Discussion Questions

• With Federalist nos.10 and 51 in mind, consider how well have Madison’s remedies worked over time. One way to evaluate the success and/or failure of his plan is to think about the kinds of factions that exist today. Compile a list of "factions" that influence modern American politics—both majority and minority. Do you agree or disagree with your fellow students in what they define as a "faction"? Why or why not?

• One team of scholars recently wrote: "Popular democracy proved to be an idea of such power that our political life has become considerably more democratic than the framers imagined or wanted." If this is true, what evidence in the Constitution and its amendments can you find?

• Because of our increased commitment to democracy over time, should the voting franchise be extended even further? Here are some examples to consider:   Recently, The New York Times published an editorial which argued against state laws that disqualify people from voting if they have been convicted of a felony. Similar laws that restrict voting for those with mental impairments have also been challenged in recent years. We might consider the issue of immigration here as well. Should legal immigrants (who pay taxes) be allowed to vote, even though they are not U.S. citizens? Might their denial be considered "taxation without representation," a key motto during the Revolutionary period?

• With the lecture in mind, consider role that federalism plays in areas such as funding education, administering elections, and combating terrorism. Should we "nationalize" laws that govern those issues (e.g., federalizing airport security)? Why or why not?

• Is Howard Zinn right when he argues that the Constitution is to blame for the problems he cites? What about the willingness of citizens and their elected representatives to enforce the law?  In short, which is more important using de Tocqueville's language—laws or mores?

• The Communications Decency Act of 1996 attempted to ban the distribution of indecent materials on the Internet. However, it soon became embroiled in court challenges. What is your view? Do we need to protect obscenity and pornography to protect art and literature, too? In other words, take the good with the bad? How would you define "obscene"?

• Should academic freedom extend to those who engage in racially or religiously inflammatory expression? How do we resolve the issue of "free speech" versus "hate speech"?. For example, does a college student have a right to hang a Confederate flag out their window? Do they have a right to post a sign on their dorm room wall calling some students by derogatory names? Are these statements, no matter how ugly, protect by the First Amendment?

• Shortly after taking office in 2001, President Bush proposed that the federal government use public funds to support "faith-based" charities and social services. Should that plan be viewed as unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates the Establishment Clause?  Is it really a matter of "separation" (where we seek to protect the church from the state, and the state from the church) or should we follow instead a "principle of neutrality" (as the Court has increasingly argued)? The latter position holds that government and religion can mingle, as long as the government does not play favorites.

• Should the "free exercise" clause of the 1^st Amendment continue to cover religious expression when the health and safety of minor children are at risk? Should it be applied to cases where criminal conduct, such as marijuana possession, is at issue?

• Civil liberties are difficult to regulate in cases that involve competing values. The tradeoffs we make are often painful ones. In the end, how much of our liberty are we willing to give up in the name of security (at airports, schools, etc.), especially at a time when domestic terrorism dominates our thoughts and fears?

• In what way(s) does the survey on Texas Attorney General Dan Morales and the tobacco lawsuit manipulate public opinion?  Should it be considered a "push poll"?  Why or why not?

• If low voter turnout matters, and if Motor-Voter has failed to work, how else might we increase turnout? If you were an advertising executive working for the federal government, what kind of motivating message would you write?

• Aside from demographic characteristics (such as gender and race), voting behavior tends to be influenced by three sets of factors:  parties, issues and candidates. How do each help us to understand Bill Clinton’s success in the 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns, or George W. Bush’s victory over Al Gore in 2000?  Based on their experiences, which of these influences seems to be most powerful? Why? 

• With examples of your own choosing in mind (e.g., an environmental group seeking to protect endangered whales, or dolphins in tuna nets), evaluate the comparative success of different interest group strategies, including:   lobbying, grassroots mobilization, litigation, election activities. Under what conditions is the probability of success for each of these strategies greatest?  Are certain issues particularly well-suited to one approach or another?

• If the news media is a powerful influence on public opinion, why did attitudes toward Bill Clinton not change during the Lewinsky scandal in1998? Despite a barrage of media attention, by the end of the year a strong majority of Americans continued to oppose impeachment and support the job Clinton had done as president. Does that fact alone reinforce the limits of the news media? Why or why not?

• Should Congress more closely resemble the demographic characteristics of the population it represents? Why or why not? If so, how could that be accomplished? For example, should the courts allow "racial gerrymandering" (as was done in North Carolina) to increase the representation of minorities in Congress?

• Some scholars argue that a stronger party system would make Congress a more consistent instrument of democracy. Do you agree or disagree? In light of Clinton's impeachment proceedings, is party unity beneficial? Why or why not?

• Can "great" men be elected to the presidency today? Some say that presidential elections attract bad candidates because they are chosen chiefly in a series of primary elections in which voters put a premium on superficial qualities conveyed through the media of television, with little consideration given to the qualities needed to run the most powerful country in the world. Do you agree? Why or why not?

• What qualities do we look for in a president (e.g., strength, compassion, intelligence)? Does our presidential election system tend to produce candidates who possess those qualities?

• What exactly is "leadership?"  William Saletan writes: "Leadership used to be the noun form of a verb. A leader was someone who led. Now a leader is someone who "shows leadership." Politicians don't lead. They show." Is he right? Why or why not?

• During the 1990s, Reinventing Government aimed to make government "work better" and "cost less" for its customers, the American people. Are citizens and customers the same? In what ways are they different? In short, does a marketplace mentality help bureaucracies to work more efficiently, or does it merely muddle their goals further?

• Is "judicial review" anti-democratic? It does seem to be a paradox in a system founded on the rule of the majority. Why should an unelected body of officials, tenured for life, be responsible for overturning the decisions of elected representatives?

• In Federalist #78 Hamilton argues that the judicial branch is the "least dangerous branch" of the American government—least dangerous, that is, to the political rights of the Constitution. As Hamilton said, the courts have neither the power of the "sword" (the president), nor the power of the purse (Congress), but merely the power to "declare." Has the Court overstepped its constitutional bounds in recent years? In its decision finalizing the outcome of election 2000, has it become too powerful?

• Are African-Americans less sympathetically portrayed than whites in the news media's coverage of poverty? Does it matter?

• How should Social Security be reformed to assure its long-term viability? Using the Century Foundation's factsheet as a guide, consider options such as these— raising the payroll tax, increasing (or eliminating) the ceiling on contributions, delaying retirement age, privitizing investments, etc. Are any of these politically feasible? Why or why not?

• Since Clinton’s health care reform plan failed in Congress in the mid-1990s, the problem has only grown worse. Given the current political climate in Washington, what opportunity is there now for reforming the system? Consider these three factors—all vital in forcing policy change:

Political elites (think about liberal optimism for government, in contrast to conservative distrust);
Interest groups (doctors, hospitals, drug companies, insurance companies);
Public support (distrust of "big government," aversion to new taxes, swayed by advertising appeals);

• Consider the Gallup poll cited in the lecture carefully. Most Americans favor reducing the federal budget deficit, and most are willing to cut government programs to do it. If Washington lawmakers were to follow public opinion and reduce spending on unpopular programs, what would the likely impact be? Compare Gallup's results to actual budget figures.

• Americans tend to be cynical about their government. Personally, are you more or less critical now than you were at the beginning of this class? Why?