Chapter 20: American Democracy, Then and Now

Objectives:

1. Contrast three features of the Old System versus the New System of American government.

   1. Old: Congress had strong committee chairpersons, small staffs, and few subcommittees. New: Congress has weak committee chairpersons, large staffs, and many subcommittees.
   2. Old: The courts allowed government to exercise few economic powers and took a narrow view of individual freedoms. New: The courts allow the government many economic powers and take a broad view of individual freedoms.
   3. Old: political parties were dominated by local party leaders meeting in conventions. New: Political parties are dominated by activists chosen in primaries and caucuses.

2. Discuss how the structure and policies of the American political system have influenced the growth of the federal government, and the consequences of that growth.

   1. The separation of powers in American politics means that the enactment of major policy changes that take place with expansion of the federal government typically takes much longer than in parliamentary democracies. Furthermore, the wide range of governmental and nongovernmental actors who participate in policymaking brings many different, often competing, ideas for policy change which complicates consensus-building. As the federal government expands, it also becomes more complex and bureaucratic

3. Summarize the key challenges for American democracy in the 21st century.

   1. Unlike the authors of the Constitution and most other previous generations of political leaders, today's presidents and members of Congress make important decisions under intense public scrutiny. They lead a demographically diverse and free society of more than 300 million citizens, with a government that constitutes a much larger share of the nation's economy than any of the Framers ever envisioned, and that touches virtually every facet of contemporary economic, social, and civic life.

Restraints on the Growth of Government

• Eisenhower administration: Limited political agenda
  • Built interstate highway system
  • Admitted Alaska and Hawaii to Union
  • Debate over the power of labor unions
  • This was about what the Founders had expected.
• For first 150 years, role of federal government was small (Old System)
  • Supreme Court restricted federal government to limited role.
  • Popular opinion supported a limited governmental role.
  • Public did not consider it legitimate for Washington to intervene in economy.
  • Racial relations considered a state prerogative, not a federal responsibility
  • Half of Americans were skeptical of federal unemployment insurance in 1930s.
• Role of federal government is now large (New System).
  • Washington now involved in most political disputes.
  • Role expanded in spite of constitutional structure that makes it difficult for federal government to act

Relaxing the Restraints:

• Constraints on federal action have weakened or disappeared.
  • Courts have changed their interpretation of the Constitution.
  • Bill of Rights has been extended to the states by the doctrine of incorporation.
  • Business is now regulated.
  • Broad discretion is granted to administrative agencies.
• Public opinion demanded the expansion of the federal government.
  • Great Depression was impetus for original expansion.
  • This was followed by demand for federal intervention in other areas, too.
  • Debate over federal policy is no longer over legitimacy, but over effectiveness.
• Wide distribution of political resources
  • Number of interest groups has grown.
  • Easier access to the federal courts
  • Technology changes facilitate wide dissemination of information; television coverage of mass protests highlight significance of policy issue.
  • Political action committees (PACs) protected by laws and the courts
  • More citizens have college education, which encourages political participation.
  • Political candidates selected by the public, not party bosses, so must appeal to voters.

The Old System:

• Small agenda of political issues
• Limited leadership circle, with movement activists excluded
• Small congressional staffs; stable congressional coalitions that extended across many issues
• Importance of states’ rights was generally accepted.
• Focus of policy debate was domestic.
• Debate was over the legitimacy of new issues.
• Presidency was less powerful, and Congress protected local constituencies.
• Extraordinary powers were exercised only during times of crisis.

The New System:

• The new system began in the 1930s but did not take present form until the 1970s.
  • Large policy agenda
  • End of the debate over the legitimacy of government action, except in area of First Amendment.
  • Diffusion and decentralization of congressional power
  • Multiplication of interest groups
  • Debate no longer about whether federal government should act, but how it should act (Social Security, civil rights, budget deficits, Medicare).
• Essential differences between Old and New systems
  • Hard to start a new program (Old) versus hard to change existing programs (New)
  • Somewhat centralized power (Old) versus decentralized power (new)
• Two periods in U.S. politics changed the political landscape
  • Early 1930s: Depression and New Deal
  • Mid-1960s: Intellectual and political ferment; LBJ elected in 1964: Great Society and War on Poverty
  • The 1960s probably had the greater impact because of the changes in leadership patterns.
  • Majority of members of the House came to enjoy safe seats.
  • Primary elections supplanted party conventions.
  • Interest groups increased in number.
  • Television increasingly shaped political agenda and candidate nominations.

The Influence of Structure:

• What if? the Founders had adopted a parliamentary system like the one they had left?
• Political life might have some different features than it currently has, and some things would probably remain the same.
  • Quicker adoption of majoritarian policies
  • Areas such as social welfare would be affected.
  • Popular desires would be translated into national policy sooner when they conformed to the views of party leaders.
  • Centralization of bureaucratic authority
  • Bureaucracies would be larger and have wider discretionary authority.
  • Local authorities would have less autonomy.
  • Fewer opportunities for citizens to challenge or block governmental policies
  • Courts would no longer be an outlet for challenging policy.
  • No state or local arena to challenge policy
  • Greater executive control of government
  • Similar foreign policy
  • Higher and more centralized taxation
• Founders would be amazed at degree of centralization that has developed in the United States.

The Influence of Ideas:

• Preoccupation with rights
  • Assumption that affected groups have a right to participate in policy formation
  • Willing to resort to courts
• Effects of rights on government functions:
  • Harder to make government decisions
  • Harder to manage large institutions
  • More red tape—limited government efficiency and effectiveness
• Elite opinion influences which rights are given priority.
  • Elites tend to favor freedom of expression over management of property.
  • Mass opinion is less committed to the freedom of expression and may view liberty as permissiveness.
• Freedom versus equality: An enduring tension
  • Advantages of freedom are remote; costs are obvious.
  • Advantages of equality are obvious; costs are remote.
  • More recently, this has become a debate about equality of opportunity versus equality of results.
• Ideas influence policy
  • More decentralized and fragmented government means that there is more opportunity for ideas to surface through debate.
  • New programs become possible when there is popular support for an idea.
  • Competing ideas and divided public opinion make change difficult.
  • It may be difficult for government to satisfy the public’s expectations.

\