POS:2041 Midterm Exam

Representative Democracy

= is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy.

Government

= the institutions and procedures through which a land and its people are ruled

Instituions

= the rules and procedures that provide incentives for political behavior, thereby shaping politics

4 subjects of institutions:

1) jurisdiction - what you have authority over/to do

2) agenda & veto power

3) decisiveness

4) delegation

Autocracy

= single individual is ruler

-often a 'cult of personality'

EX: North Korea and Kim Jong II or Muhammar Quadaffi in Libya before he was killed in the Arab Spring

Oligarchy

= Small groups run government (military, landowners, merchants, etc.)

EX: some latin american governments

(a form of government in which a small group of landowners, military officers, or wealthy merchants controls most of the governing decisions.)

Totalitarianism

= Difference between authoritative, totalitarian seeks to control every aspect of their lives (i.e. what they see on tv, to what they wear, symbol, etc.)

EX: Nazi Germany

(a system of rule in which the government recognizes no formal limits on its power and seeks to absorb or eliminate other social institutions that might challenge it)

Public goods

= all those things in which everyone is entitled too

-a good that, first, may be enjoyed by anyone if it is provided and, second, may not be denied to anyone once it has been provided

Free-riding

= even if i do not participate in means to achieve the public goods (i.e. voting, etc.) I can still benefit from there

(enjoying the benefits of some good or action while letting others bear the costs)

Collective action

= refers to action taken together by a group of people whose goal is to enhance their status and achieve a common objective.

-It is enacted by a representative of the group.

(what politics is)

Collective Action issues

-the problem of "free-riding" and public goods, and tragedy of the commons

(describes the situation in which multiple individuals would all benefit from a certain action, but has an associated cost making it implausible that any individual can or will undertake and solve it alone)

Overcoming issues of free-riding

Selective benefits: Certain benefits that groups give to their members to keep them involved and also use to persuade other people to join and contribute to the cause.

Mancur Olson and 'by-product theory': Mancur Olson, Logic of Collective Action (1965)

-By-product theory

Organizations form by offering selective benefits

Leaders use organizational resources for political action

tragedy of the commons

= the idea that a common-

access facility, owned by no one because it is available to everyone, will be over-utilized

(a pool of resources is not much depleted if someone take a little of it, but it does become depleted if lots of people take from it)

reveals how self-interest can have damaging collective consequences

veto power

the ability to defeat something even if it has made it on to the agenda of an institution

Agenda power

the control over what group will consider for discussion

-considered 'gatekeeper'

president has no agenda power; congress controls its own agenda

Principal Agent Concept

-We the people are the principals

-Our elected officials are 'trusted agents'

-We expect them to act on our behalf

(the relationship between a principal and his or her agent. This relationship may be affected by the fact that each is motivated by self-interest, yet their interests may not be well aligned)

Political bargaining

means of resolving collective dilemmas

-can be either informal or formal

informal bargaining

= unstructured bargaining

-much of politics is informal

-idea of "give a little, get a little"; sets a pattern of cooperation that develops over time

formal bargaining

= governed by rules

-such as, who gets to make the first offer, how long the other parties have to consider it, whether other parties must take it or leave it etc.

Timeline of founding of constitution

-1760s: Britain in war with France; Britain in dept taxes colonies

-1765: Stamp Act of 1765; "no taxation w/out representation"; led to formation of the Stamp Act Congress

-1770: Boston Massacre; 5 colonists killed

-1733: Boston Tea Party dumped Britain's tea in habor; Britain responded w/more taxes and restrictions

-1774: First Continental congress came to conclusion that they needed to declare independence

-1775: Battle at Lexington & Concord

-1776: Second Continental Congress Jefferson wrote declaration

-1776: Declaration of Independence

-1777: Articles of confederation adopted

-1783: Treaty of Paris ended revolutionary war

-1786: Annapolis Convention only 5 states showed; apparent revisions to Articles were needed

-1787: Shays Rebellion catalyst to constitutional convention

-1787: Constitutional Convention drafting the constitution

-1787: Virginia plan proposed; favored larger states representation

-1787: New Jersey Plan proposed; favored smaller states w/equal representations

-1787: The Great Compromise agreed upon a bicameral legislature

-1787: Constitution adopted

First Continental Congress

(1774)

-Decided to boycott all British goods

-Eventually they came to the conclusion to declare independence

Second Continental Congress

(1776)

-Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence (1776)

Declaration of Independence

(1776)

-written by Jefferson wrote

-adopted by 2nd continental congress

-The declaration, while revolutionary in its ideals (such as certain unalienable rights - life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness) was not a blueprint for governance

Shay's Rebellion

(1787)

-IMPACT: catalyst to the constitutional convention

-What happened: in debt from war, farmers were foreclosing and received no help from gov; upset they rebelled

-SHOWED: congress needed more power (because they had no money to help, and no power to stop the fights)

Articles of Confederation

(1776)

-first written constitution

-adopted after war

-established first gov

-ratified in 1781

-wear central gov

-no executive branch (or judiciary)

Constitutional Convention

(1787)

-drafting the constitution

-key writers: Madison, Hamilton, Washington, Franklin

-argument of enlightened thinkers, or self-centered

Charles Beard's Thesis:

-Argued that the founders were not concerned with philosophy & ethical ideas

-instead, he said their intentions were to protect their economic interests

-the founders were "a collection of securities speculators and property owners whose only aim was personal enrichment"

-Northern economic interests feared debtor revolts, southern planters feared slave revolts → wanted protection and capital investment for their own needs

Virginia plan

(1787)

-Proposed by Edmund Rondolph

-Based representation in congress on population of state

-This plan would favor advantage the larger states

-Anti-federalists were not happy with that

New Jersey plan

(1878)

-Proposed by William Paterson in resolution to virgina plan

-made it equal representation amongst every state

-Debate between representation ensued

-Almost decided to break up the union

Great Compromise

(1787)

-AKA Connecticut compromise

-decided to have a bicameral legislature

3/5 Compromise

= an agreement reached at the convention stipulating that for purpose of the apportionment of congressional seats, every slave would be counted as 3/5 of a person

Ratification arguments

-fear of a tyranny

-fear of too much direct democracy (Feared the common man would not make the best decisions in the political realm; Believed it was better to channel popular opinion through representative)

-needed a stronger central gov (for economy & protection)

Federalists v. Anti-Federalists

Feds:

- believed that a strong central gov could protect their rights

-Thought under articles of confederation it was too weak

-Believed that their should be a National gov, that could spur economic activity in the benefit of the nation

Anti-Feds

-Worried about strong government and the potential abuse (because of their colonial experience)

-Favored states rights

-Believed their individual liberties would be better protected under states supervision

-(Famous speech by anti-federalist Patrick Henry: "give me liberty or give me death")

Constitution

3 branches

1. Executive - president

2. legislature - congress (two chambers the house & senate)

3. Judiciary - supreme court

expressed powers

= the powers enumerated in the constitution that are granted to the federal gov and ONLY those

(any powers specifically NOT listed are NOT granted)

Necessary * Proper clause

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which enumerated the powers of Congress and provides Congress with the authority to make all laws "necessary and proper" to carry them out' also referred to as the elastic clause

Judicial review

-the power of the courts to declare actions of the legislative and executive branches invalid or unconstitutional.

-The Supreme Court asserted this power in Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Supremacy clause

= A clause of Article VI of the Constitution that states that all laws passed by the national government and all treaties are the supreme laws of the land and superior to all laws adopted by any state or any subdivision

Amending the Constitution

-pass in both the House and Senate by 2/3 vote --> then ratified by majority vote of the legislatures of 3/4 of the states

-pass in both the House and Senate by 2/3 vote --> then ratified by convention called for that purpose in 3/4 of the states

- passage in national convention --> then

Limits on national Gov Power

1) separation of powers - checks and balances

2) federalism

3) bill of rights

4) Habeus corpus; no ex post facto laws; no bills of attainder

Federalist Papers

(1787)

-85 essays supporting ratification of constitution

-written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay

-defended the principles of the constitution and sought to dispel fears of a national authority

Dual Federalism

-system of gov that prevailed in the US from 1789-1937

-fundamental gov powers were shared between the federal and state gov; with the states exercising the most important power s

McCulluoh v. Maryland

(1791)

-first and most important case favoring national power

-question if Congress had power to charter national bank

-ruled constitutional BECAUSE of the necessary and proper clause

-IMPACT: if a goal was allowed in the constitution and congress chosen means to achieve goal was not prohibited by the constitution, congress could act

Gibbons v. Ogden

(1824)

2nd landmark court case which gave the Supreme Court of the United States the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause

Commerce Clause

the clause found in Article 1 section 8 which delegated to congress the power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the serval states, and with the indian tribes"

-interpreted by the supreme court to favor national power over the economy

Expressed v. Implied

v. Reserved powers

Expressed: = the powers listed in the constitution that are granted to the federal gov and ONLY those (any powers specifically NOT listed are NOT granted)

Implied: powers derived from the necessary and proper clause; such powers are not specifically expressed by are implied through the interpretation of delegated powers

Reserved: powers derived from the 10th amendment, that are not specifically delegated to the national gov or denied to the states; these powers are reserved to the states

Concurrent powers

the shared power by both the state and national governments

i.e. power to levy taxes

Police power

the power reserved to the gov to regulate the health, safety, and morals of its citizens

Home rule

the power delegated by the state to a local unit of government to manage its own affairs

-mere connivence of state; not recognized in constitution

Full Faith & Credit Clause

requiring that each state normally honors the public acts and judicial decisions that take place in another state

Privileges & immunities

provision in constitution that states a state cannot discriminate against someone from another state or give its own resident special privileges

Grants-in-aid

funds given by congress to state and local govs

2 types are block and categorical

Block grants

= general purpose funds; not many strings attached to them

EX: block grant for transportation; freedom to use whereve

Categorical grants

States must spend the money in a certain way in order to qualify for it

Unfunded mandates

= policies created by federal state, that list ways a state must comply but then don't give any funding for those policies

-Debate if good or bad

EX: Americans with Disabilities Act - buildings must provide ramps for them, but didn't provide funding for it

States Rights

the principle that states should oppose increases in the authority of the national government

this view was most popular before the civil war

New Federalism

Concept of "recipe"

Policies

Laws

State governments provide the recipe; national government provides the ingredients

Meaning → state governments have more flexibility to make policy and administer programs

Civil Liberties

= the protections of citizens from improper gov action

-AKA negative freedom --> not the action gov is taking but what they

re precluded from taking

-bill of rights

Incorporation

Nationalization of the Bill of Rights; aka making the bill or rights apply to the states

-related to Barron v. Baltimore case

-Often referred to as "selective incorporation"

= meaning incorporation didn't happen all at once, gradual process

-can be seen as expansion of federal gov, and erosion of the autonomy of the individual state

Barron v. Baltimore

(1833)

IMPACT: ruled that bill of rights/constitution did not apply to the state's gov, but only on the federal level

-slow process of changing this, with many following supreme court cases

-14th amendment would later overturn this ruling (1868)

BACKGROUND:The city of Baltimore destroyed Barron's wharf during a public works project. Barron sued under the 5th Amendment, that the court should compensate for the property they took. The supreme court stated the US constitution did not apply to the states government, only the federal level

Slaughter House Case

(1873)

supreme court determined that the federal gov was under no obligation to protect the "privileges and immunities" of citizens of a particular state against actions by that state's gov

-this was after 14th amendment yet did not think it incorporated entire bill of rights

Palko v. Connecticut

(1937)

Background: Palko was charged with 1st degree murder, but lower court didn't find guilty; higher court did the trial again, convicting him of 1st degree; Palko appealed on accounts of double jeopardy

RULED: supreme court said yes it is double jeopardy but we can't enforce that right, (cause bill of rights doesn't apply to state)

He was put to death, where as in another state he could've lived if they protected against double jeopardy

14th amendment

"dual citizenship"

-adopted in 1868 after civil war

-yet did not fully impact until a century later in the later 19th century

-Slaughter House Case

-Barron v. Baltimore

-Palko v. Connecticut

(forefront of civil rights movements)

1st & Speech

Allowed: any symbolic or political speech

Not allowed:

1) fighting words

2) clear and present danger i.e. yelling fire in a crowed theater

3) no libel

4) no slander

Slander

an oral statement made in "reckless disregard of the truth" and considered damaging to a victim because it is "malicious, scandalous, and defamatory"

1st & Press

-no libel

-no Prior restraint = censorship; gov preventing material from being published

2 important cases:

1) Near v. Minnesota (1931)

2) Pentagon Papers (1971)

Libel

a written statement made in "reckless disregard of the truth" and considered damaging to a victim because it is "malicious, scandalous, and defamatory"

Near v. Minnesota (1931)

Publisher would write against different races; Nuance law passed, stopping publication. Went to supreme court

Ruled that can't prevent publication, if people don't want to read than that is their choice

freedom of the press

New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)

called Pentagon Papers

During vietnam war

Papers revealing something Johnson did that was not liked by people (?); Nixon was president during the time, and did not want papers published

ruled constitutional because he wasn't in office any more

freedom of the press, no prior restraint

1st & Religion

-establishment clause

-free exercise clause

-lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) came up with the Lemon Test

establishment clause

-separation between church and state

1st amendment that says "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means a wall of separation between church and state

Free exercise clause

the 1st amendment clause that protects a citizens right to believe and practice whatever religion they choose

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

-Established the Lemon Test

-to make a law/take action in regards to religion it must pass the lemon test

The Lemon Test

To avoid violation of the establishment clause, a law must:

1) have a secular purpose (a non-religious purpose)

2) the effect of the law must not either advance or retard religion (must be neutral)

3) the law must avoid "excessive entanglements" between the state and religion

came from Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) case

1st & Obscenity

-important case:Miller v. California (1973)

-gave us the "what is obscene? 3 part test"

Miller v. California (1973)

What is obscene? A 3-part test:

1) average person would find the work appealed principally to lust

2) the law must specifically define what sexual conduct is obscene

3) the work in question must lack artistic, literary, political or scientific value

2nd amendment

-right to bear arms

District of Colombia v. Heller (2008) --> 2nd A. applies to individuals as well

District of Colombia v. Heller (2008)

2nd amendment also establishes an individual right to bear arms

ruled: can not prohibit people from owning guns in their own home

4th amendment

-protects against unreasonable search and seizure

-Mapp v. Ohio (1961) --> established the 'exclusionary rule'

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

-Police had search warrant to arrest a fugitive in home; didn't find fugitive, but found obscene material; arrested lady

-Established The 'exclusionary rule'

= if police obtained material that was NOT specified on search warrant that material would be excluded from trial

4th amendment

exclusionary rule

= if police obtained material that was NOT specified on search warrant that material would be excluded from trial

established in Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

4th amendment

5th amendment

(right to not self-incriminate and due process of law)

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) --> established miranda rule

5th: right to a grand jury, protection from double jeopardy (tried 2x for same offense), protection from self-incrimination, eminent domain (protection from taking property w/o just compensation)

Double jeopardy

tried 2x for same offense

Eminent domain

the right of government to take private property for public use

Grand jury

a jury that determines whether sufficient evidence is available to justify a trail

grand juries do not rule on the accused's guilt or innocence

Miranda Rule

=any persons under arrest must be informed of their legal rights, including their right to counsel, before undergoing police interrogation

-established in Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

5th amendment

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Miranda interrogated for hours, eventually confessed to crime; later argued that confession didn't count because he was never read his rights

Police don't HAVE to read rights; but if they don't almost all confessions will become invalidated

established miranda rule

6th amendment

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Previously, if you could not afford lawyer you did not have one

Established that state would appoint a lawyer if defendant could not afford on

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

previously, if you could not afford lawyer you did not have one

Established that state would appoint a lawyer if defendant could not afford on

Due Process of law

= means that the government must respect all the legal rights to which every individual is entitled

A.4,5,6,8 are the essence of the due process of law

-stated in A.5

Right to privacy

the right to be left alone, which has been interpreted by the supreme court to entail individual access to birth control and abortions

Griswold v. Connecticut

(1965)

RULED: birth control is a right to privacy

background: Griswold was arrested for informing people about contraceptives; appealed case

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Some states allowed abortion; others did not

Ruled that women have the right of privacy to decide what to do with their body - states could not make abortions illegal

Bowers v. hardwick (1986)

Man was charged with violated non homosexual acts

Charges were eventually dropped by states

Supreme court refused to hear case; didn't count "gay" as a privacy right

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

supreme court over ruled Bowers case, and struck down sodomy law in texas

can not criminalize private sexual moments

Romer v. Evans

struck down an amendment that prohibited local govs from passing ordinance to protect gay rights

Civil rights

= the legal or moral claims that citizens are entitled to make on the government

Equal protection

= provision of the 14th Amendment guaranteeing citizens "the equal protection of laws"

this clause has been the basis for the civil rights of blacks, women, and other groups

Affirmative action

government policies or programs that seek to redress past injustices against specified groups by making special efforts to provide members of those groups with access to educational and employment opportunities

De jure segregation

= legally sanctioned segregation

racial segregation that is a direct result of law or official policy

De facto segregation

segregation based on reflection of residential patterns, income distributions or other social factors