POLS 207 lecture 1: Introduction to Government (Video)
Introduction: critical thinking and government
The instructor emphasizes critical thinking as questioning everything about government at all levels (federal, state, local) and about institutions like school districts, special districts, water districts, and local governments.
Three levels of government in the United States:
Federal
50 state governments
Approximately 90,000 local governments (including school districts and special districts).
The idea that government exists to serve the people; people should question and engage. Government should work for us, not the other way around.
The speaker’s stance: he’s not a fan of many governments, but he teaches to understand how they work and when they work against you.
The term “American people” is used to mean everyone under the U.S. Constitution, including those here illegally; constitutional protections apply broadly.
The importance of engagement:
Voting
Political participation
Staying informed about what governments do, including the everyday ways government touches your life (trash collection, utilities, etc.).
The instructor emphasizes personal accountability for learning:
Students should do their homework.
Ask why decisions are made, not just what is decided.
There is an emphasis on avoiding the trap of treating rhetoric as policy:
A bill to balance the budget in ten years is symbolic if it lacks enforceable mechanisms.
Executive orders can be symbolic and easily changed by future administrations.
Distinction highlighted early:
Policy vs. Law: Law is formally created by legislatures; policy can be created and enforced by the executive branch and by courts in practice.
The instructor’s broader goal: help students develop the habit of critical thinking and to recognize symbolic rhetoric versus substantive policy with real teeth.
The “packback” assignment: students must submit original questions to stimulate critical thinking; background context can help but simple “why” questions are the starting point.
Real-world prompts used: comparing how different states (e.g., Wisconsin vs. Texas) address the same problem (e.g., dropout rates) with different policies.
The instructor uses humor and personal anecdotes to create engagement and illustrate points about politics, culture, and media.
Key legal concepts: speech, actions, and policy vs. law
Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969):
The standard for restricting speech is that it must incite imminent lawless action.
Mere advocacy or rhetoric about wrongdoing is protected unless it is likely to incite immediate illegal action.
Texas v. Johnson (1989):
Flag burning is protected speech under the First Amendment.
Symbolic acts can be legal, but consequences depend on whether they incite imminent lawlessness.
Executive orders:
Presented as tools to signal government stance and to attempt to crack down on certain actions.
The speaker notes executive orders typically lack “teeth” that persist across administrations unless backed by law.
They can be undone by future presidents.
Pardons:
A federal pardon can erase a federal conviction.
The speaker notes the president does not necessarily pardon offenses like flag burning when discussing punitive rhetoric; the EO itself does not explicitly grant or deny pardons.
Overall point: there is a difference between law (which is created by legislatures) and policy (which can be created and enforced by the executive branch and the courts, and which can be reversed or modified more easily than statutes).
The policy making system: structure and process
The policy making system includes:
The executive branch
The bureaucracy
The courts
The legislative branch that actually makes laws.
Laws are created only by the legislative bodies:
Federal Congress
State legislatures
County commissions
City councils (at the local level, these are often called ordinances, but they are still laws).
Policy-making bodies include:
The executive branch (presidents, governors) and the bureaucracy that implements policy.
The courts that interpret laws and shape policy through rulings and interpretations.
The common misconception: courts “make laws.”
The instructor emphasizes that courts change policy through interpretation and implementation of laws, not through making laws themselves.
Case example to illustrate policy vs. law:
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896): “separate but equal” doctrine established by the courts, not by a new federal statute in Congress.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): overturned the policy effect of “separate but equal” through judicial interpretation, not by enacting a new federal law.
The point is that the law remained the same in Congress, but the interpretation and application of the law by the courts changed, altering policy outcomes.
The upcoming Friday discussion will revisit this distinction with more detail and examples.
The role of government and civic engagement in daily life
The professor stresses that decisions today affect job prospects in the future; what happens today can impact you years later (even in the short two-year congressional cycle).
The midterm elections are as important as presidential elections because control of the House and Senate determines what policies can be enacted, regardless of who is in the White House.
How congressional control works:
Senate: 100 members; one third of the Senate is up for election every two years. The current control can be described with vote tallies such as 53-45-2 (Republicans with a few defections).
House: 435 members; margins are narrow, with ongoing special elections affecting control.
The speaker emphasizes voting as a core civic duty, while also noting there are legitimate ways to participate if one cannot vote (e.g., engaging with governments, public comments, etc.).
A practical reminder: decisions at the local level (city, county, school district) have direct effects on daily life (trash collection, utilities, infrastructure, land use).
The instructor notes that Texas’s political culture is characterized as low tax and low services, with no state income tax due to constitutional rules.
Changes to the constitution require a two-step process:
Proposing amendments requires a two-thirds vote in both the Texas House and Senate.
Ratification requires a majority of voters in a statewide election.
The local and state tax landscape shapes policy outcomes and the level of government services available to residents.
The speaker emphasizes that government in Texas is not a reliable source of broad benefits; rather, job creation and economic opportunities are a more common draw for residents.
The session includes a tour through cultural stereotypes as a way to illustrate how policy and politics intersect with identity and regional culture (Texas vs. other states). He uses humor and personal anecdotes about Texas life to highlight how culture can influence political expectations and policy preferences.
The instructor mentions the real-world importance of understanding energy policy, oil and gas regulation (e.g., Railroad Commission) and the idea that Texas is not literally “on the national grid” in every sense, though the energy system is interconnected.
Media, information, and the political information environment
All media is biased, according to the lecturer; “moderate” is itself a bias; media outlets are businesses seeking to attract audiences to sell to advertisers.
He argues against using terms like “fake news” and “misinformation”; instead, he uses “bias” and “omission” to describe how media can shape perception without outright lying.
The media’s business model: large audiences attract large ad revenue.
Examples include the high cost of Super Bowl ads due to vast viewer numbers; ad slots can be extremely valuable because of audience size.
Newspapers have faced declines due to the rise of digital media and paywalls; online news is often behind paywalls, changing how people access information.
He emphasizes consuming news from multiple sources to counter bias and avoid echo chambers.
A notable adage from Ernest Bevin is quoted (paraphrased): politics is the art of looking for trouble, misdiagnosing it, and applying the wrong remedies; this underscores the reality that policy-making is not always about perfect solutions but about what can pass through a legislative body.
The speaker distinguishes that the policy that “passes” is not necessarily the best policy for individuals; it’s policy that can pass in a divided Congress.
The media critique is tied to practical implications: what information you receive shapes your views and political engagement; the class is a space to practice critical, evidence-based evaluation of media sources.
Culture, identity, and Texas-specific notes
The instructor uses playful personal anecdotes about being born in Tennessee, living in Texas for decades, and engaging with Texas identity (cowboys, boots, hats, pickup trucks, oil, Whataburger, etc.).
He stresses that Texas culture is distinctive (low taxes, strong sense of identity) and that this shapes political culture and policy preferences.
He notes common Texas beliefs about energy, oil, and the energy grid (including his claim that Texas is not on the national grid). He acknowledges that there are debates and complexities in energy policy and interconnections with the national grid.
The discussion includes observations about the high costs of everyday goods and services (e.g., groceries, minimum wage) and how those costs influence people's views on government programs and taxation.
The instructor offers humor about stereotypes and local culture (e.g., cowboy gear, high school football culture, and local dining like Whataburger and H-E-B discounts) to illustrate how culture intersects with political attitudes and policy preferences.
Critical thinking: hypothetical vs. counterfactual questions; how to ask good questions
Distinguishing between hypothetical and counterfactual questions:
Hypothetical questions: explore possible scenarios that could occur under certain conditions; useful for thinking about policy options and outcomes.
Counterfactual questions: questions about what could have happened under different historical conditions; these are often not answerable with certainty but can be explored cautiously.
The instructor provides examples of counterfactuals from political science or history (e.g., “What would have happened if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016?”) to illustrate the limits of what can be known about past events.
The value of asking why questions (the core of critical thinking):
Why did a policy move in a certain direction?
Why did the different states adopt different policies to tackle the same problem?
Why did a president push a certain policy?
Why did a court rule as it did?
The packback assignment is designed to cultivate these critical-thinking habits: a single-sentence original question is acceptable, but a well-stated background can add depth to curiosity points.
Policy making vs. law: a deeper look
Reiteration of the distinction:
Laws are created by legislative bodies (Congress, state legislatures, county commissions, city councils).
Policy is created and implemented by the executive branch (the president/governor and the bureaucracy) and the courts, shaping how laws are applied and enforced.
The speaker emphasizes that policies can exist without new laws and can be altered or reversed more easily than statutes; laws require formal legislative action to change.
The role of the courts in policy: courts interpret existing laws and thereby influence policy outcomes; they do not “make” laws in the sense of enacting new statutes.
The Plessy vs. Ferguson to Brown vs. Board of Education example demonstrates how policy changes (interpretation and enforcement) can alter social outcomes even when the underlying statute remains the same.
Practical implications: participation, privacy, and everyday life
Civic participation is framed as essential to democratic governance:
Voting every two years
Engaging with local and state governments
Understanding how policies affect daily life.
The importance of being mindful of surveillance and recording in public settings:
One-party consent laws in Texas allow recording without all participants’ consent.
A reminder to be prudent when discussing politics in public or on campus.
The expectation that students may engage with public life or even run for office; the instructor warns about public scrutiny and the likelihood that statements are recorded and disseminated.
The practical takeaway:
Stay informed about local projects (e.g., roadwork, intersection improvements) and how they affect daily life and future job prospects.
Understand how state and local budgets shape services and opportunities.
Assignment reminders and for Friday
Packback questions are due Thursday night.
Each student must submit an original question, ideally accompanied by background that demonstrates curiosity and critical thinking.
The class will continue the discussion on Friday, with deeper exploration of policy vs. law, and more examples of how policy evolves through the three branches.
Students are encouraged to bring questions about how policy is formed, implemented, and interpreted, and to consider the practical implications of governance on their lives.
Key takeaways to remember for exam preparation
Critical thinking basics:
Always ask why, what, and how.
Distinguish between what is policy and what is law.
Identify who creates the policy (legislature vs. executive vs. courts) and how it might change over time.
Law vs. policy distinction:
Laws are statute-based and created by legislatures.
Policy includes rules and practices implemented by the executive and interpreted by the courts.
Policy can exist without new laws and can be changed more readily.
The policy making system is multi-entity: executive, legislative, judiciary, and the bureaucracy together shape how laws are applied and how public policy evolves.
The influence of media and information:
Recognize bias and omission.
Rely on multiple sources.
Understand media as a business model rather than a neutral transmitter of truth.
The political culture of Texas (and its implications):
Low taxes, limited state services.
Constitutional hurdles to amendments.
The role of local governance in daily life.
The importance of voter participation in shaping policy.
The practical importance of understanding how government affects everyday life (trash collection, utilities, energy, transportation) and how to engage constructively rather than rely on slogans or rhetoric.
The value of context and nuance when discussing political topics:
Avoid overgeneralizations about entire political camps.
Focus on how policies are designed to pass and implement within a given political environment.
Questions to study or discuss
Explain the difference between a law and a policy, with examples from the Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education lineage.
Why might a president push rhetoric about a policy that has “teeth” only if enacted into law? How can executive orders signal policy without embodying law?
How does the structure of Texas’ constitution affect the ease or difficulty of changing tax policy or introducing a state income tax?
In what ways can different states address the same problem (e.g., K-12 retention) with different policies, and what factors influence those policy choices?
How can citizens responsibly engage with media sources to form well-supported political views? What constitutes reliable information in today’s media landscape?
Why is midterm election participation as important as presidential elections in shaping long-term policy outcomes? How do House and Senate compositions affect what can be enacted?
What practical steps can students take to stay engaged in local governance and understand how daily services are funded and delivered?
This note emphasizes critical thinking about all levels of government (federal, state, and local) and institutions, asserting that government exists to serve the people and should be questioned and engaged. It highlights the distinction between law (formally created by legislatures) and policy (actions and interpretations by executive branches and courts, which can be more easily changed).
The policy-making system involves the executive, bureaucracy, courts, and legislative branches, with courts shaping policy through interpretation rather than making laws directly, as seen in cases like Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education.
Civic engagement, through voting and staying informed, is crucial, as decisions—from midterm elections to local governance—have direct, long-lasting impacts. Texas's political culture, characterized by low taxes and limited state services, illustrates how local and state contexts influence policy outcomes.
The instructor also addresses media literacy, stressing that all media has bias and operates as a business model; therefore, consuming information from multiple sources is essential to avoid echo chambers and evaluate claims critically. Humor and personal anecdotes are used to connect political and cultural contexts, particularly regarding Texas identity and its influence on policy preferences. Finally, a core theme is the habit of asking “why” to understand underlying motivations and mechanisms in policy and governance, distinguishing between symbolic rhetoric and substantive action.