Voting in America

The first and last thing to take away from Chapter 9 as it concerns the AP Government exam is this...
Americans don't vote. (See Table 9-1 on p.315 and Table 9-1 on p.316 for evidence)

Reasons people tend not to vote
- not informed on the issues
- negative campaigning
- rational ignorance effect
- poor efficacy

Ideas for increasing voter turnout
- easing registration requirements
- move voting days
- allow for online voting

Then there is the issue of the electoral college
Read p. 329-332 for a better understanding of the electoral college


What follows is a narrative on running for public office. It addresses campaigning and voting.
Enjoy.

-------

So you want to run for public office. Great! We need good people in public service.
First, you need to organize a campaign. Campaigning is all about getting your message out.

How do you do that? 

Locally: door-to-door. Regionally/Nationally: travel and radio/tv ads
You also need staff, unless you plan to do the whole thing yourself. Oh, and you also need some 'bling' to help spread the word and get your name out there. You know...buttons, bumper stickers, yard signs.

Wait...this sounds like its going to cost some money.

Why, yes it is. Luckily, you can go out there and get people to donate funds to your campaign.

Sweet. I'll just find a really rich guy to cut me a check.

Not so fast. There are rules regarding fundraising. They are called campaign finance laws and they put certain limits on raising money for campaigns. Money donated directly to an individual campaign is known as hard money and is limited in the amount that can be donated. Money donated to a political party or political action committee however is known as soft money and has far fewer limits on it.

So you're saying I can get around it. And by the way, isn't limiting the ability to donate money to a political campaign a violation of the 1st amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances?

Whoa there big fella! If you want to get into laws and Supreme Court case law on campaign financing, why don't you look up McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform, Buckley v Valeo, and the Citizens United case. But aside from that let's move this campaign train down the track.

Once you are organized, you have to formally nominate yourself for elected office. This involves paperwork and either a filing fee or getting a requisite number of signatures in support of your candidacy.

Sounds easy enough.

What? You think you're the only one? There will probably be multiple candidates you choose to run. Probably multiple candidates within your own party. That is, unless your seeking a position on a non-partisan governing body.

A what?

Nevermind. Let's move on. You're going to need to devote some of your resources to winning your party nomination. This is usually done one of two ways. Through a party caucus or a primary election. Most primary elections are direct primaries in which the voters select the candidate.

How do I convince them I am the best candidate?

Well, you need to know who you are talking to. Who is choosing the candidate? Is it all potential voters, which happens in an open primary? Or is it a closed primary in which only registered voters of your party choose who they want to represent the party in the big general election? Obviously, in a closed primary, you need to speak the language of the party faithful and the hardcore base of the party to win their support. In an open primary, you would want to be more moderate and attractive to as many potential voters as possible.

Seems like there is a lot of strategy. 

You bet. You'll probably want to hire a professional for that.

Spend more money??!

Yep. Welcome to politics. If you are good enough to be able to win the party primary, then you must prepare for the general election against the chosen candidate of the other party. And now you really have to appeal to as many possible voters as you can. And really get the message out.

So be more moderate and spend more money?

Now you've got it! Keep in mind that the objective is just to get a plurality of support. That means, just get more votes than everyone else running for that position and you win. You don't even have to get over 50%. Just the plurality. Try and convince them early though. Because while most people will simply go to the polling location for their precinct on election day, a good number of people choose to vote early and some vote absentee.

So I should get out the moderate message of who I am and what changes I am going to bring into office early and often? And that's the key to winning elected office?

If only it were that simple. Even those who do that the best won't win. That's because voter behavior is a beast. The 1st thing to keep in mind is that most Americans don't bother to vote.

What? Why? This is America, isn't it? Why wouldn't they vote?

As Americans, we are fat, dumb, lazy, and happy. We would rather sit on the couch eating Doritos while we watch stuff blow up than actually get off of the couch and go down the precinct polling place to cast a vote.

That's terrible.

God bless America. No...really... God bless America. We believe in individual liberty so much, we're not even going to make you vote. Vote; don't vote; what business is that of the government? So long as you play by the rules.

What are the rules of voting?

Well, you have to be 18, a citizen of the state you are going to vote in, and you have to be registered to vote by the deadline before that election. Unless you are in North Dakota, where you don't even have to registered.

Why don't you have to be registered in North Dakota?

I don't know. Probably because there are only like ten guys named Hank and a couple of moose living in the whole state so if someone drops by and wants to vote, they're glad to have the company. Its cold up there.

Okay then.

So even if someone is registered and actually gets off their couch to go and vote, then you have to deal with the human element of voting. Despite the message that you have been trying to get out, voters rely heavily on a few things that influence their voting patterns. Party identification, their own views on the issues, your background and their background. Can they relate to you? Do they feel like you understand the issues that are important to them? Even if they think you do, some people are single-issue voters and your stance on one issue can cause them not to vote for you even though they really like everything else about you. And then there is your party. There are some people who will vote for, literally, anybody so long as their is a blue-D or a red-R next to their name. It doesn't matter what you say. They won't vote for you. You could be facing a goat in a hockey jersey in this election and they would vote for the goat because the goat represents their party.

So why do we do this?

Because of the opportunity to serve your community and to try and make things better for people. Look, elections can be rough. Negative campaigns win. People don't get registered on time and they don't vote. Money seems to have undue influence. Its enough to make anyone cynical. But campaigns and elections inform the voters and allow them to express their views on what should be done for society. That is the essence of the democratic process.

Alright then....let's do this.

Political Parties

Political parties lay claim to different areas along the political spectrum. From the extreme left to the extreme right and all points in between. The most successful parties are those that are able to lay claim to the most space on the political spectrum, thereby, appealing to the highest number of possible voters.

When the Constitution was written, there were no political parties in the United States. There were, however, ideological factions. While the Framers knew there was no way to avoid faction (see Federalist No.10) , Washington feared that organized parties would, well....., read for yourself above.

One thing the Framers did not anticipate was the fact that organized parties would be created so quickly. The creation of the two-party system was a natural reaction to the electoral system of the United States of America; a winner-take-all system. 

Two-party systems aren't the only way to operate though. 

There are One-party systems (China, Cuba) and there are Multi-party systems (India, Italy)

There are five functions that political parties in America serve according to the text.

- Recruit candidates for public office

- Organize and run elections

- Present alternative policies to the electorate

- Accept responsibility for operating government

- Act as organized opposition to the party in power

Each political party has its own hierarchy and structure. (precinct -> ward -> county -> state -> national)

Debbie Wasserman Schultz - Chair - DNC

Reince Priebus - Chair - RNC

The good and the bad of political parties:

- limits extremism

- provide stability

- build consensus

- identifiable 'brand'

- can't fulfill all promises

- big party contributors hold overwhelming influence

- gridlock

Trends in party politics in America

- Americans tend to prefer divided government

- Americans have trended towards ticket-splitting more often as of late

- There has been a cycle created between political polarization and 'safe seats'

While 3rd parties never win in America, there are few things to note about 3rd parties.

- the limited success of third parties (Table 8-1 on p.302)

- circumstances of the time create the need for a third party (Table 8-2 on p.303)

- strong personalities can be the catalyst that creates splinter parties from a traditional party

Interest Groups

Who are interest groups and what do they do?
  association of people who hold similar views and/or goals
- interest groups organize people
    organize letter writing campaigns, demonstrations
- interest groups encourage and provide means for political participation
     GOTV campaigns, group engagement in political dialogue, "checkbook participation"
- interest groups supply information to the public and to policy makers
     spreading literature, lobbying Congress, informative advertisements

The Iron Triangle

Why do Americans join interest groups?
- solidary incentives (sense of belonging to a group)
- material incentives (economic benefit or opportunity)
- purposive incentives (strong belief in the cause)


Various types of interest groups:
Economic Interests
- agricultural interests
   National Potato Council, Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association
- business interests
    US Chamber of Commerce, American Wind Energy Association
- labor interests
    United Auto Workers
- cause-based interests
    Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Texans for Life Coalition
- societal interests
    American Association of Retired Persons, National Organization for Women
- professional interests
    American Medical Association, American Bar Association
Environmental Interests
Foreign Interests

What interest groups do:
- endorse candidates
- lobby elected officials (note section on lobbyists on p.267-268 of the text)
- inform the public
- file lawsuits

What they don't do:
- donate money to political campaigns
   Political Action Committees (PACs) are created for the purpose of raising money and contributing money to candidates for their campaigns

What makes an interest group effective?
- size and resources
- effective leadership
- cohesiveness

The good and the bad of interest groups:
- give a voice to minority political interests
- too much influence
- emotional, narrowly-focused interest vs. good of the country

Public Opinion, Political Socialization, and the Media

The content that follows corresponds with Chapters 6 and 11 in the text.

Public opinion
    collection of views shared by a segment of society on issues of interest or concern

Who is 'the public'?
   - the totality of the populace
      i.e. - all Americans
     often opinions of this grouping are led by the actions of leaders

           

        --or--

           

   - smaller public groups
      i.e. - female Americans; black Americans
     often opinions of these groups drive the public agenda








Why do we care about their opinions?
   public opinion helps shape public policy in the United States

How do we know the opinions of 'the public'?
  - writing letters to elected officials
  - speaking at a public hearing
  - public organizations
  - voting trends
  - public opinion polls


Political socialization
  the process by which people acquire their political beliefs

Influences on an individual's political socialization
- family
- peer group (school/work)
- age
- race
- gender
- religion
- socio-economic status

(See Table 6-1 on p.219 of the text)


Impact of the media on public beliefs and opinion
- covers political happenings
- monitors and shapes public agenda by way of what it covers (and doesn't cover)

Function of media in America
- entertain
- report the news
- identify public problems
- socialize new generations
- provide a political forum
- make profit*

Media used to be small. Now we have mass media.
Media used to be openly biased. Then objective journalism was en vogue. Today, shaded journalism.
News agencies used to engage in broadcasting. Now they engage in narrowcasting.

Common criticism of the media
- bias in reporting
- bias in story selection
- factual inaccuracy
- media consolidation


Measuring public opinion through polling
Straw polls have been used for years to gauge public opinion.
For an accurate measure of public opinion, one must conduct a scientific poll. This is done by:
- determining your sample universe
- selecting an appropriate-sized random sample
- using carefully crafted, non-leading questions
- measuring results and determining the margin of error (roughly 3-4% is acceptable)

Civil Rights

The right for all people to have fair and equal treatment under the law. The Constitutional basis for civil rights case law is found in the 1st, 5th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments.

Topics in civil rights:

- equal protection clause
   Amendment XIV: nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws 

   As we have said, this becomes the basis for the incorporation of civil liberties and civil rights to all people in all jurisdictions throughout the United States. This is why the government cannot discriminate. Or can it??


- basis for acceptable discrimination
  The courts have determined that there are acceptable times when the government can make a reasonable distinction between people. Therefore, the government can discriminate. However, if the government is going to discriminate, the Court will review the discrimination using one of three tests.
     - Rational Basis Test
              Are reasonable methods used to accomplish a legitimate goal of government? 
              ( Example: age limits on driving)
     - Intermediate Scrutiny Test
             Same question but often with cases involving gender discrimination
             ( US v Virginia ) ( Example: selective service )
     - Strict Scrutiny Test
              Same question but: 1) a fundamental right is being restricted     and 2) involves race/origin
              ( Korematsu v US )  ( Loving v Virginia )


- segregation (de facto & de jure)
    Segregation was the law in many states throughout the south from the post-Reconstruction era through the mid 20th Century. These statutes were referred to as Jim Crow laws and constitute what we call segregation de jure (segregation by way of law). These laws were upheld, even by the courts, until the 1950's. While segregation de jure started to be repealed by way of Court rulings and Congressional acts of the 50's and 60's, certain economic and social facts remained and left us with segregation de facto (segregation as a matter of fact).


- Civil Rights Act of 1964
    The most sweeping legislation that addressed the issue of civil rights in the United States. The major provisions of the act were as follows (laid out on p.178 of the text) :
 1) outlawed arbitrary discrimination in voter registration
 2) barred discrimination in public accommodations whose operations affect interstate commerce
 3) authorized federal govt to sue to desegregate public schools and facilities
 4) expanded power of Civil Rights Commission and extended its life
 5) provided for withholding of federal funds from programs administered in discriminatory way
 6) established right to equality of opportunity in employment
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act became cornerstone of employment discrimination law.


- Plessy & Brown
    Plessy v Ferguson  - established the doctrine of 'separate but equal' as precedent
    Brown v Board of Education  - determined that 'separate but equal' was inherently not equal


- extending equal protection
    To women:
      Equal Pay Act of 1963
      Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
      Meritor Savings v Vinson
 
    To Hispanics:
       Hernandez v Texas
       Voting Rights Act of 1975

     To the disabled:
        Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

     To gays/lesbians:
        reversal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
        US v Windsor
        

- affirmative action
   What is affirmative action?
     Policies whereby institutions and employers provide opportunities for members of historically underrepresented groups
   What is the government and Court opinion on affirmative action?
      President Johnson's Executive Order #11246 (1965)
      Regents of the University of California v Bakke
      Johnson v Transportation Agency
      Gratz v Bollinger
      Fisher v University of Texas

      

Civil Liberties

Instead of making multiple posts, I have included the entire topic of civil liberties in this one posting. It is long, but since it is all so related, I find it appropriate.

Remember the ratification battle for the Constitution and the demand that Antifederalists had for "guarantees" of their liberties. This battle, of course, produced the Bill of Rights.

Bill of Rights - 1st ten amendment to the Constitution; protect civil liberties and civil rights

Civil liberties
   freedom to think and act protected from government abuse
      - regards personal actions in eyes of government
      - protected from abuse; can be limited

Civil rights
   right of fair and equal status/treatment for all people
      - regards status as person in eyes of government
      - right of fair treatment; much more difficult to limit

Bill of Rights

Civil liberties are the most litigated part of the Constitution. Since the Constitution is somewhat gray by nature, the openness to interpretation that many of the amendments exhibit leave it wide open to challenges over intent and application. The heart of these amendments are the liberties of the individual people. But what if they contradict? What if one person exercising their liberties interferes with another person exercising theirs? Or with the government attempting to carry out its responsibilities?

Where do your liberties end and mine begin?

This is why the study of civil liberties and civil rights is wrapped up in case law.

What does the 14th Amendment have to do with the Bill of Rights?

The 14th is how the Bill of Rights becomes applicable to the states. Prior to the 14th, they only apply to citizens of the United States, not the individual states. 

Read 14th Amendment

 - citizenship clause

 - due process clause

 - equal protection clause

Again, it is up to individuals to challenge institutions if they feel that their rights or liberties are being violated. Because of the 14th, the Bill of Rights has been applied to the states on a case-by-case basis. This is the process of selective incorporation.

(See Table 4-1 on p.125 to see the incorporation process.)

The most cherished and argued about Amendment to the Constitution is the 1st Amendment.

Amendment I: 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

Religion:
The Constitution does not say anything about 'separation of church & state'. That phrase is taken from a writing of Jefferson  in which he said that he believed that the 1st Amendment created "a wall of separation between Church and State". What the Constitution does say, and what the federal court system has been tasked with interpreting regarding religion is:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (establishment clause) nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof  (free exercise clause)
Establishment clause:
  Lynch v Donnelly
  McCreary County v ACLU
  Van Orden v Perry
  Everson v Board of Education
  Engel v Vitale
  Lemon V Kurtzman
  Wallace v Jaffree
Free exercise clause:
  Reynolds v US
  Minersville School District v Gobitis
  WV State Board of Ed v Barnette
  Wisconsin v Yoder

Speech & Press:
Congress cannot make a law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. But, again, that is not absolute. There are limits. The Court has traditionally protected individuals from defamation by way of slander (spoken) and libel (print). The Court has also traditionally protected the government in its attempts to prevent treason and sedition.
Speech:
  Schenck v US
  Whitney v California
  Brandenburg v Ohio
Press:
  New York Times Co v Sullivan
  Reno v ACLU
  Near v Minnesota
  New York Times Co v US
Symbolic Speech:
  Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District
  Texas v Johnson

Assembly & Petition:
Congress cannot abridge the right of the people peaceably to assemble. The people also have the right to petition their government for a redress of grievances. (Hence, all of those lobbyists people love to hate are legit)
  DeJonge v Oregon
  Edwards v South Carolina
  NAACP v Alabama


Amendment II: 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

The Right to Bear Arms:
  US v Miller
  Heller v Washington DC










Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

Protection Against Unreasonable Search & Seizure
  - law enforcement must have a warrant or probable cause to search and/or seize
  - "plain view" doctrine
  - evidence obtained via a warrantless search is subject to the exclusionary rule
  - electronic communications have been determined by the Court to be a person's "papers"
  - civil liberties of students are even more limited

Search & Seizure:
  Arizona v Hicks
  Weeks v US
  Mapp v Ohio
  Olmstead v US
  Katz v US
  New Jersey v TLO
  Board of Ed of Pottawatomie Co v Earls


Amendment V: 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

- Grand Jury cluase
- double jeopardy clause
- self-incrimination clause
- due process clause
- eminent domain clause

Due Process:
 Federal government cannot deprive person of life, liberty, or property with the due process of law
substantive due process v procedural due process
procedural due process - correct procedures must be followed (can't make it up as you go)
substantive due process - the laws themselves must be fair
Due process can be denied if the state has a compelling case for it.
  Mackey v Montrym

The 'Right to Privacy'
Like 'separation of church and state', this does not exist as text in the Constitution. However, the Court has upheld its belief that Americans have a right to privacy through their interpretation of the 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th Amendments.
  Olmstead v US
  Griswold v Connecticut
  Roe v Wade
  Planned Parenthood v Casey

The Rights of the accused
Even is charged with an offense, the accused still have certain rights that are retained.
  Miranda v Arizona
  Gideon v Wainwright
  Furman v Georgia
  Gregg v Georgia


Finally, civil liberties terms that are good to know. What do these terms refer to in the context of civil liberties and the Courts interpretation/application thereof?
  exclusionary rule
  lemon test
  clear & present danger test
  bad tendency rule

The Supreme Court

Procedure of the Supreme Court

- October - June/July

- prepare for block of cases, hear block of cases, decide and write opinions on block of cases (rinse, lather, repeat)

- law clerks do tremendous amounts of work for justices

- Court decides which cases it will hear during term (original and appellate)

- Justices must decide which appeals they want to take up (rule of 4)

- Court grants certiorari to cases it will hear

- Justices prepare by reading case briefs, studying law, researching and reviewing precedent

- Court may consult amicus briefs in preparation for oral arguments

- Oral arguments before the Court (30 minutes per side); Justices pepper with questions

- Justices meet behind closed doors to review/discuss case

- Chief Justice assigns duty of writing majority (if not unanimous) and dissenting opinions

- Many justices often offer concurring opinions

- Court opinions are detailed legal explanations of reasoning for the decision that was reached

- Opinions of case become part of Court precedent

                         

The process of appointing a Supreme Court nominee is the same as what we have examined before regarding judicial appointments. However, the harshness of the critique of the nominee is much greater.

- legal expertise

- party affiliation

- judicial philosophy

- acceptability to Senate

All of these are unofficial requirements to be a justice of the Supreme Court. There are no formal qualifications. But because of the scrutiny of being appointed to the highest court in the land, the Senate is usually much more deliberate about confirming a nominee.(See Table 15-1 on p.532 for background on 112 recent justices of the Court) 

Confirmation hearing of Justice Elena Kagan

The Federal Court System

Before we begin, let us consider for what purpose courts exist. They are a way for people to resolve conflict without having to resort to violent measures.
Where does this conflict come from? It comes from the fact that someone feels that an offense has been committed.
That offense is, in a certain legal context, referred to as a tort. (Hence, if you hear the phrase 'tort reform', they are talking about legal reforms)
Once we have established that there has been an offense, the next question is then "Who has been offended?" Is it
     - an individual  (civil matter)
     - society as a whole   (criminal matter)
If it is a criminal matter (society has been offended), then what segment of society has been offended?
     - the municipality
     - the state
     - the nation
The prosecution of the offender in these matters often then comes down to which level of society that has been offended is willing to devote its limited resources (time, money) to hold the offender accountable.
The court system for that society that has been offended and seeks to hold the offender accountable is then considered to have jurisdiction in that matter.
jurisdiction - the authority to hear and decide a case

Okay...what does all of that have to do with the judicial branch of the federal government?

What is the offense is related to a Constitutional matter? Then we must look at the Constitution to see what is says regarding this issue based on the facts present.
Who gets to interpret the Constitution?  What's that called? Where did it come from?
What if the offender or the offended party is the United States of America?

In these matters, and a few others, the United States Federal Court system has exclusive jurisdiction. They are the only ones with the authority to hear and decide these cases.

So, if you feel that your Constitutional rights have been violated, you would take that grievance to the federal court system. The first court to hear you case in that process would be considered to have original jurisdiction.



Article III Section 1
- established a Supreme Court and "such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish"

Judiciary Act of 1789
- established a three-tiered court structure (district, appeals, Supreme)

notes on the Federal Court structure
- 94 Federal District Courts spread throughout the United States
- 12 Federal Courts of Appeal (appellate courts, circuit courts)

District Courts
- 94 districts nationwide
- minimum of 2 judges per district (Southern District of NY has 44)
- each has separate bankruptcy court

Appellate Courts
- 13 courts (12 circuits plus DC)
- mostly hear appeals from District Courts (US govt cannot appeal rulings)
- majority of cases are civil/criminal
- most rulings of lower courts upheld (fewer than 4% overturned)
- do not retry case; reexamine facts, court proceedings, and legal briefs of litigants (on occasion, oral                   argument is allowed)

Supreme Court (court of last resort)
- appellate jurisdiction
- original jurisdiction in certain cases
- does not hear all cases appealed; justices choose
- hear roughly 100 cases of 8,000 petitions per year

Various other federal courts
-Article I courts (various other courts created by Congress for specific matters)
- Federal Tax Court
- FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court



All federal judges, whether they be at the district, appellate, or Supreme Court level, are appointed by the President (with...guess what).
When deciding who to nominate for appointment, the President usually considers 4 things
  - legal expertise
             integrity, competence, experience, knowledge
  - party affiliation
             usually affiliated in party politics before serving as a judge; people associated with
  - judicial philosophy
             loose interpretationist (judicial activism) or strict constructionist (judicial restraint)
  - likelihood of confirmation by the Senate
             senatorial courtesy with lower positions; non-divisive for SC

Appointees to any of the three tiers of the Federal Court System have a lifetime appointment. That does not mean, however, that there is no check on the power of the judiciary. While the Courts wield the power of judicial review, their power can be checked by
 - appointment (executive and legislative)
 - impeachment (legislative)
 - amendments to the Constitution (legislative)
 - inability to create action (nature of the institution)


Sources for deciding federal court cases
- Principle of Judicial Review (Marbury v Madison)
- Constitution
- Statutes and Administrative Regulations
- Case Law (precedent : principle of stare decisis)

The Iron Triangle: Bureaucrats & Policy Makers

AP Government & Politics loves the topic of the iron triangle. That is, the relationship between executive departments/agencies, interest groups & lobbyists, and Congressional committees.

Watch these videos (I don't know why I couldn't get them embedded)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u3th3ixQes&list=PL0kBVa_Bm8E0ofjvVXsoP6O-W3PVxv0UT


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APd9N71klhM&list=PL0kBVa_Bm8E0ofjvVXsoP6O-W3PVxv0UT

Reforming the Bureaucracy

There have been various efforts to reform the bureaucracy in order to make it more efficient and less costly. These efforts include:
- Sunshine laws
     laws designed to create transparency within the agency
     Freedom if Information Act of 1966; Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976

- Sunset laws
    laws designed to review a program regularly for possible reforms and/or termination
    never adopted nationally but adopted in many states

- Privatization
    replacing government agencies/employees with that of private firms
    contracting out various government duties; offering vouchers instead of services

- Offering incentives for productivity and/or efficiency
    performance-based budgeting practices; requiring justification for programs
    e-government options
    Government Performance and Results Act of 1997

- Protecting whistleblowers
    establishing safe-guards for those who expose agency inefficiency or corruption
    Civil Service Reform Act of 1978; Whistle-Blower Protection Act of 1989
    Garcetti v Ceballos

Discussions on various problems with and solutions to traditional bureaucracies

   

Agencies of the Bureaucracy

These are independent organizations tasked with doing something on behalf of the government.
- Can only be created by an act of Congress
- Usually created for specialized tasks to complex or cumbersome to be legislated
- Congress retains oversight
- Agencies have quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial power

The text identifies 3 types of agencies
   - independent executive agencies
   - independent regulatory commissions
   - government corporations

See Figure 14-3 on p.488 and note all of the Executive Departments & Government Agencies

Okay, technically Education and Commerce are Executive Departments, not agencies. But still, a classic moment.

Independent Executive Agencies
- Similar to executive departments
- Not Cabinet level
- Administered by the executive branch; President appoints head of agency
- Congress retains oversight
- Example: NASA

Independent Regulatory Commission
- Created to help regulate some aspect of the economy
- Governed by board; members of board nominated by President (and ......)
- Board composition must be bipartisan
- Creates rules and enforces rules (judge, jury, and executioner)
- Examples: ICC (Interstate Commerce Commission), SEC (other SEC: Securities & Exchange Commission), FCC (Federal Communications Commission) 

Government Corporations
- Operate under traditional business model
- Differences: owned by government; service v profit
- Purpose: provide service to American people
- Examples: Amtrak, USPS


What is the Civil Service?
  the civilians who carry out the work of the federal government (i.e.-postal carrier)
Originally staffed by people friendly with the President (spoils system)
Reformed by the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883 (competitive hiring based on merit)
Even still, many top-level bureaucratic positions are political appointees

Bureaucracy & The Cabinet Departments

If it is associated with the federal government and has:
  - a formal structure
  - a division of labor
  - a set of rules/procedures by which it operates
then it is most likely a part of the bureaucracy.

3 models of bureaucracy
- Weberian model
   bureaucracies are rational, hierarchical organizations in which decisions are made based on logival reasoning
- Acquisitive model
    bureaucracies are led by people who seek to grow their budget and staff to gain greater power
- Monopolistic model
    bureaucracies lack competition, leading them be inefficient and costly operations




All organized under the Executive Branch
Employs about 2.7 million people
Top administrators are political appointees
Most other bureaucrats are knowledgeable/skilled employees



Executive Departments
Major units of administration and policy making
Headed by Secretary
Account for roughly 60% of all government employees (see Figure 14-1 on p.486)
Often smaller departments within each executive department
Only 3 departments to start with (State, Treasury, War)
New departments often created when issues became to big for Congress to legislate solutions
Currently 15 departments
Homeland Security is the most recent addition
Defense Department is largest Executive Department by far
     over 3 million employees and budget of $480 billion in 2008

The Cabinet & the Vice Presidency

3 main roles of the Vice President per the Constitution
- presiding over the Senate
- opening and counting electoral votes after presidential election
- serving as President should the President become incapacitated

Throughout American history, the role of the Vice President has changed. Early on, it merely entailed performing those tasks laid out above and waiting around in case the President may die. After the ratification of the 12th Amendment (requiring electors to cast one vote for President and one vote for Vice President), political parties started to pair the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate together on 'the ticket'. This pairing of candidates led politically minded leaders to start trying to balance their ticket to make the candidacy of 'the ticket' more attractive to more voters. The Vice Presidency itself however, was still not seen as a job opportunity one would desire. The role of the Vice President has grown since the 70s into a position that serves as an extension of the President himself. The Vice President is often consulted regularly on policy decisions and will be tasked with executing certain duties (being point-man / head executive) on behalf of the President.

The Best of Joe Biden

And don't forget former Vice President Dick Cheney

Advisory: Censored word (based on exchange between VP Dick Cheney & Sen Patrick Leahey)

The Cabinet
- consists of the heads (Secretary) of each of the executive departments (State, Defense, Treasury, etc)
- serves as advisory council to the President
- Secretary is nominated by President ( and ......)
- 16 official Cabinet positions, incl Vice President
- advice sought but not relied upon
- "kitchen cabinets"
- Cabinet Secretaries often more loyal to their department than the President

The Executive Office of the President

Who is "the administration" that they are always talking about?
Many of these people work in the Executive Office of the President (EOP).

I don't know what's up with the foreign subtitles.

Executive Office of the President
- The White House Office (The West Wing)
see chart on p.182

There was a television show: The West Wing

- National Security Council (NSC)

- Council of Economic Advisers (CEA)

yawn

- Office of Management & Budget (OMB)

Term Paper notes

Here are a few notes to remember as you are tweaking and polishing your term paper.
- refer to the grading guidelines
- 'A' papers have a good numbers of sources with supporting evidence (5-6 high quality sources)
- if you need more high quality supporting evidence, refer to the policy center links provided
- your target audience is someone involved in government
- your objective is to persuade them to support a change (or perpetuation) of current government policy
- your analysis of the issue and analysis/argument for your policy must be thorough
- proofread!! (spell check will not catch everything)
- double-check to make sure that your paper is correctly formatted

Also remember, the term paper is due on Monday.
- it must be submitted to TurnItIn
- a hard copy must be submitted in class

Good luck!

Unique Presidential Powers

Unique powers of the President of the United States
- emergency powers
- executive orders
- executive privilege

Emergency Powers
Based on the principle of inherent powers and supported by the Court decision US v Curtiss-Wright Export Corp
Usually invoked in cases of foreign affairs or national security

Executive Orders
Executive orders carry the force of law with them and
    - enforce legislative statutes
    - enforce the Constitution or treaties w/ foreign nations
    - establish or modify rules and practices of executive administrative agencies
Only legal requirement is that executive orders be published in the Federal Register
Unlike laws, executive orders can be revoked by subsequent executives (see Hyde Amendment)

Executive Privilege
Perhaps the most controversial because it allows the executive to withhold information from the other branches
Often invoked when claiming disclosure would threaten national security
Principle has been upheld by the Court
Extent of privilege famously upheld in case of US v Nixon

While the President has unique powers, the position is not all powerful. Review process of and reasons for impeachment from Unit III.

The Political President

The President is, in essence, a super-politician. The President has reached the pinnacle of the American political game. Therefore, you cannot separate the President from politics despite the wishes of some. The President uses political power in a number of ways including as the leader of his political party and through access to the media.

- Chief of Political Party
  The President has, historically, engaged in political patronage by appointing loyal party supporters to certain government jobs. While much of that was done away with in the late 1800s through the creation of the civil service, it still exists in less noticeable ways. (i.e. - US Ambassador to _name that tropical location_ )

- Power for Persuade
  The President, by the nature of the position and the media, has access to "the bully pulpit". This affords the President the opportunity to try and persuade people and/or direct the tone and nature of the debate. To be President, you have to have some ability to do this.

The President & Public Approval
The President needs the support of certain constituencies in order to get things done.
- national electorate
- party members
- key members of opposing party
- Washington

Public approval is the ultimate check on Presidential power.
- high approval ratings = get lots of stuff done
- low approval ratings = Congress won't work with you
- all Presidents start with highest approval ratings they will likely achieve (honeymoon effect)
- military action can increase popularity (rally around the flag effect)
- prolonged military action will decrease popularity
- President may "go public" to gain popular support for agenda (pressure Congress)

How has the recent Syria crisis and response illustrated the above?

But, also consider this....

When evaluating Presidential approval....


Americans tend to look at their wallets.

Agree or disagree??

A Good Example of Policy Writing

Follow the link below and you will find the work of Leia Guccione (Mrs Guccione's daughter). She is writing of a possible solution to climate change that she is in favor of. Regardless of your position on the issue or interest in the issue, you should read it and pay attention for the way in which she writes it. You will notice how she:
- Introduced the issue
- Gave a bit of background
- Clearly identified the problem that exists currently
- Overwhelmingly argued in favor of her position
- Provided evidence (through the use of statistics and hyperlinks to sources)

http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_10_02_microgrid_solution_to_macro_challenge_of_climate_change

Remember, your objective in this paper is to try and convince people in government to adopt your position concerning this policy issue. This is exactly what Ms Guccione is doing in this work.

psst.... it is also what Mr Edghill does in his writing.... just saying

How to be a Foreign Policy Genius

This was shared with me by a friend of mine who graduated from Nolan, taught at Nolan for a year, got his MA from Yale, and now works for the State Department. Oh, and he has also been published in The Atlantic. So pay attention.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/09/30/how_to_be_a_foreign_policy_genius_in_7_minutes?page=full&wp_login_redirect=0

Think Tanks & Sources for the Term Paper

Below is a partial list of 'think tanks' and policy centers that may be of use to you.

For focusing on domestic issues:
The Brookings Institute - http://www.brookings.edu/
The Cato Institute - http://www.cato.org/
The Heritage Foundation - http://www.heritage.org/
Center for American Progress - http://www.americanprogress.org/
American Enterprise Institute - http://aei.org/

For focusing on foreign policy:
Council on Foreign Relations - http://www.cfr.org/
Center for Strategic & International Studies - http://csis.org/
Wilson Center - http://www.wilsoncenter.org/

Wikipedia has an extensive list of think tanks. You may want to look through it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_think_tanks_in_the_United_States

High-quality journalist sources
The Atlantic - http://www.theatlantic.com/
The Economist - http://www.economist.com/
Foreign Affairs - http://www.foreignaffairs.com/
The Christian Science Monitor - http://www.csmonitor.com/

Don't forget that all of the Executive Departments (State, Treasury, etc) have their own studies and publications as well as all if the Congressional Committees (Foreign Affairs, Budget, etc).

Good luck.

The American Presidency

What does the President do?

What are the roles of the President of the United States?









Roles of the President of the United States of America
- Head of State
- Chief Executive
- Commander in Chief
- Chief Diplomat
- Chief Legislator







Formal Qualifications to be President of the United States
- minimum 35 years of age
- resident of US for minimum of 14 years
- natural-born US citizen

Unofficial qualifications??

- wealthy
- male
- WASP
- prior executive experience
- good communicator
- charisma






How does the President get elected?
Win the electoral college (not the popular vote....though it doesn't hurt to win that one too)
See graphic on p.165

Presidential succession was defined by both the Presidential Succession Act (1947) and the 25th Amendment.  (See chart on p.166)
- Vice President
- Speaker of the House
- President Pro Tempore of the Senate
- Secretary of State
- Secretary of the Treasury


Head of State
Serves in this role in addition to duties as head of government. Includes ceremonial duties as well as receiving foreign dignitaries and making official state visits to other countries.

Chief Executive
Role as head of government to make sure that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed. Includes overseeing all executive departments and the civil service of the government. To assist, the President may appoint individuals to various positions in the executive branch, federal judiciary, regulatory commissions, government corporations, etc (with the consent of the Senate). There are also a handful of unique executive powers and/or privileges.
  - grant reprieves
  - grant pardons
  - issue signing statements on laws

Commander in Chief
Unique power of the President as commander of all United States armed forces. (civilian control of the military) Commander in Chief role versus the Congressional power to declare war (A1 S8 C11) has been a tricky dynamic. War Powers Resolution/Act creates some clarity.

Chief Diplomat
Power to make treaties with foreign nations (with consent of .....), offer diplomatic recognition to foreign governments, forge executive agreements with foreign heads of state, nominate ambassadors to foreign nations, and generally lead United States foreign policy.

Chief Legislator
While not an active part of legislating (not a part of the legislative branch), the President can influence legislation in various ways.
  - suggesting/ passing along legislation to Congress
  - recommendations in addresses, especially the State of the Union (bully pulpit)
  - veto (pocket veto / line-item veto) see Table 13-1 on p.458