GOV 1111 – Flashcards

Liberty Egalitarianism Individualism Populism Laisse-faire

US has high inequality and high wealth

• Locke says the governing factor in a society should be the majority, and that individuals in a society must submit to the rule of the majority. Two arguments he addresses: 1. The first argument is that majoritarian rule doesn't have a historical precedent. Locke says it does, because all government at some point originated from the consent of the governed. 2. Even if a one man is bonded by a government, his children will still have the choice to follow said government. • Locke claims that people give up the freedom of their natural state to assure protection of their "property,"(lives, liberties, and estates) • Nature lacks three things which are provided by society: o 1. An established, settled, known law o 2. A known and indifferent judge o 3. The power to back and support the sentence • Society only works if it these idea are enforced by "a law, a judge, and an executive"

Madison:o Madison defined a faction: a group of people united "by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens" o Factions were an inevitable consequence of society the only way to get rid of them would be to: Restrict the freedom that allows them to exists, (a remedy worse than the disease) Force everyone to have the same opinions (straight impossible) o Factions are caused by unequal distribution of proberty, (upper class v. lower class) and since they can't be destroyed, we must mitigate their effects. o Factions are best controlled by a large representative government, because it has the power to balance one faction against the other.

: Deals with the system of Checks and Balances, that the constitution has to protect the rights and liberties of the citizens. "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition". o It is essential that each branch remains independent, and to fend against this, each branch needs a way to fight against the others. o Madison claims that the legislative branch is the strongest and thus must be slip up into multiple branches. Also claims it to be the "true voice of the people." o Division of power doubly protects the rights of the people. Each branch protects the people from other branches, while also defending against itself. o Factions will always exist and always be dangerous. The best way to combat them is to have numerous factions competing against each other.

• Brutus says that we should be cautious about what powers we give to this new government, because very few rulers have ever willingly given up authority. • Brutus cites the "necessary and proper" clause and the "supremacy" clause as examples of how the constitution gives far to much power to the national government. The states are therefore essentially powerless. • There are no examples of a republic the size of the US being successful. Thus if the constitution is trying to turn the 13 states into one republic (As Brutus believes it is) it shouldn't be adopted.

• Three Main Streams in American Intellectual Life: He basically said that Smith basicall said that racism was one of these strains, and shouldn't be ignored o Lockean Liberalism o Civic Republicanism o Racism or "inegalitarian ideologies and institutions of ascriptive hierarchy" (he added this one) • Tocqueville's thesis, that American politics have been shaped by egalitaran ideas is too narrow, it ignores all the Americans who had no say. • Basically the equality that Tocqueville talks about in the US, only ever applied to a small group of Americans. (White men). Only looking at liberalism v. republicanism ignores the power structures amongst all these ethnic or gender groups. • The influence of this third stream of thought is seen in how US politics have not in fact simply gotten more and more equal over time.

• While Federalism has theoretical benefits, Riker arguments that in practice it results in the oppression of the poor minorities and the protection of privileged wealthy minorities. Essentially Riker asks "Is Federalism worth keeping?" • Riker claims: Approval of Federalism = Approval of Racism • Federalism prevents majoritarian freedom (rule of the majority) by giving power to local majorities • Federalism prevents minoritarian freedom (freedom of a minority to preserve its rights against a majority) • I believe Riker is ignoring the "ascriptive hierarchy" that Roger's details. He claims blacks were oppressed as a result of federalist institutions, however anti-blackness is not limited to one system. This racism Riker claims Federalism protected would have most certainly occurred without federalism.

• Court struck down Arizona laws involving immigrations. Due to the supremacy clause, states are not allowed to interfere in areas the Federal government has reserved for its self. Thus Arizona couldn't regulate immigration.

• Members of congress are mainly focused exclusively on getting reelected. Even if they have other goals, they care most about getting reelected because that needs to happen before their other goals do. Members always afraid of losing their seats, always believe they can improve their odds. They do this by o advertising, o credit-claiming, and o position-taking. (popular position taking) • Members benefit from position taking not passage of legislation. They don't care about solving, just making clear they support a simple plan that most people like. • Congress only still works because party leaders and committees fight against individual interests.

• The typical member of congress sees their constituency as four parts: o The Geographic Constituency: this is the largest part, the district from which the representative travels. o The Reelection Constituency: electoral supporters, "who is likely to vote for me?" o The Primary Constituency: the strongest supporters, the "core base" of voters who will always vote for a given politician. o The Personal Constituency: intimate relations to the representative. These are advisors, family members, and friends. • When looking at a representative, it is important to ask not just is he representing his constituency, but: Which constituency is he representing?

There is a lot of evidence that suggests that politicians don't view all people as political equals. • Bartels shows that Senators votes are vastly more responsive to affluent constituents. The top one third of income earners had 50% more influence on senator's votes then the middle, the bottom third had NO EFFECT on the senators voting. • Representatives of parties have more in common with other party members then they do with different party representatives from their same state. This trend has slightly increased over the past 15 years. • Essential Bartels says that because in the US political power is a result of economic power, our system is more of an OLIGARCHY then a democracy. At best he says it's an unequal democracy.

• Most everyone in the US hates, and always has hated congress. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily bad or broken. Mayhew believes it's not that defective and that no compelling case exists for its reform. • Three points Mayhew makes: 1. Divided Party control not a great problem: Congress still passes a lot of bills, they just tend to be more heterogonous, and have more compromises. 2. The Senate's Malapportionment is not a serious problem: On what seems to be luck, the political composition of the senate is very similar to the US, so it still reflects America's views. Also it seems any resources big states are giving up to subsidize small states is overstated. It's only about 35 dollars a person. 3. Americans look to elections for change: basically Americans don't try to revise the constitution to get

• Binder thinks that Mayhew views are too optimistic. She thinks that the system will probably get back on track at some point, however for now we are stuck with an ineffective congress. • Unified party control fuels legislative capacity and reduces the frequency of deadlock. • The amount of gridlock has increased in recent years, and so has the amount of "salient" issues that appear in congress. More salient issues tend to experience slightly lower lecels of deadlock. • 112th congress was actually really bad, and the frequency of deadlock is increasing. • Basically she says that while she believes that polarization makes compromise less likely, she agrees with Mayhew that the current "imbalances" are not "permanent, systemic problems" However, she has three reservations: o Deadlock has increased steadily over the past half-century o Its unclear whether current levels of polarization are going to decrease anytime soon

• The American public, like James Madison in Fed. 50, tends to see the party conflicts as "bickering" motivated by passion or self-interest. However, most political scientist tend to see this as principled and even philosophical disagreement. • The US public isn't wrong. Party politics is often more "partisan bickering" then "principled disagreement." • Lee states that party conflicts happen so often not because of ideological differences but because of party competition for elected offices. • Members have "shared risk" meaning it is in party members best interests to support their own parties power (try to gain/keep a majority) because this power helps members win office and wield power. This makes members want to both support their own party and to differentiate themselves from the other party. • About 38% of laws can not be classified as either conservative or liberal. If partisan behavior has a result of ideological differences, then one should expect to see nonpartisan behavior for this nonideological issues. But you don't.

• Republicans and Democrats are increasing divided along ideological lines, especially in the past two decades. More and more party members believe the other party threatens the nation. This trend is more notable in the politically engaged. Antipathy between parties has increased. • The ideological extremes tend to vote/participate more. • Theres growing ideological consistently within parties. • Americans are more and more likely to live in areas and be around people who are ideologically similar to them, this creates an Ideological Echo chamber.

• Parties have always been a tool of politicians to achieve their goals. These goals are not partisan, but individual- the party is just a way to achieve them. The overarching goal is always: "to have a long and successful career in political office," fgfgf • The "Mass Mobilization party" of the last century has led to a contemporary party is service to politician's needs. • The Way a party can help a politician is dependent on three aspects: o The Polity (electorate): through "collective action" parties can organize individuals o The Institutional Setting: in our case a republican form of government o "Historical Setting": Technological Setting- TV, radio, computer, etc. make parties less important. Normative Setting- the perceived role of the government, how people see parties. Development Matters: Once two party system is in place, it is hard to change to a different even superior system. • Aldrich discusses the typical "Responsible Party Thesis": o Responsible Parties are defined by: 1. Make Policy Commitment to the electorate 2.Are willing to carry these out while in office 3. Develop alternatives to government policies when out of office 4. Differ sufficiently to offer voters a real choice • Aldrich calls this idealized, and points to these defects: o It assumes 2 party control is good, o Shifting back and forth between 2 widely different policy goals is harmful o Parties don't live up to these ideals. They focus on candidates, and rarely offer clear choices between policies.

• This piece challenges Aldrich's view that parties are driven by the needs of ambitious politicians. Rather, it contends parties are shaped by activists trying to achieve certain policy goals. These activists determine who will run, and thus shape the direction of the party. • There are many other aspects of parties (interest groups, social movement, sectional interests, and citizen activists). These aspects also benefit. • Parties serve to nominate/elect office seekers who best represent the party's intense policy demanders: People who: o Have a clear demand/set of demands o Are politically active on behalf of their demands

People who: o Have a clear demand/set of demands o Are politically active on behalf of their demands o Numerous enough to be influential "The party Decides" believes Aldrich is wrong about parties, and that they actually serve these intense policy demanders

• Overtime presidents have used increasingly unilateral measures. Howell describes this trend, and shows that during the 20th century, Congress and the Supreme Court allowed the president more power as problems became more complicated. • Historical Trend of Increased Presidential Power o During WWII FDR issued dozens of executive orders that nationalized a huge amount of facilities important to the war effort. Blatantly a violation of the 5th amendments "taking" clause, none were overturned o Nixon used an executive order to create the EPA, and make it directly beholden to the president. • Personal Presidency Literature: Since the New Deal, the public has expected the president to accomplish far more than his formal powers would allow. In order to be successful, a president needs to be able to persuade groups to follow his demaind, • Howell disagree with the "Personal Presidency view". The modern presidency has vast power outside of influencing congress: executive action. Here the president can act swiftly and unilaterally and its then up to congress to try and challenge him. • These unilateral powers are generally defined as: o Executive Action: a direct order to employees of the executive branch. o Presidential Proclamations: these are directed at individuals/groups outside of the government. They carry less weight as Executive Orders, often ceremonial. Can be important: ex. Carter's proclamations imposing new surcharges on imported oil. o National Security Directive: can serve to define the nations military/political objectives o Executive Agreements: The president can commit the US to deals, usually small and specific in nature.

o Executive Action: a direct order to employees of the executive branch. o Presidential Proclamations: these are directed at individuals/groups outside of the government. They carry less weight as Executive Orders, often ceremonial. Can be important: ex. Carter's proclamations imposing new surcharges on imported oil. o National Security Directive: can serve to define the nations military/political objectives o Executive Agreements: The president can commit the US to deals, usually small and specific in nature.

Mirror Theory: Representatives should reflect their district. Filter Theory: Representatives should be the best/most educated members of who they are filtering.

• The Rationality Principle holds that all political behavior has a purpose and that people tend to be goal-oriented in their political activities as they make instrumental choices about how to act. • The Institution Principle recognizes that political institutions provide incentives for political behavior, thereby shaping and structuring politics. Institutional rules and procedures—like jurisdiction (who has the authority to apply rules or make decisions), agenda power (who determines what issues will be taken up), veto power (the ability to defeat something even if it is on the agenda), decisiveness (the rules by which authoritative and final determinations are made), and delegation (the transmission of authority to some other official or body, which is characterized by a principal-agent relationshipinvolving transaction costs)—are consequential for political outcomes. • The Collective-Action Principle refers to the idea that, although all politics is collective action, getting people to act in concert is difficult. Thus, political action often involves both formal and informal bargaining, along with other efforts to overcome the obstacles to collective action. Formal and informal bargaining relationships are struck in politics to provide for collective decision making, and organizational efforts to overcome the tendencies of individuals to "free ride" on the labors of others are necessary to overcome the collective-action problems endemic in producing public goods. One common solution to the collective-action problem, arising from Mancur Olson's by-product theory, is the provision of selective benefits that accrue only to those who contribute to the group enterprise. • The Policy Principle holds that political outcomes are the products of individual preferences and institutional procedures. Combining lessons from the Rationality and Institution principles, we see that individual political actors' personal, electoral, and institutional ambitions are filtered through, and in many ways shaped by, institutional arrangements in politics; and that policy outcomes are the products of the complex intermingling of individual goals and institutions. • The History Principle reminds us that how we got here matters. Political circumstances and outcomes are understood to bepath dependent (partly determined by past events and choices) and to influence existing rules and procedures, political loyalties and alliances, and political viewpoints and perspectives.

the Supreme Court held that laws that enforced segregation of black and white citizens satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment protections so long as the facilities were equal; this "separate but equal"

Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, separate is inherently unequal

o Expressed powers are those powers specifically granted to the president in Article II, Sections 2 and 3, of the Constitution. o Given that Article II declares that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," when Congress enacts laws, it delegates power to the president and the executive branch to implement its will; such delegated powers constitute an important, expandable source of presidential strength. o Inherent powers are those that presidents claim that are not expressed in the Constitution but are inferred from it; they are most often asserted during times of war or national emergency.

institutions & procedures through which a land & people are ruled

rules & procedures that provide incentives for political behavior, and establish norms and values, thereby shaping politics

From the Virginia Plan: nationalist, population-based to the New Jersey Plan: state-based To the Connecticut (Great) Compromise: bicameralism, mix of both

-slavery sanctioned -lack of voting rights guarantees -Senators chosen not by popular vote but by state legislatures -equal representation of the states, not the people, in the Senate (Wyoming has 66 times the power of California!) -electoral college for electing president -ambiguity about judicial power -restrictions on congressional power -difficult to amend

Recent case, guaranteed right to marriage for same-sex couples

division of powers and functions between states & national government Seeks to limit gov't by dividing it into two levels, national and state, each with independence (sovereignty) to compete with the other, thereby restraining the power of both

Expressed/enumerated powers/Article I, Section 8 Implied powers: Necessary and proper clause Supremacy Clause

•Reserved powers/10th Amendment Reciprocal Obligations of States: •Full Faith & Credit clause •Privileges & Immunities Clause

1789-1937: State and Nation completely separate and soviegn

States can't tax federal institutes. Used necessary and proper clause to grant the national government "implied powers"

The pooling of resources & the coordination of effort & activity by a group of people (often a large one) to achieve common goals

Speaker of House only permits votes if majority of the majority agree Not binding, but customary since mid-1990s

Created system of Judicial review