluding that the first solution is not plausible, he focuses on how to accomplish the second in Federalist 51. Here, he introduces the ideas of a system of checks and balances and separation of powers. The separation of powers refers to the idea of dividing the federal government into three distinct branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. This would disperse the government's power and help prevent the ability of factions to mobilize and control the government. A system of checks and balances refers to the ability of each branch of government to limit the power of each of the other branches, which would further prevent the influence of factions by making it harder for any one group to control the other. The views of human nature held by the Founders involved the idea that all human's are self interested. They feared that members of the government would act in their own self interest, fall into the evils of humanity, and create a corrupted government. This view caused them to create a federal or divided system of government in order to prevent such selfish behaviors. Factions: groups with similar issues the mobilize majority rule vs minority rights Madison, as you probably know, saw the depravity in human nature, but at the same time saw virtue as well. He believed that the government would be the true reflection of the people it represented and it must not conform to the evils of human nature. So, therefore, his views of human nature affected his theory in government by limiting the power of the government to prevent corruption. framers' views of self-interested human nature and the dangers of faction Madison's whole analysis of the role of factions, self interested groups, can not count on them to serve public good, view of basic human self interest, people want to better their own lives, so can't count on that to work for the public interest, so need to set up a government that will prevent the evils of factions from corrupting our government with their self interested ways. In Federalist 10, Madison described the central problem for government as the need to control factions Madison and Federalist 10 Faction: interest groups and lobbyist Majority tyranny was the central concern, ex: Jim crow what to do about factions? -causes can be removed (have to make everyone the same or remove liberty) which is horrible -can only control the effects of faction -set faction against faction, ambition must be made to counter ambition. how to control the effects of factions? -constitutional solution: system of separation of powers and checks and balances (federalist #51) Federalist No. 51 addresses means by which appropriate checks and balances can be created in government and also advocates a separation of powers within the national government. This idea of checks and balances became a crucial document in the establishment of the modern U.S. system of checks and balances. Separation of powers, therefore, refers to the division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. The intent is to prevent the concentration of power and provide for checks and balances. -"double security" of the state govts -the "Size" principle -informal norms and customs, education -tradition of moderation and pragmatism (Louis Hartz); importance of compromise

"the double security."

Madison's belief, expressed in Federalist No. 51, that federalism and the separation of powers would protect citizens from governmental abuses of power by dividing power both within the branches of the national government and between the national government and the state governments. not only do you separate the power within one level of govt (federal), but also between federal and state.

The "size principle" (from Federalist #10)

Majority interests are less likely to organize and less able to dominate in a large and diverse republic one of the ways that majority tyranny can be prevented, because we are a large and diverse republic, it is unlikely that a single faction will emerge and dominate everyone else.

reforming Congress??????

Make Congress more responsive. -Term limits (struck down by Supreme Court). -Weaken party leadership, decentralize the policy making process. -Increase personal staff instead of committee staff. Make Congress more responsible. -Campaign finance reform to strengthen parties and reduce power of interest groups. -Strengthen party leadership. -Line-item veto (but 1998 Supreme Court case). -Make filibusters in the Senate more difficult. Enhancing responsibility -Weaken the "traceability" chain. -Bipartisan commissions. -Presidential/Congressional summits. -Delegate to autonomous bureaucracies. -Insulate Congress by repealing some of the "sunshine laws." -Lobbying reform. -Enhance deliberation in Congress. -Educate the public about Congress's role. Making Congress more responsive to constituents: 1) Create term limits (people think members have held their position for too long, makes them out of touch with their constituents, but Congress said no because the Const. would have to be amended for this to happen). 2) Weaken party leadership so that representatives do what constituents want, instead of what the party wants. 3) Increase personal staff because they help the reps help their constituents.

McCulloch v. Maryland

Maryland was trying to tax the national bank and Supreme Court ruled that federal law was stronger than the state law. the government had a right to create a national bank and Maryland had no right to sue the government. In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to create the Second Bank of the United States and that the state of Maryland lacked the power to tax the Bank. Because "the power to tax is the power to destroy," Maryland was unconstitutionally undermining the superior laws and institutions of the United States.

Anti-Federalists

Opponents of the American Constitution at the time when the states were contemplating its adoption. (state power)

???????????????? The commerce clause of the Constitution (and its relevance for federalism)

Perhaps the best illustration of the importance of ambiguity in the Constitution is the commerce clause, which gives Congress "the power to regulate commerce . . . among the several States." In the nineteenth century, when the national government was relatively weak and more power was held at the state level, the Supreme Court interpreted the clause to mean that Congress could not regulate commerce that was entirely within the boundaries of a single state (intrastate, as opposed to interstate, commerce). In the New Deal era of the mid-1930s, the Court adopted a more expansive interpretation of the commerce clause that largely obliterated the distinction between intrastate and interstate commerce. This view was strengthened in the 1960s when the Supreme Court upheld a civil rights law that, among other things, prevented owners of hotels and restaurants from discriminating against African Americans. For nearly 60 years this interpretation held. More recently the Supreme Court has tightened the scope of Congress's powers to regulate commerce, but the clause still serves as the basis for most important national legislation. The commerce clause has been unchanged since 1789, but its ambiguous wording has been used to justify or restrict a varying array of legislation. negative correlation for federalism. every time it is enacted, powers are taken away from the states.

factions

Political groups that agree on objectives and policies; the origins of political parties.

presidential losses in midterm elections

Presidents party just about always looses seats in the House during midterm elections. senate pattern is not as dramatic as the house since the 1870s in the house, besides three elections midterm elections happen in the non presidential years

Unfunded mandates

Programs that the Federal government requires States to implement without Federal funding. Americans with Disabilities Act and Medicaid.

Should "hate speech" be restricted on college campuses and elsewhere? (Rauch in TED)

Speakers' interests in making their voices and opinions heard must be balanced against the universities' interest in public safety and students' interest in protecting other students from hate speech he thinks no because it is impossible to completely Remove prejudice from society? thinks that it goes to far. soon any criticism of any group will be "prejudice" say that they are protecting minorities but they are also attacking and suppressing minorities. purists the only way to truly eliminate hate speech is to openly discuss it in order to change people's minds. if someone is truly racist or sexist or anything, restricting hate speech won't remove that quality, they will still think those thoughts even if they can't speak them. if anything banning it will only add fuel to the fire.

due process clause of the 14th Amendment

State governments must observe fair procedures when they deny a person life, liberty, or property.

intermediate scrutiny and strict scrutiny.

Such regulation is subject to the strict scrutiny standard of judicial review, which means the regulation must be narrowly tailored so that it is the least restrictive on an individual's fundamental right to free speech and the government must demonstrate a compelling state interest to curtail the speech. In most cases, such strict scrutiny by the courts means that the speech will be protected and the regulation will be struck down. If a regulation is content neutral and does not favor any given viewpoint over another, then it is subject to the less demanding intermediate scrutiny standard. This means that the government must only demonstrate a substantial interest in curtailing the speech, the interest must be unrelated to the content of the speech, and there must be alternative opportunities for communication.

What do Hibbing and Theiss-Morse say is "too much of a good thing? (TED)

T,.hey argue that having institutions that are too representative may be "too much of a good thing." That is, it may not be in the nation's interest to always do what the public wants, especially when it comes to issues of institutional reform. The public is usually convinced that the only thing preventing ideal policies is that the "people in power" are serving their own interests rather than the public's interests. According to this view, the obvious-but wrong, according to these two-solution is to weaken political institutions through "reforms" such as term limits or reducing the salaries of members of Congress. These two argue that the reforms proposed so far might make people even more disillusion when they discover that weakening Congress will not solve our nation's problems. They also argue that the public generally does not have a very realistic understanding of the inherent nature of conflict in the political process. The public believes that there is substantial consensus on most issues and that only small "fringe" groups disagree on a broad range of issue. If this were true, frustration with Congress would certainly be understandable. But in reality, as the authors point out, the nation is deeply divided. This makes conflict and compromise an inherent part of the legislative process, and at the same time, dims the prospect for simple reforms. too much responsiveness. often the voters don't know a lot about the issues or the way congress works as an institution. so sometimes congressmen get into trouble if they listen too much.

direct incitement test

Test articulated by the Supreme Court in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) that holds that advocacy of illegal action is protected by the First Amendment unless imminent lawless action is intended and likely to occur.

establishment and free exercise clauses

The First Amendment has two parts that deal with religion: the establishment clause, which has been interpreted to mean that Congress cannot sponsor or endorse any particular religion, and the free exercise clause, which has been interpreted to mean that Congress cannot interfere with the practice of religion unless there are important secular reasons for doing so. balancing interests

the whip system

The Majority Whip oversees the extensive whip system, which has three functions: information gathering, information dissemination, and coalition building. The whips meet regularly to discuss legislative strategy and scheduling. The whips then pass along this information to colleagues in their respective parties and indicate the party's position on a given bill. Whips also take a head count of party members in the House on specific votes and communicate this information to the party leaders. If a vote looks close, whips try to persuade members to support the party's position more important in the house. two main things: way party gets information out to their members (about bills), from leaders to members, also finding out different members' views on different votes (so whips find out how members will not on bills). keep members in line.

What are the different standards for protecting the freedom of speech that have been used by the Supreme Court throughout our history? (APT, Chap 4, and lecture)

The Supreme Court has interpreted the law to mean that content-based regulation of speech is not permissible (unless it falls into one of the categories of exceptions we outline later). (if a law is content-based, it is subject to strict scrutiny, otherwise intermediate scrutiny) strict: compelling interest, narrowly tailored, in the least restricting way (race) intermediate: substantial interest, policy not quite as narrowly tailored (Gender) rational basis: just a rational reason (age discrimination=21 year old drinking age) Freedom of speech got off to a rocky start with the sedition act 1918, enacted during World War I, made it a crime to "willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of the Government of the United States" During WWI, used: The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create "a clear and present danger" that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right. Specifically, the direct incitement test holds that speech is protected "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." The use of signs, symbols, or other unspoken acts or methods to communicate in a political manner—symbolic speech—enjoys many of the same protections as regular speech. For example, during the Vietnam War the Court protected the right of a war protester to wear an American flag patch sewn on the seat of his pants, high school students' right to wear an armband to protest the war, and an individual's right to tape a peace symbol on the flag and fly it upside down outside an apartment window. The forms of expression discussed in this section—speech, assembly, and press—all have strong protections based on the First Amendment. The strongest protections are for content-based expression—that is, if a regulation is trying to limit what can be said, the Court applies the strict scrutiny standard and usually strikes down the regulation. However, there are exceptions, such as speech that directly incites an imminent danger. If the regulation is content neutral and does not favor one viewpoint over another, then it is easier to uphold. But even then, the government must have a substantial reason for limiting expression. time, manner, and place public figures have to deal with slander and libel commercial speech: advertising enjoys strong protection obscenity: miller test: 1. Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, 2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[4] specifically defined by applicable state law, 3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.[5]

What is the constitutional basis for federalism? Does a federal system serve our needs today? (lecture, Peterson in TED, and APT chap 3)

The U.S. Constitution does not use the term federalism, nor does it provide extensive details about the federal system. Nevertheless, the framers helped created a federalist system in the United States, particularly in the ways the Constitution allocates power. (separation of powers, checks and balances, state rights) Federalism is a form of government that divides sovereign power across at least two political units. Dividing sovereign power simply means that each unit of government (in the United States, national, state, and local governments) has some degree of authority and autonomy. checks and balances: (in the constitution, the govt is divided and separated or power is balanced across levels). Early federalism was built on the principle of dual sovereignty. The Federalist argued that the best way of preserving liberty was to divide power. Feared monarchy. (enumerated, implied, and prohibited powers) while dual sovereignty has been put to rest, that does not mean that federalism has come to an end. although the constitutional authority of the national govt has steadily expanded (and many would say overstepped), state and local goats remain of great practical significance; taxes raised by state and local governments, domestic policy. advantages to federalism. it has facilitated capital growth and development, the creation of infrastructures, and social programs. Once the national govt took responsibility for guaranteeing civil rights and civil liberties, the states "became the engines of economic development." national govt is able to diminish some of the differences of wealth between states with welfare programs. states still able to respond better to their citizens (they are closer to them) Pros innovation in policy ("laboratories of democracy") multiple points of access important check on federal power responsiveness Cons complexity (Exxon example). competitive federalism: battle over jobs, sports teams. Race to the bottom (welfare). Uneven distribution of resources and wealth and need for services (see map).

Nullification

The doctrine that a state can declare null and void a federal law that, in the state's opinion, violates the Constitution. (not around anymore) Nullification is the theory that states can invalidate federal law it considers unconstitutional. callhoon: lead up to civil war, if we disagree with what the federal govt does, we can ignore it, national supremacy clause invalidates this.

party unity

The extent to which members of Congress in the same party vote together on party votes. Party unity hit an all-time high for House Republicans in 2016, with 93 percent of them voting together on party vote. House Democrats were almost as unified at 91 percent.

Why was the Bill of Rights added to the Constitution? (lecture)

The federalists agreed that the new Congress's first order of business would be to add a Bill of Rights. In order to guarantee that the country would not repeat the mistakes of Britain or the colonies, this promise was essential for securing the support of New York, Massachusetts, and Virginia. The ninth state, New Hampshire, ratified the Constitution on June 21, 1788, but New York and Virginia were still dragging their heels, and their support was viewed as necessary for the legitimacy of the United States, even if it technically was not needed.

the "takings clause" of the 5th Amendment and property rights

The final part of the Fifth Amendment is at the heart of a hot legal debate over property rights. The clause says, "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." A new, controversial interpretation of the Fifth Amendment's "takings" clause, however, has attempted to expand the principle of just compensation to cover not only "physical takings" but also "regulatory takings." if you are not allowed to use land that you own because the government won't let you because there is an endangered animal living on it, they should compensate it.

The Articles of Confederation

The first attempt to structure an American government, the Articles of Confederation, swung too far in the direction of decentralized and limited government. The Articles were written in the summer of 1776 during the Second Continental Congress, which had also authorized and approved the Declaration of Independence. They were submitted to all 13 states in 1777 for approval, but they did not take effect until the last state ratified them in 1781. However, in the absence of any alternative, the Articles of Confederation served as the basis for organizing the government during the Revolutionary War. 1st Constitution of the U.S. 1781-1788 (weaknesses-no executive, no judicial, no power to tax, no power to regulate trade) gave the states too much power 1777. articles created national unicameral legislature with lawmaking power, each state had one vote in continental congress, regardless of size online

What is the "economic interpretation of the Constitution"? (Beard in TED)

The formation of the Constitution and the document itself was economically motivated. The movement for the Constitution was originated and carried through principally by 4 groups of personalty interests which had been adversely affected under the Articles of Confederation: money, public securities, manufactures, and trade and shipping., The first firm steps toward the formation of the constitution were taken by a small and active group of men immediately interested through their personal possessions in the outcome of their labors. A large properties mass was, under the prevailing suffrage qualifications, excluded at the outset from participation in the work of the framing. the members of the Philadelphia convention, were immediately, directly and personally interested in, and derived economic advantages from, the establishment of the new system. The constitution was essentially an economic document based upon the concept that the fundamental private rights of property are anterior to government and morally beyond the reach of popular majorities. The leaders who supported the Constitution in the ratifying conventions represented the same economic groups as the members of the convention. cleavage between substantial personalty interested and small farming and debtors

The doctrine of interposition

The idea that if the national government passes an unconstitutional law, the people of the states (through their state legislatures) can declare the law void. This idea provided the basis for southern secession and the Civil War. State-centered view. Reaction against the sedition Act: Thomas Jefferson and the doctrine of interposition. Sees the constitution as a "compact to which the states are party" Precursor to the Civil War (John Calhoun and "nullification") being raised again now in battle over implementing health care reform. Interposition refers to the right of the states to protect their interests from federal violation deemed by those states to be dangerous or unconstitutional. interposition: Thomas Jefferson, his response to the alien and sedition act (illegal to criticize the govt) duty of states as the middle between the federal govt and the states to protect the people from unconstitutional laws.

Impeachment process and grounds for impeachment

The impeachment power allows Congress to remove the president, vice president, or other "officers of the United States" (including federal judges) for abuses of power—specifically, "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes or Misdemeanors." The framers placed this central check with Congress as part of the overall system of checks and balances. impeachment process Impeachment in the United States is the process by which a legislature (usually in the form of the lower house) brings charges against a civil officer of government for crimes alleged to have been committed, analogous to the bringing of an indictment by a grand jury. The federal House of Representatives can impeach federal officials, including the president, and each state's legislature can impeach state officials, including the governor, in accordance with their respective federal or state constitution. The impeached official remains in office until a trial is held. That trial, and removal from office if convicted, is separate from the act of impeachment itself (and is conducted in the Senate). In impeachment proceedings, the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty, or property. According to the Constitution, the only penalties allowed to be imposed by the Senate are removal from office and disqualification from holding any federal office in the future.

Enumerated powers

The powers explicitly given to Congress in the Constitution. Congress was given the specific enumerated power to raise revenue for the federal government through taxes and borrowing, regulate interstate and foreign commerce, coin money, establish post offices and roads, grant patents and copyrights, create the system of federal courts, declare war, "raise and support armies," make rules for the military, and create and maintain a navy.

The right to privacy

The right to a private personal life free from the intrusion of government. a contrived right from unstated liberties in the Bill of Rights.

politico

The third model of representation captures this reality: the politico is more likely to act as a delegate on issues that are highly salient to his or her constituency (such as immigration reform or farm subsidies) but as a trustee on less salient or very complex issues (such as some foreign policies).

The "Lemon test"

The three-part test for Establishment Clause cases that a law must pass before it is declared constitutional: it must have a secular purpose; it must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and it must not cause excessive entanglement with religion (the last one kind of fuzzy). The Court has had an even more difficult time coming up with principles to govern government aid to religious organizations, either directly, through tax dollars, or indirectly, through the use of public space. One early attempt was known as the Lemon test, after one of the parties in a 1971 case involving government support for religious schools (Lemon v. Kurtzman). This case said that a practice violated the establishment clause if it (1) did not have a "secular legislative purpose," (2) either advanced or inhibited religion, or (3) fostered "an excessive government entanglement with religion."29 The third part of the test was later found open to interpretation by lower courts and therefore led to conflicting rulings.

balancing test

The view of the majority of the Supreme Court that First Amendment rights must be weighed against the competing needs of the community to preserve order.

home style

The way a member of Congress behaves, explains his or her legislative actions, and presents himself or herself in the home district.

PATRIOT Act

This law passed after 9/11 expanded the tools used to fight terrorism and improved communication between law enforcement and intelligence agencies Several of the most controversial parts of the act strengthen police surveillance powers; make it easier to conduct "sneak and peek" searches, broaden Internet surveillance; increase the government's access to individuals' library, banking, and medical records; and permit roving wiretaps for suspected terrorists.

responsiveness vs. responsibility

Thus, responsibilities for national interests may be more difficult for members of Congress to explain to their constituents. This is rooted in the conflicts that arise from Congress's dual roles: responsibility for national policy making and responsiveness to local constituencies. This duality may make members of Congress appear to be simultaneously great leaders who debate important issues and locally oriented representatives who work hard to deliver benefits for the district (which may not be good for the country as a whole). Part of the national frustration with Congress arises because we want our representatives to be responsible and responsive; we want them to be great national leaders and to take care of our local and, at times, personal concerns.

double jeopardy

Trial or punishment for the same crime again by the same government; forbidden by the Constitution. can be brought up on different charges though

prior restraint

When do national security concerns prevail over journalists' right to keep citizens informed? The general issue here is prior restraint, the government's right to prevent the media from publishing something.

the Year of the Woman (and the Year of the Woman v 2.0).

Women in Congress -1992 "Year of the Woman"=1st year. (# of women has increased in congress and government over the years) The Year of the Woman was a popular label attached to 1992 after the election of a number of female Senators in the United States. The hotly contested Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas involving the sexual conduct allegations of Anita Hill raised the question of the dominance of men in the Senate. In 1992, much like 2018, the country was grappling with a series of high-profile sexual misconduct cases. Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court even after Anita Hill levied sexual harassment allegations against him. Bill Clinton had won the White House while being dogged by allegations of infidelity. And women, broadly, were furious. I sat down with Swers to discuss how the influx of women in Congress helped reshape policy in 1992 and what it could mean this time around. Following 1992's "Year of the Woman," lawmakers passed bills including the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Violence Against Women Act, she says. Today, with even more women in leadership roles in Congress, they are expected to continue influencing legislation in a wide range of areas including immigration and health care. Current Congress most diverse ever -year of the woman v. 2.0 in the 2018 midterms almost 80% said they wanted more woman. The record-breaking number of women candidates running for office in 2018 drew comparisons with the last time there was a so-called "Year of the Woman" 26 years ago: in 1992. That year, as in 2018, a surge of women candidates ran for office and won. When the ballots were counted, America had elected a record-breaking four women as senators and 24 women as representatives to Congress. These included lawmakers who are still in Congress today such as Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Patty Murray (D-WA). This year, more than 100 women are expected to be elected to the House, with 22 who are set to serve in the Senate next term, shattering a whole new set of records. most women in govt are democrats In 1992, much like 2018, the country was grappling with a series of high-profile sexual misconduct cases. -Record numbers of women ran for the House and Senate. More than 100 women are serving in the House for the first time (102 up from 84), including more than 30 first-term members. In exit polls, almost 80% of voters said it was very or somewhat important to see more women elected. (lecture)

the "marketplace of ideas"

a concept at the core of the freedoms of expression and press, based on the belief that true and free political discourse depends on a free and unrestrained discussion of ideas 1st amendment: free expression of speech, often brought up in the concept of hate speech. if you have free expression of ideas and free ideas are allowed in this marketplace, it will drive out the bad ideas. optimal allocation of resources in terms of speech (optimal allocation of speech)

The "race to the bottom"

a dynamic in which states compete to attract business by lowering taxes and regulations, often to workers' detriment.

geographic representation

a legislature divided according to geography, in which people are represented by the area they live in Geographic representation -impact on policy: makes policy more parochial. National random constituency as an alternative?

confederal system of government

a political system in which independent states form a nation but retain their power under a weak central government

federal system of government

a type of government in which power is shared between the national government and smaller regional governments within the nation

How does the national government coerce states to comply with its mandates? What are the argument in favor of allowing unfunded mandates??????????? What is the status of balance of power between the national and state governments today and how has it evolved throughout history? What are the problems associated with "devolving power" to the states (APT chapter 3, lecture and Peterson in TED).

benefit is the federal govt gets to pass something without having to fund it (so bad for states and good for federal govt because they don't have to raise taxes to fund it).....without withholding aid or attaching funds The federal government also creates an unfunded mandate when it reduces an organization's ability to pay for an existing mandate. It does this under three circumstances: It cuts funds earmarked for the program. It changes the requirements for receiving funds. It interferes with a government's ability to raise funds through taxes When Congress increases the U.S. minimum wage, it creates an unfunded mandate on businesses. The laws most objectionable to the states are unfunded mandates, which require states to do certain things but carry no federal money to pay for them. despite the fact that the connection between the appropriation and the regulation was problematic, the Supreme Court ruled that congress could attach any reasonable condition to its grants to the states. state sovereignty was not violated, because any state could choose not to accept the money. started with weak national government which grew and lead to less state power and then in 1833 started moving toward more state power. Despite the overall shift toward cooperative federalism, strong overtones of national government supremacy remain. moving decidedly in the direction of state power Future of Federalism Shift toward the states? Continued central role for the national government. Bipartisan tendency to centralize power in Washington. Globalization national defense infrastructure Distribution of power among parties (see figure). A shift to more Republican governors is consistent with a shift to state-centered federalism (but gains for Ds in 2018: picked up 7 governorships). Problems: Prevents The Creation Of A National Policy, Leads To A Lack Of Accountability, and exposes Citizen Ignorance. differences in wealth and income levels and poverty levels across the states (so if you devolve power to states and keep federal govt out of it, then bigger inequality because poorer states don't have the resources to help themselves)=national policy is the greatest tool

Is civic culture in decline? (Schudson in TED).

civic culture. he addresses the widespread concerns that public life is in decline or the quality of citizenship (or the robust participation and inclusion in American society) is declining. He believes that while there is an agreed upon decline, the situation is not nearly as dire as many people believe. He points to seven factors that could measure this. people's trust in govt and voter turnout examples. Schudson focuses on the idea that citizenship is build upon expectations of robust participation and inclusion in American public life. He addresses the widespread concerns expressed in recent decades that American public life is in decline and that the notion of citizenship as requiring extensive participation in community and civic life has withered, imperiling the stability and legitimacy of the political system. he examines seven factors, and concludes that the situation is not nearly as dire as some analysts would suggest. Citizenship in the US has not disappeared. it has not even declined. It has, inevitably, changed. Schudson's argument is based on the premise that as civic life declines, the quality of citizenship declines as well. He argues that whether or not American civic life is in decline depends on where we look and how we interpret the trends. seven indicators. he states that the assertions about the decline of civil life and the health of citizenship are exaggerated. disparity between rich and poor, capacity of the last advantaged groups in society to make their voices heard in the political process, reach of state-guaranteed rights, quality of public discourse, voting, social trust, and social membership. in general it is; the decline of parties, the fiscal impoverishment of cities strangled by suburbs, the dwindling of newspaper readership, disappearing trust in government, shrinking voter turnout, citizens' knowledge of national and international affairs, the lack of substance in political campaigns, the decline of conversation, the fear of street crime, and the spread of scandal as a political issue. example of it being of being over exaggerated: high voter turnout may not always be a good thing (could mean they think something is wrong), and if people have too much trust in govt that can also be a bad thing (the govt might try and get away with bad stuff) public life improving: the reach of state-guaranteed rights has improved (your husband can't beat you)

What are examples of the attempt to "balance interests" and "draw lines" concerning civil libert ies? (APT, Chap 4)

civil liberties=freedom civil rights= are about equality When the Supreme Court rules on civil liberties cases, it must balance an individual's freedom with government interests and the public good. In some cases, the Court must not only balance these interests but also "draw a line" between permissible and illegal conduct concerning a specific liberty. national security, public health, and public safety the amish having to put a slow vehicle sign on their horse drawn carriages even though it goes against their religious practice (public safety is more important) (balance interests) while free speech is important, it is obvious that not all speech should be permitted, like yelling fire when there isn't one (drawing lines) search and seizure cases balancing interests: trying to figure out what the constitution means (two different competing interests that are both good things but Supreme Court must decide which one is more important, privacy vs security). safety vs religion. Drawing lines: establishment clause cases, a single principle. we don't want a govt to establish a religion. is school prayer okay? say no. have to figure out where to draw line on difficult cases, must make a decision, clear cut, a single principle.

What are the different techniques members use to get reelected? (lecture, Mayhew in TED)

congressional offices is perhaps the most important one: office resources are given to all members regardless of party, seniority, or any other qualifications. They come with the job. The Hill office is a vitally important political unit, part campaign management firm and part political machine. Second, among the structural units are the committees. Committees supply good platforms for position taking. catches public attention. Ex house education and labor committee. some committee traffic in particularized benefits...every member has a right to his share of benefits. particularism. Finally, the committee system aids Congressmen simply by allowing a division of labor among members. First, it creates small voting bodies in which membership may be valued. Second, it creates specialized small-group settings in which individual congressmen can make things happen and be perceived to make things happen. credit claiming, position taking, advertising: ways getting reelected.

Racial bias in application of the death penalty

cruel and unusual punishment (8th amendment) and the death penalty. original intent argument-clearly OK with founders. comparative context. moral argument. innocent people put to death? left up to the states to decide. racial bias in application of the death penalty. 51% on death row are white, about half of people murdered are white. but racial bias based on the race of the victim. In Florida, murderers of whites 37 times more likely to be put on death row than murdered of blacks. 87-1 in Texas. -McKlesky v Kemp (1987); Racial Justice Act, 1994.

The "switch in time that saved nine"

decision made during West Coast Hotel Co v. Parrish that saved nine justices and prevented the addition of 6 new justices to the court during FDR's New Deal. (they switched their decision and started supporting more of his policies) court packing scheme. supreme courts were striking down a lot of New Deal decisions. lot of people on the court who were old and need to put new people to help them out (humanitarian take), lot of controversy, but one judge switched his view on the commerce clause which saved 6 judges from getting added (one for every person over a certain age)

Prerogative powers?????

implied powers derived from the executive clause of the constitution or the article where it states, "the power of the executive will be vested in the President of the United States." Obama DACA: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is an American immigration policy that allows some individuals with unlawful presence in the United States after being brought to the country as children to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and become eligible for a work permit in the . a president's freedom to make independent and binding judgments, extending beyond national emergencies to include day-to-day decisions, that do not require the approval of congress or the courts Executive prerogative refers to the President's authority to declare policy, take action, and make law without congressional support or in the face of inconsistent congressional legislation. This authority may be seen as a corollary of the separation of powers under which the President has exclusive executive power that Congress may not invade because Congress's authority is limited to legislative powers. Executive prerogative may also refer to certain emergency powers under which the President may act contrary to the Constitution, such as spending funds without an appropriation or contrary to an act of Congress that would properly be classified as a legislative act. Neither executive privilege nor the oversight power of Congress is explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution.[1] However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[2] Abraham Lincoln during the civil war. During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln controversially used executive orders to suspend habeas corpus

exclusionary rule

improperly gathered evidence may not be introduced in a criminal trial

filibuster (and cloture)

in the Senate Debate may be cut off only if a supermajority of 60 senators agree in a process known as invoking cloture. Therefore, one senator can stop any bill by threatening to talk the bill to death if 40 of his or her colleagues agree. This practice is known as a filibuster. The filibuster strengthens the hand of the minority party in the Senate, giving it veto power over legislation unless the majority party has 60 senators who support a bill.

How do different "home styles" influence how a member of congress represents his or her district? (Fenno in TED)????

in this case the perception of a primary constituency. Obviously, there is no one to one relationship between the groups with whom a congressman acts and feels most at home and his primary constituency. But it does provide a pretty good unobtrusive clue. So I found myself fashioning a highly "at homeless index" to rank the degree to which each congressman seems to have support from and rapport with each group. Some groups can be apart of re-election constituencies, but not primary constituencies. different constituencies-geographical, re-election, primary, and personal it is a concern for the scope of that support-which decreases as one moves from the geographical to the personal constituency. it is a concern for the stability of that support-which increases as one moves from the geographical to the personal constituency. Representatives think about their constituencies because they seek support there. A congressman's perception of his several constituencies will affect such things. work to maintain or enlarge their political support at home, by going to the district and doing things there. as they cultivate their constituencies, House members display what I shall call their home style. When they discuss the importance of what they are doing, they are discussing the importance of home style to the achievement of their electoral goal. At this stage of the research, the surest generalization one can make about home style is that there are as many varieties as there are members of Congress. First, the congressman's allocation of his personal resources and those of his office; second, the congressman's presentation of self; and third, the congressman's explanation of his Washington activity. Every congressman allocates, presents, and explains. The amalgam of these three activities for any given representative constitutes his home style. His home style, we expect, will be affected by his perception of his four constituencies.

polarization of parties in Congress

increasing Party polarization in Congress -Parties are more polarized in Congress now than any time since the late 19th century. -Why does it matter? What outcomes in the political system are influenced by polarization? -Gridlock: the debt ceiling debate, fiscal cliff, and sequester/budget politics. The inability to compromise. "Brinkmanship" politics. -Legislative productivity. -Trust in government and cynicism about politics. Erodes the legitimacy of our political institutions.

What is the tradeoff between security and freedom and how has this played out in the debate over civil liberties and the PATRIOT Act? Do you think the balance between the two is at the right level? What are the main exceptions to the exclusionary rule? (APT, Chap 4, and lecture)!!!!!!!!

indestrip searches Mapp v. Ohio. This case established for all courts the exclusionary rule, which says that illegally or unconstitutionally obtained evidence cannot be used in a criminal trial. Previously, the rule had applied only at the national level. main reason for the exclusionary rule is to deter unlawful police conduct. balancing civil liberties and "coddling criminals" For example, the Court established a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule, allowing evidence to be used as long as the officer believed that he or she had conducted a legal search. In this specific case, the officer had a warrant with the wrong address. faulty warrants are OK as long as the error was not intentional (good faith exception). Arizona case: applies if error by court or police staff-"reasonable expectation doctrine" hold that police cannot climb over your fence, but can look through a hole. Thermal imaging device not OK without warrant. ok to search garbage without warrant. cordless phones are fair game. taping conversations. dan swab for people who were arrested is ok. Yet another case established an "independent source" exception allowing the use of evidence that was initially obtained in an illegal search but subsequently acquired with a valid warrant. The Patriot Act CUSA Patriot Act: -Internet surveillance, wiretaps...other: strengthened the ability of law enforcement officials to track potential terrorists. -recent revelations about NSA "meta data" searches. -Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools to Restrict, Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. Long title. An Act to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and across the globe, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes. Coalition of the left and right are opposed to limits on civil liberties. Major decision in 2018, Carpenter v U.S., requiring a warrant to use a cellphone location data. -response of people who lived under communism.

Should there be a religious exemption to non-discrimination laws? (Cole and Helfman in TED)

it depends? obviously we don't want to force people to go against their religious beliefs, but denying same sex couples services allows discrimination to be reaffirmed? balance between fighting discrimination and religious freedom. RFRAs (too favoring of religion right now?) same sex couple and bakery owner Pence's Indiana law people can claim religious exemption to almost any law? religious freedom is also a civil right, on the same plane as same sex marriage, more of balancing lines

The central tensions faced by the Founders at the Constitutional convention

majority rule vs minority rights slave states versus nonslave states (slavery) the executive state versus federal power representation commerce majority rule versus minority rights large states versus small states legislative power versus executive power (and how to elect the executive) national power versus state and local power slave states versus nonslave states large vs small states slave vs nonslave states the executive or president and how he was elected commerce representation majority rule vs minority rights

delegate

one of the two long standing models of substantive representation in which the delegate, who carries out the direct desires of the voters. In a sense, trustees are more concerned with being responsible and delegates are more interested in being responsive.

trustee

one of the two long standing models of substantive representation in which the trustee, who represents the interests of constituents from a distance, weighing numerous national, collective, local, and moral concerns; and In a sense, trustees are more concerned with being responsible and delegates are more interested in being responsive. Essentially, a trustee considers an issue and, after hearing all sides of the debate, exercises their own judgment in making decisions about what should be done.

What has happened to political parties and party leadership in Congress in the last two decades? What are the different ideas for reforming Congress and how would they affect responsiveness and responsibility? (lecture).?????????

party leaders have become stronger, political parties have become extremely polarized With Democrats and Republicans more ideologically separated than ever before, compromises have become scarcer and more difficult to achieve, contributing to the current Congress' inability to get much of consequence done. What's happened? In large part, the disappearance of moderate-to-liberal Republicans (mainly in the Northeast) and conservative Democrats (primarily in the South). Since the 1970s, the congressional parties have sorted themselves both ideologically and geographically. our government is more polarized than we are. reforming congress see different slide what the top positions are: speaker of the house, majority leader in the senate, basic responsibilities of the leaders: in charge of deciding what the agenda is gonna be, when the bills will come up, public face of the party, in charge of information gathering, dissemination, and coalition building,

"selective incorporation" of the Bill of Rights

ratification of the 14th amendment was done to prevent states from interfering with newly freed slaves' freedom The due process clause, which forbids any state from denying "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," led to an especially important expansion of civil liberties because the similar clause in the Fifth Amendment had previously been interpreted by the Court to apply only to the federal government. Slowly over the next 50 years, most civil liberties covered in the Bill of Rights were applied to the states on a right-by-right, case-by-case basis through the Fourteenth Amendment. However, this process of selective incorporation was not smooth and incremental.

Gonzales v Raich and........

states arguing for more liberal policies, national typically more liberal so weird (state vs federal) flip of ideological positions to state level

!!!!!!!!!!!! Should states have the right to nullify national policy, such as immigration reform? Should the states be given more power in the area of immigration to experiment with new policies, such as granting work visas? (The Economist, Gulaskekaram and Ramakrishnan, and Dalmia, in TED).!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

states should not have the right to nullify national policy unless it is unconstitutional (that is what lead to the civil war) I believe that states should be given more power in the area of immigration to experiment with new policies, because each state is different and has different needs. will resolve some of the tension about the topic by allowing everyone to do what they want. might even encourage immigration. those who want to reform immigration may well do better to push for piecemeal changes at the state level than to chase comprehensive reform federally. The economist trumps removal of DACA, government will have a harder time deporting more people than they already are and they will have difficulty getting cooperation from cities and states that oppose it. sanctuary cities. ramakrishnan proposals for federal immigration reform face little chance of becoming law. congress will almost certainly be strongly partisan and divided through at least 2020. state and localities are setting immigration policy. such state level changes will be difficult to undo. California package vs Arizona package. the federal govt relation on the states to help carry out its immigration policy. (ex. federal law gives state welfare systems some control over whether noncitizen are eligible for public assistance. kalmia: congress can't enact immigration reform because it is struggling to find a way to balance the contradictory demands of labor, business, and talk-radio restrictionists. a way out might be by embracing a more federalist approach that gives states flexibility to craft their own immigration policies. Global Entrepreneur=guest worker programs.

majority tyranny

suppression of the rights and liberties of a minority by the majority

Two-track analysis on free-speech cases

the 1st amendment (freedom of speech), where to draw the line? 1. content neutral "time, manner, and place" restrictions usually ok. much tougher scrutiny if it is not content neutral (banning KKK rally) 2. content-based restrictions. -political speech. intended by the Founders to be strongly protected. However, varying degrees of protection over the years. -Alien and Sedition Laws, 1798 -Schneck vs U.S.: FIRE! in a crowded theater (clear and present danger test/bad tendency test) -Dennis vs US: the balancing test -Yates vs US: belief vs action -Brandenberg v Ohio "direct incitement test" (KKK members) as long as not imminent danger=action=speech okay (protection for speech gets stronger)

Implied powers

the boundaries of power have stretched far beyond the original lines specified in the constitution. "necessary and proper" clause (or elastic clause) A section of the United States Constitution that enables Congress to make the laws required for the exercise of its other powers established by the Constitution. that is, powers that are not explicitly stated in the Constitution but can be inferred from an enumerated power executive implied powers: article 2, sections 3: he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed and article 2, section 1: the executive power shall be vested in a President of the U.S. ex: McCulloch v Maryland (1819(: ruled that the national govt had power to create a national bank and that meant Maryland could not tax that bank) Maryland tried to tax the national bank out of existence. Supreme Court said sorry congress does have a right to have this bank. implied powers (necessary and proper clause). article one doesn't say anything about a national bank, but power of the purse, so important constitutional interpretation standard, also true for the national supremacy clause (federal bank trumps Maryland not wanting a bank)

What role has the Supreme Court played in the evolution of relations between the states and the national government? (lecture and Annas in TED). How do the medical marijuana and assisted suicide cases illustrate the tensions between national and state power? (Annas in TED).

the commerce clause guns in schools and violence against women From welfare reform to health care, educational funding to inner-city development, state goats have sought more control over public policy within their borders. The debate over devolving power from the national govt to the states has grown increasingly complicated in recent yrs: the Courts have played a larger, but inconsistent role, and issues of "states" rights" increasingly tend to cut across normal ideological and partisan divisions. While Republicans continued to favor greater state control, Democratic President Bill Clinton supported devolution to the states in several areas in the 1990s, especially welfare policy. Since the mid-1990s, the Supreme Court has played a central role in the shift of power to the states, but two recent cases involving medical marijuana (Gonzales v. Raich) and the right to die (Gonzales v Oregon) shows how the typical debate between national and state power can shift when a moral dimension is introduced. In both cases, state votes supported liberal politics (Democratic). Voices have been flipped since the beginning of our nation. So a national-power liberal would have supported a Rauch decision and opposed the Gonzales decision (the opposite of the social liberal). Surprisingly, there was almost no consistency among the eight justices who voted on both cases, only Justice Sandra Day O'Connor supported the states' rights position in both cases, and Antonin Scalia voted as a moral conservative. The court as a whole was inconsistent on the question of federalism. (marijuana lost but right to die won)

State sovereignty

the concept that states have the right to govern themselves independent of the federal government

The Constitution as a living document

the constitution can be amended or interpreted through court rulings; founding fathers planned for this because of unexpected changes in the future (made the wording slightly vague so it could be applied to a wider range of situations in the future and, hence, function for a long time after its creation) can it-a document that was written 230 yrs ago-besides fixed parts, still work? -main characteristics that allow it to evolve: amending the Constitution and vague language. -empirical and normative views on the "living document." -still contain the wisdom that allows democratic governance in a modern world? In 1987, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall delivered a lecture, "The Constitution: A Living Document," in which he argued that the Constitution must be interpreted in light of the moral, political, and cultural climate of the age of interpretation.

personal constituencies

the people and interests the senators represent

General revenue sharing

the process by which one unit of government yields a portion of its tax income to another unit of government, according to an established formula; revenue sharing typically involves the national government providing money to state governments

devolution

the transfer of powers and responsibilities from the federal government to the states

logrolling and norms of reciprocity are the same

they make pork barrel possible, because you are trading votes, you are able to get physical results for your constituents.

What are the different roles that members of Congress can adopt with respect to how they will represent their district? (lecture) How does Congress structure its institutions to help gets its members reelected? (Mayhew in TED, lecture) ???????????z

trustee, politico, delegate: They can be on committees They can adopt a home style they can credit claim, advertise, or position take. The way parties are structured: a party won't for a representative to vote against their constituents because they know that if they do it will be harder for them to get reelected (and they need their vote to get a majority on other important issues) Characteristics of Congress: Elective institution -reelection is never far from members' minds (Mayhew). Geographic representation -impact on policy: makes policy more parochial. -National random constituency as an alternative. Bicameral (House and Senate) -Impact on legislative efficiency and policy Operates within the system of shared powers and checks and balances. The Electoral Connection -Members want to be reelected. Impact on behavior (David Mayhew). -Credit claiming (for pork barrel) -Advertising -Position taking. Vote on the 2008 bailout bill. -Impact on the legislative process: -Makes leadership more difficult. Each member wants to go his or her own way. Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson and health care reform. -Weakens the electoral connection to the president. Weaker coattails. Impact of the electoral connection on parties: -Mayhew says that parties aren't as important for what they do, but for what they don't do: they don't make members take unpopular stands in their district. -However, parties have become much stronger in Congress. -A need for more genuine partisanship: the clash of competing ideas and values, but have to be willing to work together. Impact of the electoral connection on the Committee system. -The main institution for building personal turf for credit claiming. -Decentralization of Congress. -Committees also serve as corrective on individualism as the policy making institutions of Congress. Where the work gets done. -Deference to committees, low and high salience committees.

unitary system of government

type of government that centralizes all the powers of government into one central authority

logrolling

vote trading; voting to support a colleague's bill in return for a promise of future support universalism

Shared powers

war powers. a good ex of the principle of checks and balances. the founders changed a single crucial word, from "make" to "declare" war for the congressional role. president is commander in chief. in general, congress and the courts have deferred to the president.

hate speech

words that attack groups such as racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities

Seniority

years of service The seniority norm also serves individual and institutional purposes. This norm holds that the member with the longest service on a given committee will chair that committee