The Study of American Government (Chapter 1)

Two Basic Questions: 1) Who governs? -- The distribution of political power in a society; To what ends?-- goals values
policies of a society

Basic Political Concepts

power: The ability of one person (or group) to get another person (or a group) to act in accordance with the first person’s
(group’s) intentions.

Resources of power: force, wealth, numbers, organizational skill, legal talent, etc.

Authority: the right to use power; formal authority --the right to use power that is vested in a government office.
Legitimacy: political authority conferred by law, public opinion, or constitution--e.g. U.S. Constitution
Democracy-- rule of the people (broad definition)

Types:
a. Direct or Participatory democracy: a political system in which all or most citizens participate by either holding office or
making policy. The town meeting, in which citizens vote on issues, is an example of participatory democracy. It has its
origins in the ancient Greek city-states which Aristotle wrote about. Another example is the initiative/referendum device
(direct legislation by the people by-passing state legislatures) which a number of states, mainly midwestern and western,
have. Note discussions of Proposition 13, Proposition 187 and the California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition 209).

Initiative: a procedure allowing voters to submit a proposed law to a popular vote by obtaining a required number of
signatures (see page 10). Depending on the state, initiatives require between 5 and 15 percent of those who voted in the
last election to sign a petition

Referendum: The practice of submitting a law to a popular vote at election time. The law may be proposed by a voter
initiative. Referenda also may be used to enable voters to reject measures adopted by state legislatures.

Recall: a procedure whereby voters can remove an elected official from office. If enough signatures are gathered on a
petition, the official must go before voters, who can vote to leave the person in office, remove the person from office, or
remove the person and replace him or her with someone else. Note the California governor’s recall election in 2003.
Initiative, referendum, and recall are elements of direct democracy in the United States at the state level. See discussion
on p. 59 in the federalism chapter

b. Representative democracy: A political system in which leaders and representatives acquire political power by means of
a competitive struggle for the people’s vote. This is the form of government used by most nations that are called
democratic. See Schumpeter’s definition and Madison statement in Federalist #10.

Direct v. Representative Democracy: Which is better?

advocates of representative democracy stress the filtering notion; the representative acts as a filter, a broker or
compromiser of many interests, helps to tone down politics, filter out extreme demands. This type of democracy depends
on open, free elections, adequate funding of opposing parties and accountability.

advocates of direct democracy: stress virtues of neighborhood or community control -- allow people to decide on issues
that affect them; note the controversy over referenda -- do they polarize?

When the Framers of the Constitution spoke disparagingly of democracy (see Federalist 10), they were referring to direct
democracy and its potential association with fleeting passions and popular demogogues. When they recommended a
“republican form of government,” they meant representative democracy.

How Power is distributed in a Democracy

majoritarian politics: the majority feels so intense that elected officials feel constrained to follow the will of the majority --
this can lead to the famous “tyranny of the majority” articulated by Tocqueville in Democracy in America and Madison in
Federalist #10.

Elite: an identifiable group of persons who possess a disproportionate share of some valued resource -- e.g. power,
money, access to media, organizational ability.

Four Social Theories of Elite Influence

A. Marxist: government reflects underlying forces; class conflict; bourgeois v. proletariat; projection of the communist
revolution in industrialized societies.

B. Power elite: associated with American sociologist C.W. Mills. Holds that an interlocking directorate of key military,
business, government and communications leaders set the agenda and in effect make the key decisions in American
society; democratic forms merely ratify what has already been decided by the elite.

C. Bureaucratic view. Max Weber, early 20th century German sociologist advanced the view that in modern societies
specialized knowledge and technical expertise held by the higher echlons of the bureaucracy were key factors. The higher
level bureaucrats are not accountable or elected by the people.

D. Pluralism: premised on dispersion (decentralization) of power through separation of powers, federalism. This theory
holds that political resources are widely dispersed throughout the society. All important interests will have some access.
The notion of multiple access points is key. If one branch or level of government is unresponsive (e.g., Congress or state
legislature) try another (Federal Courts). Note that NAACP strategy from the late 1930s through the 1950s. (See pages
127-134 in Chapter 6 for a discussion of this strategy). Many argue that pluralism mirrors American society the closest of
the theories presented here. It is the dominant model in political science for explaining American government.

Criticisms: there are two faces of power (visible and hidden ). The pluralists concentrate only on the visible and neglect
issues that don’t come before a public forum, issues that affect groups without resources or access. These are called
non-decisions. The plight of the homeless and mentally ill in American cities can be considered a type of non-decision.
Beyond Self Interest

Wilson and DiIulio reject narrow self-interest as basic motivations for American politics. They cite the Founding
experience of the 1770s and 1780s and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s as evidence of public spirited
behavior.

What Explains Political Change

The text’s authors refer to changing beliefs about government. In the 1920s the federal government played a smaller role
in our lives; since the 1930s we have seen an expansion of government activism, though not on the scale of the
European welfare state democracies (see chapter 4).
“What Would You Do?”

What are the authors getting at? State the arguments for and against initiatives and relate them to the issue of direct vs.
representative democracy.

The Summary and Key Terms section highlight the most salient points in the chapter. Comprehending these summaries
and terms will assist you in studying for exams.

Chapter One focused on the lexicon of politics – power, authority, legitimacy, elites, majoritarian politics.

Two major theoretical themes were explored 1) direct vs. representative democracy the nature of devices of direct
democracy such as initiatives and referenda vs. the Madisonian notion of filters; 2) and Elites and Political Power, Who
Governs? – Marxists, elitist theory (C.W. Mills), bureaucracy (Weber), and pluralists

Wilson and DiIulio in their “Reconsidering Who Governs?” summary reiterate the basic answers given in the chapter.
Most political scientists, including the authors, lean to the pluralist approach, but even they note that resources are not
equally distributed. Note the non-decisions critique of pluralism.

In discussing change they stress that, at least since the 1930s, we expect more from the federal government.

In the “Reconsidering Ends,” the authors stress the tradeoffs among values -- e.g., procedural rights and security. The
classic trade-off in the American system is between liberty and equality.
 The American Founding and The Constitution (Chapter 2).

Liberty as Goal of the American Revolution, e.g., traditional liberties to which they thought they were entitled as British
subjects: trials under judges independent of the King; no taxation without representation; right to engage in trade without
burdensome restrictions.

1600-1750 “salutary neglect”-- British government enabled the colonies to develop institutions of self-government and
allowed them to considerable economic freedom.

1754-1761 Seven Years War (French and Indian War)

Pamphlet War 1760-1776 : colonial protests against restrictions on trade and imposition of taxes (“no taxation without
representation”)

Civil disobedience: Boston Massacre (1770); Boston Tea Party (1773); Lexington and Concord (1775)

Tom Paine’s radical pamphlet Common Sense--no compromise, time for revolution is at hand.

June-July 1776 Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence

influence of John Locke (p.24) Two Treaties on Government (1690)

state of nature, social contract, natural or unalienable rights (life, liberty, property), right of revolution

The Declaration of Independence:

a.) 5 self evident truth organized around Lockian ideas of natural right, social contract, consent of governed, right of
revolution

b.) Bill of Particulars (listing of grievances against the British Government and king: attacks on self-government; economic
deprivation (trade and taxes); attacks on juridical rights; military oppression
c.) Act of Separation: significance of “free and independent states”

American Revolution 1776-1781

Articles of Confederation 1781-1789 unicameral; equality of representation.

power in state government characterized by legislative supremacy

Weaknesses of the Articles (pp. 23-24)

1. could not levy taxes directly
2. could not regulate commerce
3. states could issue paper money
4. delegates to confederal Congress were loyal to states
5. state militias primary units of defense-- lack of a national army and navy
6. unanimity need for amendments
7. no Supreme Court--difficult to settle inter-state disputes
8. could not enforce laws or treaties.

State Constitution experience

Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 (close to direct democracy–legislative supremacy)
Massachusetts Constitution of 1780 (separation of powers; property qualifications, religious tests; state support of
religion; concern for character formation)
Annapolis Convention 1786 -- note role of Hamilton-- call to “revise” the Articles in the new convention in Philadelphia

Shays Rebellion Jan 1787 debtor revolt in western Massachusetts-- underscored weakness of Articles and even state
militias in securing “domestic tranquility”

The Philadelphia Convention (May - September 1787)

Portrait of the Framers (p. 25- 26)

Randolph and the Virginia Plan

Virginia Plan New Jersey Plan
bicameral Unicameral
Large states Small states
Unitary form, independent of states confederation
Representation based on population equality of representation
Power to pass all laws in which
States are incompetent, or where
State action disrupts harmony
of the union
Veto state laws
Use military against states
Treaties Supreme law of land
Executive and Judiciary selected by
National legislature

Connecticut Compromise (Great Compromise)

Bicameral legislature (House based on population; Senate on equality of states)
President and Judiciary separated from the legislature and independently selected

House 2 year term directly elected; Senate 6 year term chosen by state legislatures
note 17th amendment (1913) direct election of U.S. senators

Presidency Compromises

How many? Single v. Plural (Randolph-- “foetus of a monarchy”)

Wilson and Hamilton prevailed a single president see Federalist 70

How long? 4 year term with unlimited re-eligibility; 22nd amendment (1951) two-term limit

Electoral College: each state gets electors equal to the number of representatives it has and its two senators. It decides
how to choose them. In the early decades, the state legislature chose the electors, now voters vote for them by voting a
party slate. Whoever wins the popular vote in a state wins all of the state’s electoral votes (unit rule). Today, a winning
candidate must win a sufficient number of states to get 270 or more electoral votes. If no candidate obtains a majority, the
House of Representatives decides. Each state delegation gets one vote. It is possible for the popular vote winner
nationwide to lose. Key point: the electoral college has been democratized over time.

Federal Judiciary: President nominates; Senate confirms

federal judges have life tenure once confirmed

Other Compromises
commerce, treaties, exports

slavery: 3/5’s compromise: each slave counted as three-fifths of a free person for representation and taxation purposes
slave trade: no prohibition before 1808
fugitive slave provision

Key principles in the Constitution: separation of powers (with checks and balances; see chart p. 29), and federalism.
Both are ways of dividing power. Most European countries (e.g., England) have power centralized in a national
government.

The Founders and Democracy. The Founders favored a republic over a democracy because they didn’t want to place
too much power in the hands of the people.— The people could be duped by demagogues. Though opposed to “rule by
the people” the founders not anti-majoritarian. They preserved majority rule. Notion of two majorities and concept of
indirect democracy. 1. majority of the people. 2. majority of the states. Some sets of people selected by the people and
others are indirectly selected by the people by their state legislatures and other groups of people who share power.
Judicial review is also a way to limit the power of the people; federal judges are not elected but are appointed for life, and
can void laws passed by the people’s elected representatives.

Government and Human Nature Human nature good enough to make self government under a republic possible, but not
that good to make it inevitable.
ancients vs moderns
Aristotle Locke, Madison
virtue interest
Sam Adams’ “Christian Sparta” v. Madison’s “new science of politics”-- summarized by the phrase from Federalist 51:
“ambition must be made to counteract ambition”; channel interest, passions, and ambition of men into the cause of stable
and decent government through circumstance ( the large republic) and institutional devices ( separation of powers and
checks and balances)

Federalist Papers newspaper articles written to support the American Constitution during the ratification struggle by
Madison, Hamilton and Jay (see pp. 34-35)

Federalist 10: problem of faction; argument for diversity, large republic and pluralism (“a great variety of parties and
interests”) moderation –need to accommodate diversity of interests. To govern and pass laws need to for form coalitions.

Federalist 51: argument for separation of powers and checks and balances (see p. 31)

Ratification Procedure: 9 states by conventions of delegates elected by the people

Antifederalist position on the Constitution (pp. 32-33).

Antifederalists thought cultivating virtue was necessary.
extensiveness is a threat to liberty, disharmony
annihilation of states -- consolidation
national government is too centralized
presidential powers and standing army
fear of judicial review, necessary and proper clause, supremacy clause, power to tax and spend.
lack of a Bill of Rights ( lasting contribution)

There was a truncated bill of rights in the original constitution: e.g. write of habeas corpus, prohibition of bills of attainder,
ex post facto laws, no religious test for office but Antifederalists insisted that this was not enough.

Bill of attainder: A law that declares a person, without a trial, to be guilty of a crime. The state legislatures and
Congress are forbidden to pass such acts by Article I of the Constitution.

Ex post facto law: Ex post facto is a Latin term meaning “after the fact.” A law that makes criminal an act that was legal
when it was committed, that increases the penalty for a crime after it has been committed, or that changes the rules of
evidence to make conviction easier; a retroactive criminal law. The state legislatures and Congress are forbidden to pass
such laws by Article I of the Constitution.

Writ of habeas corpus: A Latin term meaning “you shall have the body.” A court order directing a police officer, sheriff,
or warden who has a person in custody to bring the prisoner before a judge and show sufficient cause for his or her
detention. The writ of habeas corpus was designed to prevent illegal arrests and imprisonment.

Bill of Rights were added in 1791; first 10 amendments. Originally they applied only to the federal government ( Barron v.
Baltimore 1833); later they were incorporated or made applicable to the states through the 14th amendment– Page 37,
Box on Bill of Rights

Broad Sets of Liberties Protected by the Bill of Rights

1) Religious and Political Liberties – First Amendment (religion, speech, press, assembly)

2) Protections Against Arbitrary Police and Court Action – especially Amendments 4, 5, 6, 8

3) Unnamed Rights of the People and States Rights – Amendments 9 and 10

Amendment 9: used to fashion a right to privacy in the contraception use case of Griswold v. Connecticut 1965 (see
section on women and equal rights in the Civil rights chapter, p. 143).

Amendment 10 –reserved powers is the basis for states rights

Notes: The Bill of Right now apply to the states through the process known as incorporation where the Supreme Court
using the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th amendment gradually made the provisions of the Bill of
Rights apply to the states. Incorporation began with a freedom of speech case in 1925, Gitlow v. New York.

Charles Beard An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution (1913):were the framers a conspiratorial economic elite
intent on protecting their personal economic interests or were they merely representing the economic interests of their
states? Did they always agree? Can economic interests conflict? Beard set off a debate. It still continues though more
recent historians take a more pluralist view, that is, the framers represented the interests of their states and they did not
always agree. Hence the reference to the Constitution as a “bundle of compromises.”

The Founding Debate Over Church and State: The Anti-federalists opposed the Constitution, in part, because it did not
expressly condone federal government aid to religion, although states were given more leeway. The proper role of
church and state is a major area of contention in the courts and source of political conflict today.

Motives of the the Framers

Constitutional Reform
A. Reduce separation of powers since it can lead to deadlock and inefficiency.
Proposals: President draws cabinet from Congress; allow president ability to dissolve Congress and call for new
elections at any time; allow Congress to vote “no confidence” in a president and call for new elections; force congress and
the president to run as a team in each congressional district so that a president will have a congressional majority and
end “divided” government. This is called a party government proposal.
B. Reduce the Scope of the Federal Government
Line-item veto (see p. 45); balanced budget amendment; limit appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. These
people feel that the federal government has gotten too powerful vis a vis the states.

Amendment Procedure Box. p. 44

Proposal Ratification
2/3 of both house of Congress 3/4 of state legislatures
or or
2/3 of states ask Congress to call a 3/4 of state conventions
constitutional convention(never used)

Note relationship between extraordinary and nationally distributed majorities ( broad consensus) the case of ERA

Federalist Papers 10 and 51

Federalist #10 (pp. A21-A25)
ostensible theme: problem of factions
theoretical significance: the large republic argument
statement of the problem -- critical period of the 1780s described by the Federalist perspective; for Madison this is the
mortal disease of popular governments

definition of faction: a group in seeking its interests may be advers to the rights of other citizens and the permanent and
aggregate interests of the community

Proposed Solutions
Two methods:
A. Remove causes: 1.destroy liberty (“a cure worse than the disease”)
2.homogeneity (“impracticable”)
B. Control Effect (the solution Madison comes to)

view of Human Nature “The latent causes of faction are sown in the nature of man....”

commercial republic passage: the interests that develop in “civilized nations”

principle task of modern legislation: regulation of interests

views of elected officials: advocates and parties of interests

can’t rely on enlightened statesmen, religion or morality

Two ways to undermine the political (electoral) effectiveness of potential majority factions (p. A23).
1. either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time, must be prevented;
2. or, the majority, having the same interest or passion, must be rendered, by their number and local situation,
unable to act in concert and carry into effect their schemes of oppression.

Key: If the impulse and opportunity to act are allowed to coincide, “it is well known that neither moral nor religious
motives can be relied on as an adequate control.

Madison’s solution relies on the size of republics

democracy v. republic
pure, direct v. representative
small v. large
no cure v. promises the cure for which we are seeking

representation makes possible the large republic; representatives are good in and of themselves -- will be better
governors than the people themselves in a direct democracy; will act as filters to moderate intemperate demands; the
advantages of representatives in large districts

advantages of federalism

Extensiveness: “Extended the sphere....” principle of pluralism and countervailing balance: no one interest will become so
powerful as to oppress the others

Federalist #51 (pp. A26-A29)

Theme: separation of powers; checks and balances

constitutional engineering “so contrive the interior structure of government...”

institutional will and separate selection modes
some deviation with the judiciary
No branch should have the control over the salaries of the other branches.

Human nature passages “new science of politics”

“ambition must be made to counteract ambition”
“need for auxiliary precautions” Dependence on the people as a check is not enough.
“defect of better motives”
Examples of checks:
bicameralism because of legislative dominance
president’s veto to fortify the office

Two considerations: Protecting the people from oppression from the government.
Simple vs. compound republic (federalism)

Protecting the weaker (smaller part of society) from oppression of the stronger (larger).
Two ways: create a will independent of the people—rejects this
Large republic reiteration of #10 (“multiplicity of interests, multiplicity of sects”)

These notes are no substitute for a reading of the Papers. Also consult the box on The Federalist Papers 10 and 51"
(pp.34-35) and the section on “Government and Human Nature” beginning on p.30.

Enduring Questions

1. View of Human Nature in the Constitution

2. representative democracy and compromise
3. tension between liberty and equality

Reconsidering Who Governs – here the stress is on the distinction between direct and representative democracy which
Madison called a republic.

Wilson and DiIulio also note a literal reading of the Constitution would make Congress the first branch but the
relationships have evolved.

Constitution is flexible about ends. It allows flexibility. Note enormous growth and responsibility of the federal
government.

With respect to women’s equality, the authors note its evolvement with the 19th amendment and state option (as in
Wyoming) before that.
The Constitution (pp. A4-A29)

Preamble “We the people..” signifies one nation -- Patrick Henry (a leading Antifederalist ) “What right had they [the
Convention] to say ‘We the People.....instead of ‘We the States’?”
Articles
I. Legislative -- Article I, Section 8 Enumerated
a. economic(taxing, borrowing and coining money, regulation of interstate and foreign commerce, copyrights and
patents)
b. national security (declaring war, raising an army and navy, punishing piracies, erection of forts, magazines, arsenals)

Implied Powers derived from the elastic clause (“necessary and proper” clause -- a basis for expansion of federal power)

II. Executive -- Section 2 and 3 (presidential powers)

III. Judiciary -- Supreme Court and lower federal courts Congress creates
Note judicial review is not mentioned

IV. ‘Federal’ article -- What states owe each other (e.g. extradition) and guarantee clause

V. Amendment procedure -- Proposal: 2/3 of both houses of Congress or 2/3 of states ask
Congress to call a constitutional convention

Ratification: 3/4 of state legislature or 3/4 of state conventions

Note the reasons for extraordinary majorities

VI. National supremacy and no religious test for federal office

VII. Ratification: 9 states by convention

Amendments

Bill of Rights 1-X (1791)

I. Religion (establishment, free exercise), speech, press, assembly
II. Right to bear arms
III. Quartering of soldiers
IV. Unreasonable searches and seizures
V. Rights of persons accused of crime
VI. Jury trial, counsel (note Gideon v. Wainwright 1963)
VII. Civil suits in federal courts
VIII. Excessive bail, cruel, and unusual punishments
IX. Unenumerated rights (e.g. Griswold v. Connecticut 1965)
X. Reserved powers of the states
XI. Restrictions on suits against states (1798)
XII. Electoral college reform “distinct ballots” (1804)
XIII. Abolition of slavery (1865)
XIV. Citizenship for ex-slaves and descendents; use of due process clause to protect business
firms(legal persons) from government regulation during laissez faire era (Lochner v. New York 1905); incorporation
beginning with Gitlow v. New York 1925 -- note ruling in Barron v. Baltimore 1833; use of the equal protection
clause in civil rights -- e.g. Brown v.Board of Education 1954 [1868]
XV. Voting rights cannot be abridged by race (1870)
XVI. Income tax (1913)
XVII. Direct election of U.S. senators (1913)
XVIII. Prohibition (1918)
XIX. Women’s suffrage (1920)
XX. Inauguration moved up; end of lame-duck Congress (1933)
XXI. Repeal of Prohibition (1933)
XXII. Two-term limitation for President (1951)
XXIII. Electoral votes for D.C. (1961)
XXIV. Poll tax banned (1964)
XXV. Presidential disability (1967)
XXVI. 18 year old vote (1971)
XXVII. Congressional pay rise limitation -- a “Rip Van Winkle” ratification (p.45)
There was no time limit for ratification in 1789; today usually 7 years (1992)
 Federalism Chapter 3

Definition: a division of powers and constitutional authority between a national and constituent
(e.g. provincial, state) governments. Each level retains sovereignty, that is, one level may not abolish the other.

Emphasis in recent years on devolution and block grants (see definitions on pages 66, and 70-71)

Question of Boundaries “perpetually arising” -- see McCulloch v. Maryland

Typology of constitutional systems: federal; confederal; unitary see box; graphic (pp. 53; 60)

Federalism and the American Founding

a new hybrid: pre v. post 1787 meaning, see pp. 53-54

Federalist #10 diversity and extensiveness: federalism as a response

Federalist #28, 46: different layers of government for different purposes

Tenth Amendment -- reserved powers

The States and the Constitution, see Box, p. 57. Note the emerging controversy over the “Full faith and credit” clause
(Article IV, Section 1) and the potential of gay marriage.

Elastic Language: Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, and Article VI; note potential conflict with the Tenth Amendment -- issue
of boundaries perpetually arising
Hamilton v. Jefferson -- broad (loose) construction v. strict construction

Madison in Federalist #45 presents us with an almost layer cake definition: “The powers generated by the proposed
Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are
numerous and indefinite.”

Debate over the meaning of federalism: major constitutional issue up to the Civil War

Supreme Court emerges as arbiter

John Marshall Chief Justice (1801- 1835) broad constructionist, Federalist

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) two key constitutional questions
1. Could Congress create the Bank?
2. Could Maryland tax the Bank?

States Rights

Antifederalists
Alien and Sedition Acts 1797, 1798 -- Jefferson and Madison respond in the “Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions”
advocate interposition

John C. Calhoun -- theory of concurrent majorities; 1830 tariff controversy; nullification

secession Civil War 1861-65; Texas v. White 1869 “one indissoluble union”

dual federalism: intra v. interstate commerce; e.g. whisky in original package was inter-state; sold retail intrastate; key
case in child labor restrictions Hammer v. Dagenhart 1918

constitutional revolution of 1937 -- expansion of the commerce clause

NLRB vs. Jones Laughlin Steel Corp. 1937

State Sovereignty

Wilson and DiIulio write: “It would be a mistake to think that the doctrine of dual federalism is entirely dead.” (p. 57). They
are referring to the resuscitation of the Tenth Amendment in recent years by the Supreme Court. The conservative
members of the Court have put a brake on the expansion of federal powers using the elastic language of the Constitution.
Key Cases
U.S. v. Lopez (1995)-- Congress exceeded its commerce clause power by banning the carrying of guns 1,000 feet from a
school. Criminal justice and the banning of guns falls within the purview of the state’s police powers (p. 59) – state
powers that promote the health, safety, and morals of the people of a state. States can enact and enforce criminal
codes, require children to go the school and citizens be vaccinated, restrict pornography, activities of prostitutes.

United States v. Morrison (2000) Violence Against Women Act of 1994 overturned – violence against women do not
substantially affect inter-state commerce.

Printz vs. U.S. (1997) – Court invalidated federal law that required local police to conduct background checks on all gun
purchasers. This was a violation of the Tenth Amendment by requiring states to carry out a federal regulatory program.

States may enact provisions for initiatives, referendum, and recall (definitions on p. 63 – relate to direct democracy, ch.
1). Note the California recall election October 2003.

Local Governance
City or municipal corporation is chartered by state
a)special act charter – lists what a specific city can and cannot do
b) general-act charters: different powers for different classes (usually based on
population) of cities within a state

Dillon’s rule: city powers narrowly specified by the state

home rule charter–allows a city government to do anything not prohibited by charter or state law.

City laws: ordinances

Local governments: counties (usually between a state and city)

special district governments

school districts

Federal-State Relations -- “cooperative federalism”

Evaluations: Federalism Good or Bad, pages 60-62.

Laski: “parasitic and poisonous”
Riker: “perpetuation of racism”
Elazar: “laboratories for innovation, flexibility”
Truman: “increased political activity”
Grants-in-Aid
land grant colleges; public works projects; growth in 1930s, 1960s
reasons: 1. tariffs, income tax
2. surpluses
3. borrowing capacity of the federal government
4. pork barrel politics -- Sen. Muskie and Model Cities

grants to cities, community groups -- “federal aid junkies” – In 2006, 30% of state and local spending and 17% of Federal
budget goes to aid states

Controversy over Homeland Security money – Wyoming received 7 times per capita more than New York State.

clients, mobilization and lobbying-- intergovernmental lobby

types (pages 66): categorical often matching requirement designed for a specific purpose most conditions attached

block consolidation of grants into a broader general grants-- gives state and local officials more discretion

revenue sharing return of tax receipts back to the states-- allows state and local officials maximum discretion(1972-1987)

Rivalry among states -- formulas based in part on population -- importance of the census -- movement from the Northeast
 of the Sunbelt -- implications for representation and the electoral college

Debate over federal controls mandates note current debate over unfunded mandates;
conditions of aid (pp. 68-69)

activism of courts and public interest groups

Slowdown in federal money and state response

innovations in welfare, education, health care, e.g. Oregon’s rationing scheme

Morton Grodzins: a student of federalism has argued that we have moved from layer-cake federalism to marble-cake
federalism

Types of grants and the partisan divide (pp. 70ff)

Devolution (pp. 70ff): The current effort to scale back the size and activities of the national government and to shift
responsibility for a wide range of domestic programs from Washington to the states. It has been most evident in the
areas of welfare, health care and job training.

104th Congress (1994-96) Republican dominated -- 1st time since 1954

Types of Block Grants

operational: running state programs
capital: infrastructure and construction
entitlement: income transfer

AFDC: transferred to block grant; Medicaid still a federal-state partnership

AFDC was devolved; Medicaid was not

Reason: Larger constituency for Medicaid -- including middle-class elderly; nursing homes come under the Medicaid
program

Second order devolution: flow of power from states to local government

Third order devolution: increased role of non-profits and private groups in policy implementation
(e.g., increasing debate over faith-based organizations, Charitable Choice, see box on page 72).

Reasons for Devolution

a. Deficits
b. Ideological mistrust of federal government
c. State innovations
Congress and Federalism

devolution has made headway because of localist orientation of Congress; political parties are weak

diversity and fragmentation keeps American federalism alive

American Federalism: Competing Values

uniform policies v. personal freedom

rational policies v. cultural variation
efficiency v. diversity and local experimentation

Page 72 “What Would You Do”? Attempts to convey variation in public policy in a federal system – the topics focuses on
the different approaches the federal government and states take on the issue of faith-based initiatives (in light of recent
Court decisions on Church-State relations).

Reconsidering Who Governs?

1. Where is sovereignty located – federal and state governments share sovereignty – dual sovereignty. Note different policy
domains and time perspectives – e.g., 1780s v. 2000.

2. How is power divided – devolution revolution and the re-emergence of the Tenth Amendment after a period of
federal government expansion.
Growth of federal government’s power vis-à-vis the states; some evidence that the Supreme Court seeks to
effect more of a balance on the basis of state sovereignty decisions like U.S. v. Lopez.

Reconsidering To What Ends

What issues ought to be left to the states?
 American Political Culture (Chapter 4)

political culture -- consensus on fundamental beliefs; “ a patterned set of ways of thinking about how politics and
governing ought to carried out; fundamental assumptions about how the political process ought to be carried out (see box
on pg. 78). Note distinction with ideology. People of different ideologies (e.g. American liberals and conservatives can
share a political culture)
Political subcultures: distinctive regional, religious, ethnic groups within the larger political culture

Foreign observers to U.S. -- e.g. Tocqueville, Bryce, Myrdal -- a source of profound insights

Tocqueville, Democracy in America (1835) what makes the American experiment in democracy work?
a. environmental factors
b. Absence of feudal tradition
c. moral and intellectual characteristics (“Habits of the heart”)

Elements of American Political Culture

a. Liberty -- negative liberty; freedom from; individual rights e.g. Bill of Rights
b. Equality ( of Opportunity) note distinction with Equality of Condition or Results -- basis for
egalitarianism; redistribution of wealth; the welfare state
c. Democracy: accountability and majority rule
d. Civic Duty: participation; importance of voting rights
e. Individual Responsibility: an obstacle to the development of the welfare state

Three questions about this political culture.

1. How do we know that the American people share these beliefs? Can infer existence of values by books read,
election results, political speeches, commentaries by famous foreigners.
2. If these values are important, how can we explain the existence in our society of behavior obviously
inconsistent with them—e.g., denial of civil rights and equal opportunity. Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma (1944) --
a sociological study about race relations in the U.S. and the conflict of American Creed (belief in equality of opportunity)
and American political behavior. Proved that beliefs are important, if inconsistency is made known people will realign
behavior to conform with values.
3. Conflict within the consensus. Civil War; conflict between different values within the creed—equality of opportunity
vs. liberty.

Empirical verification of consensus of the core elements of American political culture is reflected in the persistence of
“Americanism” in the American vocabulary.

The Economic System.

There is a long-standing commitment to individualism and personal responsibility in the US.

The Lynds’ Middletown studies 1920s; replicated in the 1970s-90s; referred to on p. 83.

Responsibility for Success or Failure

Percentage of High School Students Agreeing
Statement 1924 1977 1989 1999

It is entirely the fault of a man 47 48 55 65

himself if he does not succeed.

The reason for economic 30 40 38 44

Inequality is social injustice.

Since the Progressive (c. 1900-1920) and New Deal (1930s) eras there has been growing support for regulation of
business within a basically market system of free enterprise

Americans are more willing to tolerate economic inequality than political inequality.

They believe in maintaining “equality of opportunity” in the economy but not “equality of results.”

Some scholars have interpreted individualistic values as “symbolic racism” – a kind of plausible camouflage for anti-black
attitudes. There is a debate among scholars on this issue – Kinder, Sears vs. Sniderman, Hagen (p. 80).
Cross-Cultural Comparisons

(a) The Political System

Sweden: constitutional democracy but more deferential than participatory

Americans emphasize individualism, competition, equality in political, economic, and social relations.

In Japan social harmony, respect for hierarchy are emphasized.

Reference to the Civic Culture – Americans had higher sense of civic duty and competence than citizens in Germany,
Italy, Mexico. Voting participation lagged but Americans participate in other ways. See Table 4.2 (p. 83) and Figure 4.1
(p. 85) which compare American political cultural attitudes with the attitudes of citizens in other countries.

Trust in government has declined since the 1960s.

(b) The Economic System from a Cross Cultural Perspective

Verba- Orren Swedish-U.S. comparison show that Swedish politicians and union leaders were more in favor of economic
equality and putting limits on income than their U.S. counterparts.

Commitment to Free Enterprise -- notions of equality of opportunity rather than equality of results U.S. and Swedish
example

Data from the Orren-Verba study

Income Equality in the Sweden and the U.S.

Income Equality in the Sweden and the U.S.

Political Party Leaders Union Leaders
Social Democrats Democrats Sweden U.S.

Equality of Results 21% 9% 14% 4%

Equal Pay 58 12 68 11
Favor Top Limit 44 17
51
13
on Income
Income Ratio 2:1 15:1 2:1 11:1

This type of study is used to underscore Americans’ commitment to free enterprise -- notions of equality of opportunity
rather than equality of results.

Sources of American Political Culture

A. Founding Experience -- devotion to individualism; preoccupation with rights, Bill of Rights (negative freedom);
Lockean social contract ideas; distrust of authority and of people wielding authoritiy. Puritanical and biblical roots; original
sin and human depravity. constitutionalism and limited government; loyal opposition Federalists v. Jeffersonian
Democratic—Republicans. 1800 election --great test of trusting others (opponents) with power.

B. Religion-- important relationship between religion and American democracy -- Tocqueville saw this -- despite First
Amendment U.S. is a more religious society than most European nations -- see Tables displayed below. Americans
are more likely to believe in God and attend religious services.

Religious Beliefs in America and Europe

Percentage Agreeing
Statement U.S. GB Germany Italy France

Never doubt in existence of God. 60 31 20 56 29

Prayer is an important part 77 37 44 69 32

of my daily life.

There are clear guidelines 79 65 54 56 64

about what is good and evil.

Religion in America Today

Percentage of Adult Americans
Believe in God 96

Say they have a personal relationship 80

with God

Never doubt God’s existence 79

Say they are seeking to grow in 76

religious faith

Pray at least daily 75

Are a member of a church, synagogue, 64

mosque, or other organized religious group

Say religion can solve all or most 61

of today’s problems

Attend worship services more 54

than once a month

The Civic Role of Religion: Tocqueville saw religion as essential to civic life; but its influence was indirect not state
sponsored. Tocqueville’s ideas have been updated by a leading American political scientist Robert Putnam in his
influential book Bowling Alone (pp. 90-91). Putnam notes a decline in American civic life and “social capital” – resources
that are contributed to community betterment. Research by economist Arthur Brooks show that religious people are more
likely to give money to charity than seculars as well as volunteer their time. This “greater giving” by religious people holds
when the recipients of the charity are non-religious organizations as well as religious. Religious groups are major sources
of social capital – seedbeds of volunteering and philanthropy. They help to mitigate individualism in American life.
Putnam’s data indicate that fewer Americans were joining voluntary associations, including religious groups. The book
sparked a debate in American social science. What does it mean to be “bowling alone”?

Religion and Politics: Despite official separation, there has been an interplay historically between these two spheres of
social life. A religious revival known as the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s led to notions of America as
God’s “chosen nation. The clergy supported the American Revolution. Religious leaders and ideas were involved in the
struggle against slavery (many abolitionists were motivated by religion) resulting in the Civil War (1861-65) and the
temperance movement, which led to the 18th amendment (1918). The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s
was rooted in the black churches and gained moral authority from religion. Martin Luther King, Jr. and many of the
leaders were ministers. Conservative Christians are an important constituency of the Republican Party and have been
active in politics since the 1980s. Faith based programs which would allow religious organizations to deliver social
services have entered the policy debate with the 2000 election. The public expresses both support and reservations
about faith-based programs. Americans’ general feelings about religion (sometimes called civil religion, ceremonial
deism, general religion, or public religion) were apparent in the reaction to the 9th circuit federal appeals court ruling that
ruled that the phrase “under God” violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment. The case is still to be heard
by the Supreme Court.

Protestantism and individualism: Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1907) protestant
culture despite separation of church and state; notion of the work ethic

congregational church structure: miniature political systems; participant religious culture; conducive to democracy and a
participant civic culture
C. Family as transmitter e.g. egalitarianism of American family; freedom of American children; democratic political
values are transmitted. Party identification is perhaps the most important political identity transmitted through the
socialization process.

D. Absence of class consciousness -- historically Marxist and socialist parties have had little impact even in the
Depression ridden 1930s.

Reference to Horatio Alger stories P. 87.

The Culture War
since 1960s: explosive issues of abortion, gay rights, drug use, school prayer, pornography. Wilson and DiIulio point out
that there are two culture classes ( orthodox and progressive ). Note their application to abortion conflict; “curriculum of
inclusion” and the firing of Joseph Fernandez; controversy of the decriminalization of some drugs and the funding by NEA
of
“obscene art”.

Wilson and DiIulio point out that there are two culture classes ( orthodox and progressive ). This idea doesn’t make
sense to Marxist, who see economic class as the basic division in society.
These issues are difficult to compromise. They are about fundamental beliefs and morality.

Ways in which the culture wars differ from other political disputes (taxes, business regulation, foreign policy).
1. Money is not at stake.
2. Compromises are almost impossible to arrange;
3. the conflict is more profound. It is animated by deep differences in people’s beliefs about private and public
morality. That is the standards that ought to govern individual behavior and social arrangements. Is not just about
what kinds of policies ought to be adopted, but what kind of country we ought to live in.
Orthodox view: People who believe that moral rules are derived from the commands of God or the laws of nature,
commands and laws that are relatively clear, and independent of individual moral preferences. They are likely to believe
that traditional morality is more important than individual liberty and should be enforced by government and communal
norms.

Progressive view: People who believe that moral rules are derived in part from an individual’s beliefs and the
circumstances of modern life. They are likely to favor government tolerance and the protection of individual choice.

Reasons for the importance of the culture wars these days. Increase in the progressive and secular camp;
teledemocracy; direct mail, talk radio, C-SPAN, fax machines, greater mobilization

There is an important scholarly debate over the culture wars. Political scientists like Morris Fiorina believe that the culture
war is a myth at the mass level. Political leaders and activists are polarized over culture issues but most Americans are
in the middle.

Other scholars like Alan Abramowitz note that more people are choosing party affiliation on the basis of the parties’
positions on important cultural and social issues. The more traditionalist or orthodox will tend toward the Republican
Party; progressives toward the Democratic Party.
(Mis)trust in Government
Figure 4.2 p. 90 note difference between Eisenhower era and the mid 1960s
explain growing mistrust in government -- Vietnam, counterculture, disappointment with progress in civil rights, Watergate
and other government scandals

Civil Society (p. 91).

Mistrust in government has been linked to wider declines in social and civic engagement. Note Putnam’s Bowling Alone
studies. Figure 4.3 shows a general decline in the civic health index (e.g. membership in civic groups, following the news,
trust in government, social interactions with family and friends). This can impede the development of social capital.

Political tolerance
e.g. First Amendment liberties
Democratic politics depends on citizens being reasonably tolerant of the opinions and behavior of others.
relatively tolerant society but periods of intolerance
e.g. nativism 19th century; Red Scare 1920s (e.g. Sacco and Vanzetti); McCarthyism (1950s)
Democracy doesn’t require perfect tolerance: but it does require a political culture that allows for the discussion of ideas
and the election of rulers in an atmosphere reasonably free of oppression.
Prothro-Grigg support for civil liberties -- tolerance in the abstract not always in the concrete
McClosky-Brill: elite vs. mass public support for civil liberties
Increasing tolerance since the 1960s
Question concerning Political Tolerance: If most people dislike one or another group strongly enough to deny it certain
political rights that we usually take for granted, how is it that such groups (and such rights) survive.
Reasons:
1. most of us don’t act on our beliefs.
2. Pluralistic intolerance—even though most of us are ready to deny some group its rights, most of us usually can’t
agree on which group that should be. Relate to Madison Federalist number 10.
3. Role of Federal Judges and Courts insulated from public opinon
Charitable Choice memo – should social services be contracted out to religious organizations?
The church-state question– Does involving faith-based organizations in the provision of social services with government
funds cross a permissible line between church and state. Using faith-based organizations in charitable work was an
initiative promoted by the Bush administration.

Reconsidering Who Governs

Change from both the 1950s and 1960s. Not as trustful as the 1950s but the Vietnam War era fallout seemed to be over.
There was a temporary surge of trust after September 11th. The situation in Iraq may re-kindle it a bit but not to the 1960s
dimensions.

Enduring value: Equality in the U.S. leans toward equality of opportunity rather than results. Income disparity has gotten
wider. The culture is still individualistic.

Reconsidering Ends: There is an emphasis on procedural rights. This is evident in solicitude by the Courts of the rights
of persons accused of crimes; note the rulings on the rights of prisoners, detainees as a result of the war on terror.