Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 23

Poli Sci Midterm Review *CRITICAL JUNCTURE: THERE'S A BIG CHANGE THAT CHANGES THE PATH OF POLITCS Prisoner's

Dilemma problem w/ articles of confederation: US had a lot of debt and they had to pay the army as well debts to Britain negotiated in the peace settlement and loans from European gvnts and private interest all had to be repaid before normal commercial relations w/ the countries could resume Congress held the debt but the states controlled the purse strings w/ no enforcement mechanism in place the states confronted a prisoner's dilemma: no state would contribute its share of the revenue so long as it suspected another state might not meet its obligations James Madison: Vices of the Political System of the US: attributed Confederation's failure not to a moral breakdown of the citizenry but to the prisoner's dilemma 2 fundamental barriers that block effective collective action: 1. coordination- members of the group decide individually what they want, what they are prepared to contribute and how to coordinate their efforts w/ others 2. prisoner's dilemma- when individuals decide that they are personally better off pursuing an activity that rewards them individually participants privately calculate that they would be better off by not contributing to the collective action even when they wholeheartedly agree with its purpose the prisoner's dilemma arises whenever individuals have a powerful/irresistible incentive to break the agreement and exploit the other side unless participants in a collective decision can trust each other to abide by their commitments, they will not achieve a mutually profitable exchange solutions: 1. making reneging/defection very expensive 2. create institutions that help parties discover opportunities to profit through cooperation and guarantee that agreements are honored without confidence that agreements will be enforced, the political process quickly unravels America's political institutions foster collective action by solving the prisoner's dilemma some issues don't offer mutual gains through cooperation zero sum issues: one party's gain is the other's loss and politics may break down tragedy of the commons and free-rider problem are both forms of the prisoner's dilemma in Congress: standard prisoner's dilemma: tension between individual/collective political welfare closed rules help to solve the majority's prisoner's dilemmas Coordination Problem 2 fundamental barriers that block effective collective action: 1. coordination- members of the group decide individually what they want, what they are prepared to contribute and how to coordinate their efforts w/ others 2. prisoner's dilemma- when individuals decide that they are personally better off pursuing an activity that rewards them individually coordination problems increase w/ the size of the group occasions do arise where citizens seek to coordinate their actions a critical ingredient in their success lies in identifying a common focal point to target their energies toward a common purpose demonstrations/protests represent another kind of political activity that depends on massive coordination among individuals; a focal point is critical 1960's MLK and the SCLC were effective focal points protestors want to express themselves, they just need guidance and encouragement and a place/time to show up

coordination problems frequently require no more than direction/information even when states agree to work together, they may have difficulty figuring out how to work together Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act: it standardized state driver's license for interstate truckers and created a bureau within the Dept of Transportation to centralize traffic violation records ^ centralized record keeping offered a simpler solution to state coordination than requiring each state to update its records w/ those from every other state transaction costs come from conforming to national standards *Congress- coordination becomes more difficult/necessary the greater the group's workload and the more elaborate its division of labor traffic management: dividing up the work, direction the flow of bills, scheduling debates and votes on the floor party leaders serve as the traffic cop members sacrifice a measure of their autonomy in return for the gains in efficiency that come from delegating agenda control to party leaders 1995 House Republicans gave their leader an unusually strong hand to overcome their coordination and other collective action problems and to complete every promise they made w/ the Contract with America within 100 days of taking office Collective Good tragedy of the commons: a large number of participants encourages each to renege on contributions to the public good; the public good will be destroyed if its exploitation is not brought under control the solution to this problem links the individuals' personal interest to provision of the collective good: a decision to conserve resources must affect personal welfare one specific solution is force: setting up regulations on use of a common resource and penalizing those who violate them privatizing the collective good is a common solution; it aligns personal gain w/ promotion of the collective good ex: PBS can offer private inducements to get contributions costs of public goods are borne collectively and no one can be excluded from their benefits ex of public good: a freeway, it can be used by anyone; private good: toll road externalities: undesirable byproducts ex: automobile pollution citizens look to gvnt to provide positive public goods and prevent negative externalities Free Rider Problem Free-Rider Problem: a form of the prisoner's dilemma free-ride: to defect from the agreement by withholding a contribution to the group's undertaking while enjoying the benefits of the collective effort the free-rider problem arises whenever citizens recognize that their small contribution to the collective enterprise will not affect its success or failure ex: not a lot of viewers donating to PBS but non-donators ppl still watch it gvnt uses force in the form of laws to induce participation and prevent reneging Selective Incentive collective action problems can be circumvented by selective incentives selective incentives are benefits that can be denied to individuals who do not join and contribute doctors join the American Medical Association, attorneys become members of state bar associations

Conformity Costs Conformity costs range from an ordinary task like paying property taxes to extraordinary sacrifices like serving in Iraq those institutions that minimize transaction costs may do so by imposing excessive conformity costs example: a dictator decides national policies (minimum transaction costs) by insisting that everyone do what he prefer (maximum conformity costs) after 9/11, balance shifted and transaction costs were reduced and conformity costs increased veto threatens fewer severe conformity costs b/c it is a negative/blocking action House members bear heavy conformity costs b/c in the absence of agenda control the transaction costs would be unmanageable senators buy lower conformity costs at the price of higher transaction costs presence of ready-made coalitions increases conformity costs b/c individual members cannot always do what is politically best for themselves rather than their party reduced transaction costs risks increase in conformity costs and agency losses 1970's Dems strengthened hands of the Speaker b/c they saw smaller potential conformity costs in centralizing authority for Senate: filibuster means lower conformity costs but higher transaction costs Transaction Costs after 9/11, balance shifted and transaction costs were reduced and conformity costs increased if citizens fear that gvnt might intrude too far into their private lives, they might want to add high transaction costs and require consensus to make collective decisions OR if citizens greatly value quick/decisive action like defense against an imminent foreign threat, they may favor institutions that minimize transaction costs even at the risk of ceding more authority to the leaders the greater the number of veto-holders, the higher the transaction costs in making new policy House members bear heavy conformity costs b/c in the absence of agenda control the transaction costs would be unmanageable 1910 Speaker was stripped of his power to appoint committees and chairs the leadership structure was turned into a more decentralized/impersonal structure by weakening the Speaker, House members chose to tolerate higher transaction costs to reduce their conformity costs transaction costs were further reduce by having committee members appointed by the Speaker rather than elected political parties in Congress serve as ready-made coalitions presence of ready-made coalitions reduces transaction costs of negotiating agreements transaction costs in Congress: time, effort, bargaining resources that go into negotiating agreements on action in the absence of agreement one solution to reduce transaction costs: use fixed rules when making decisions ex: seniority rule: allocating first choice in committee chairs, offices to majority members who have served longest ex: follow precedent following precedent/seniority inevitably increases the power of some members at the expense of others pressure to avoid unnecessary transaction costs intensified by ticking clock: one-year session of Congress and two-year tenure of each Congress Continental Congress

the Continental Congress was unable to act decisively/rapidly b/c all decisions of consequence (taxes) required approval by all state gvnts 1774 First Continental Congress: Philadelphia: they formed a nucleus of national leadership most significant actions of First Continental Congress: adoption of Declaration of Amer Rights (it reasserted home rule) and endorsement of an agreement to ban all trade w/ Britain until despised taxes were rescinded the conventions quickly became de facto gvnts: they collected taxes, raised militias, passed laws forbidding the judiciary from enforcing British decrees, and selected delegates to the Second Continental Congress (1775) most states adopted bicameral (2-chamber) legislatures and all created a governorship the 2nd Continental Congress issued the nation's first bonds and established a national currency July 4 1776 2nd Continental Congress signed the Declaration of Independence Articles of Confederation The Articles of Confederation allowed any state to block national action on important policies like taxes; the absence of enforcement authority fostered rampant free riding even when the states could agree on a course of action the delegates that established the Articles of Confederation did so b/c they thought that w/ the Articles of Confederation, the small states would not lose influence Articles ratified in 1781: they served as the nation's de facto constitution during the war years the first American constitution created a confederation: a highly decentralized system in which the national gvnt derives limited authority from the states rather than directly from citizens each state received one vote major laws required endorsement of 9/13 state delegations amendments needed unanimous votes the delegates recognized that they now had the responsibility for supplying essential public goods that Britain had provided under home rule he states were unwilling to give the national gvnt sufficient authority to conduct the war and they became chiefly responsible for recruiting troops and outfitting them for battle collective action problems evident in the war effort: contagious levels of free riding and reluctance of some states to contribute their fair share in fear that other states would hold back Congress held the debt but the states controlled the purse strings w/ no enforcement mechanism in place the states confronted a prisoner's dilemma: no state would contribute its share of the revenue so long as it suspected another state might not meet its obligations Congress lacked the authority to negotiate credible trade agreements w/ other nations each state minted its own currency; some states inflated their currencies Shay's Rebellion mobilized the states behind constitutional reform under Articles of Confederation each state was free to conduct its own international trade policy: this arrangement allowed foreign gvnts and merchants to exploit competition among the states to negotiate profitable trade agreements this caused the states to engage in cutthroat competition Shay's Rebellion Shay's Rebellion mobilized the states behind constitutional reform Shays Rebellion: armed group of farmers marched into a Massachusetts Supreme Court session, demanding that state judges stop prosecuting debtors Congress couldn't offer troops or money to settle the next assault that Shays had planned

the state organized a militia that intercepted Shay's army Madison felt discomfort with arbitrary majority action Shay's Rebellion represented the threat of anarchy Shay's Rebellion inspired constitutional reform Virginia Plan first day: Madison introduced new constitution: he favored a design resembling parliamentary systems Virginia plan: Madison appears to have been more concerned w/ fashioning an active national gvnt, even if it imposed high conformity costs on the states centerpiece of Virginia Plan: bicameral national legislature lower chamber: apportioned among states by population; directly elected upper chamber: members elected from lower chamber from lists of nominees supplied by the state legislatures only representatives who were directly elected by ppl could control selection of other officers of gvnt Virginia Plan also gave national gvnt enforcement authority Delegates representing less populous states were upset: they would have less participation James Madison Madison felt discomfort with arbitrary majority action James Madison: Vices of the Political System of the US: attributed Confederation's failure not to a moral breakdown of the citizenry but to the prisoner's dilemma first day: Madison introduced new constitution: he favored a design resembling parliamentary systems Virginia plan: Madison appears to have been more concerned w/ fashioning an active national gvnt, even if it imposed high conformity costs on the states suddenly, Madison wanted a genuine separation of powers between the branches, w/ each side exercising checks and balances over the others Madison/Hamilton succeeded in fashioning an independent exec branch that might be incapable of abusing authority they limited the scope of prez responsibilities and particularly the office's command authority Madison/Hamilton designed a legislative check, or veto, to each prez duty: the senate would confirm appts and ratify any treaties before they could take effect Only Congress could declare war another design: veto: a negative action which would allow the exec to perform a checking function on the legislature The Federalist: Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison the essays provided rhetorical ammunition to those supporting ratification early years of the Republic: Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe asserted executive privilege when they thought secrecy would serve the national interest New Jersey Plan New Jersey Plan: proposed giving each state one vote gave Congress authority to force states to comply w/ taxes allowed simple majority vote to enact national policy rather than supermajority it failed to propose the organization of the executive and judiciary it continued to give each state one vote it was supported by state's rights advocates

Connecticut Compromise aka GREAT COMPROMISE upper chamber: senate: each legislature would send 2 senators to serve 6-year terms House of Representatives: population-based, elective legislature House alone had the authority to originate revenue legislation delegates agreed to a broad list of enumerated/expressed powers: Article 1, sec 8: it extended the authority of the national legislature enumerated powers included authority to declare war, maintain army/navy, borrow moeny commerce clause: Congress had authority to regulate commerce w/ foreign nations necessary/proper clause: left the door open for a major expansion of Congress' legislative power opposition came from nationalists who viewed the compromise as one-sided 17th amendment: 1913: senators elected directly by voters the compromise strengthened the national gvnt's capacity for action; thus most nationalists accepted it suddenly, Madison wanted a genuine separation of powers between the branches, w/ each side exercising checks and balances over the others House: by population; directly elected, 2-year term Senate: 2 per state; selected by state legislatures (until 17th amendment, 1913); 6-year term idea that House represents the People; the Senate represents the States Logroll 1808 total ban on slave imports went into effect neither side was able to persuade the other to adopt its preferred position the solution turned into a log roll: a standard bargaining strategy in which 2 sides swap support for dissimilar policies in the end, New England accommodated the South by agreeing to 2 provisions: Article 1 sec 9: protecting the importation of salves until 1808 ; Article 4 sec 2: requiring that northern states return fugitive slaves logrolling is essential for a society composed of many different and competing interests to transact its politics successfully vote trading: ex: legislators representing urban districts may vote for an agricultural bill provided that legislators from rural districts vote for a mass transit bill for Congressmen: pursuit of reelection makes logrolling an attractive strategy Supremacy Clause supremacy clause: article 6: national laws take precedence over state laws Supreme Court has ^ and final jurisdiction in resolving differences between state/national levels of gvnt supremacy clause in article 6: the national gvnt enjoys supremacy, but only insofar as its policies conform to a Constitution that prohibits certain kinds of federal activities the supremacy clause was framed to avoid impasses over jurisdiction rather than to cede authority to the national gvnt preemption legislation: federal laws that assert the national gvnt's prerogative to control public policy in a particular field preemption owes its existence to the supremacy clause Enumerated Powers delegates agreed to a broad list of enumerated/expressed powers: Article 1, sec 8: it extended the authority of the national legislature enumerated powers included authority to declare war, maintain army/navy, borrow moeny

the Framers agreed to list in the Constitution some enumerated powers that should be in the domain of the national gvnt: specific authority that would enable the gvnt to address problems the states had not grappled w/ effectively under the Articles of Confederation in McCulloch v Maryland (1819) Chief Justice John Marshall declared that b/c the national bank assisted Congress in performing several of its responsibilities enumerated in Article 1 sec 8 (borrowing money, levying taxes, issuing national currency) the elastic clause gave the national gvnt the authority to create the bank Necessary and Proper Clause aka Elastic Clause necessary/proper clause: left the door open for a major expansion of Congress' legislative power opposition came from nationalists who viewed the great compromise as one-sided necessary/proper clause: Congress can do what is necessary/proper: aka elastic clause Commerce Clause commerce clause: Congress had authority to regulate commerce w/ foreign nations during Depression years the dramatic growth in federal spending, coupled w/ corresponding reductions in funds @ the state/local levels, provided evidence of sharp shift from state to fed responsibility for social programs Roosevelt administration invoked the commerce clause as justification Chief Justice William Renquist argued that Congress had exceeded its commerce clause authority by intruding into state control of law enforcement (us v lopez) when he overturned the Violence Against Women Act law 3/5ths Compromise trying to maximize representations in House of Reps, southern delegates insisted that slaves were ppl and should be included fully in any population count slaves would count as 3/5 of a citizen in the end, New England accommodated the South by agreeing to 2 provisions: Article 1 sec 9: protecting the importation of salves until 1808 ; Article 4 sec 2: requiring that northern states return fugitive slaves 1865-1870 slaves were formally emancipated (13th amendment), granted citizenship (14th amendment), and guaranteed the right to vote (15th amendment) for most states, freeing the slaves and granting them citizenship were 2 different things with African Americans now a whole, not 3/5, the South would gain 13 seats Separation of Powers Framers established separation of powers, different term lengths, and explicit provision for states' rights to make it difficult for majorities to take charge of the new gvnt parliamentary systems are able to forgo the higher transaction costs embedded in the US' separation of powers separation of powers, staggered legislative terms, unelected judiciary: limit national authority Federalist 51 deals w/ the delegation problem of keeping the citizenry's agents (gvnt officeholders) honest; the solution lies in pitting the politicians against one another through the mutual vetoes embedded in the Constitution's separation of powers and checks/balances suddenly, Madison wanted a genuine separation of powers between the branches, w/ each side exercising checks and balances over the others definition: the distribution of gvnt powers among several political institutions; in the US, at the national level power is divided between 3 branches: Congress, Prez, Supreme Court Checks and Balances

suddenly, Madison wanted a genuine separation of powers between the branches, w/ each side exercising checks and balances over the others Checks on Exec branch: 1. congress passes legislation, 2. Congress controls the fed budget, 3. Congress can override prez veto, 4. Congress can impeach/remove the prez 5. Court can declare exec order unconstitutional Checks on Legislative branch: 1. prez can veto legislation 2. Courts can declare laws unconstitutional Checks on Judicial Branch: 1. Congress can impeach fed judges 2. Congress can set the size of Supreme Court and jurisdiction of lower courts 3. Senate confirms all fed judges 4. Prez nominates Supreme Court and other fed judges the Framers accepted that the executive would contain none of the internal checks provided by institutional design (Fed 51) or factions (Fed 10) Separate Institutions Sharing Powers Not pure separation of powers (Montesquieu) the Consitutional Convention of 1787 did not create a gvnt of separated powers; it created a gvnt of separated institutions sharing powers Richard Neustadt: Separate institutions sharing power Eisenhower: "I am part of the legislative process" as a reminder of his veto power the parties are themselves composed of separated organizations sharing public authority; the authority consists of nominating powers Electoral College a majority of the electoral college is required to elect the prez, not the majority of popular vote Electoral College tries to mix state, congressional, and popular participation in the electoral process each state is awarded as many electors as it has members of the House and Senate "Take Care" Clause 20th century: prezzies realized "take care" clause gave them more authority than their predecessors claimed Teddy Roosevelt first to expand the "take care" view fed courts have used "take care" as justification and have rejected it

take care clause: prezzie's elastic clause: ensure laws need to be faithfully execute

Antifederalist critiques on Constitution farmers looked suspiciously on the attempt to shift fiscal policy to the national gvnt many state legislatures had printed cheap paper money, overturned court decisions unfavorable to debt-laden farmers, and provided some w/ direct subsidies and relief farmers failed to recognize that the ascendancy of the national gvnt would benefit them by shifting public finance away from property taxes and toward import duties rhetoric of nationalism (Federalists ) versus rhetoric of states rights (antifederalists) antifederalists argued that only local democracy could approach true democracy antifederalists insisted on a bill of rights antifederalists were worried about an ultimate subjugation of the citizenry Federalist 10 Federalist 10 and 51 tackle the fundamental problem of self-governance Federalist 10 explores the likelihood that tyranny by the majority would arise within a democracy and identifying a solution

Federalist 10 responds to the argument that a large republic can't survive Madison's plan is to devise a republic in which a majority of citizens will be unable to tyrannize the minority Madison defines a faction as a number of citizens who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion/interest Madison's factions have many attributes of modern-day interest groups and political parties Madison identifies 2 ways to eliminate factions: authoritarianism or conformism Madison identifies 2 kinds of factions: a minority faction- it's unable to execute its violence under forms of the Constitution; majority faction Madison dismisses direct democracy as the solution Madison contends that a republican form of gvnt, in which elected representatives are delegated responsibility for making governmental decisions, addressed problem of tyranny majority size principle: the larger and more diverse the constituency, the more diluted is the influence of any particular faction Madison argues that an encompassing national gvnt would be less susceptible to the influence of factions than would state gvnts Madison explained that growth strengthens the republic pluralism: welcomes society's numerous diverse interests and generally endorses the idea that those competing interest most affected by a public policy will have the greatest say in what the policy will be Federalist 51 Federalist 51 deals w/ the delegation problem of keeping the citizenry's agents (gvnt officeholders) honest; the solution lies in pitting the politicians against one another through the mutual vetoes embedded in the Constitution's separation of powers and checks/balances Fed 51 discusses separating gvnt officers into different branches and giving them the authority to interfere w/ each other's actions Madison expressed the importance in politicians defending the integrity of their offices bicameralism is intended to weaken the legislature's capacity to act too quickly and impulsively antifederalists were worried about an ultimate subjugation of the citizenry Fed 10 conveys the theory of pluralism that guided the Constitution's chief architect Fed 51 explores how/why the gvnt system that emerged from the Philadelphia convention might actually work some argue that w/ authority so fragmented, gvnt can't function effectively Ambition to Counter Ambition Fed 51 James Madison! The ambitions of Presidents must be checked by the ambitions of both the legislative branch and the judicial branch. The ambitions of legislators must be checked by the executive and judicial branches and the ambitions of judges must be checked by the ambitions of legislators and Presidents the ambition of one segment of society would not have control, as the branches of government are designed to counter the opposing ambition Mischief of Faction Fed 10 Madison The "Mischief" involved was that interest groups would seek to further their own ends at the expense of the welfare of the nation

Madison worried that powerful interests would use their connections to benefit themselves at the expense of the nation, and that was "Mischief" in his mind Impeachment Article One of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and the Senate the sole power to try impeachments in the United States, impeachment can occur both at the federal and state level. The Constitution defines impeachment at the federal level and limits impeachment to "The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" impeachment is only the first of two stages, and conviction requires a two-thirds vote. Impeachment does not necessarily result in removal from office; it is only a legal statement of charges, parallel to an indictment in criminal law. Bill of Rights state's rights ppl wanted it to limit the ability of national majorities to demand religious/political conformity antifederalists insisted on a bill of rights only during the 20th century has the Bill of Rights come to be accepted as national policy that applies to every level of gvnt 10th Amendment 10th amendment: offers most explicit endorsement of federalism in constitution: those powers not taken by the national gvnt do belong to the states the powerful combo of the supremacy and elastic clauses reduces the 10th amendment to a truism: those powers not taken by the national gvnt DO belong to the states in Garcia v San Antonio Metro Transit Authority (1985) Supreme Court approved the application of fed wage/hour laws to state/local employees; the court dismissed the 10th amendment as too ambiguous to guide fed-state relations Judicial Review there's no formal language extending the power of judicial review: the Court's authority to overturn federal laws and exec actions as unconstitutional Marbury v Madison: 1803: the Court laid claim to the authority to strike down any legislation it deemed unconstitutional judicial review: Court's ability to rule act of Congress unconstitutional Article 6: Supremacy Clause: allows the Supreme Court to exercise judicial review and veto state laws that trespass fed jurisdiction or violate the constitution over time, the other branches affirmed the Court's power of judicial review 1790-1860 only 2 fed laws had been declared unconstitutional 1920's/1930's exercise of judicial review rose 1960's decision regarding fed/states laws rose again 1st: questions concerned nation-state authority 2nd: gvnt regulation of the economy 3rd: civil rights/liberties although judicial review elevated the Supreme Court to a coequal branch, it is Congress' delegation of oversight on national policy that ensures the Court's active participation in governance Judiciary Act of 1789 created more constitutional courts: lower courts that exercise the same power of judicial review

sources of limitations on the absoluteness of judicial review are found: in provision of the Constitution, internal/organizational weakness of the federal judiciary, ways that Congress/prez can redirect judicial doctrine the doctrine of judicial review has worked b/c it does not foreclose effective responses from the other branches the limited authority offered by judicial review, the huge caseload, lack of enforcement authority, life tenure makes it hard to formulate/implement public policy Division of War Powers (power to declare war; commander in chief) the Constitution declares the prez to be commander in chief of the nation's armed forces the check: only Congress can declare war prezzies often commit troops/engage in hostilities and then go to Congress for authority to continue 1973 War Powers Act: Congress overrode Nixon's veto: the law requires the prez to inform Congress within 48 hours of committing troops abroad in military action; the operation must end within sixty days unless Congress approves an extension Federal v Unitary Sytem Unitary V Confederation (loose, decentralized) Unitary= federalists confederation= antifederalists Unitary: central gvnt is in power federalist: power divided by national, state, local Federalism is a hybrid arrangement that mixes elements of confederation (in which lower-level gvnts possess primary authority) unitary gvnt (in which the national gvnt monopolizes constitutional authority) across the world, unitary gvnts are far more common than federations and confederations combined under unitary systems, lower-level gvnt entities are created by and ultimately dependent on the national gvnt for authority/resources a unitary gvnt may decentralize its power by delegating some decision to a lower gvnt entity, but the national gvnt retains ultimate authority to alter or rescind this delegation in modern times: in fights over federalism, each combatant is usually more concerned w/ a policy goal than w/ shaping the proper relationship between national/state gvnts Dual Federalism v Cooperative Federalism (shared) 2 distinct forms of American federalism: dual and shared Dual federalism is the simplest possible arrangement, leaving the states and national gvnt to preside over mutually exclusive spheres of sovereignty foreign policy and national defense are purely national concerns; matters in the ordinary course of affairs of the citizens are the responsibility of the individual states shared (or cooperative) federalism) recognizes that the national and state gvnt jointly supply services to the citizenry state and fed powers intersect over many of the most important functions overall, the US has moved from Madison's dual federalism to a shared federalism in which federal officials generally decide how authority over intersecting state and federal policy areas should be divided in partitioning responsibilities, the Framers worked within a structure of dual federalism

the jurisdictions of states have been not so much curtailed as the national gvnt has joined w/ the states in formulating policy; the result is shared federalism, not dual Dual federalism: separate responsibilities for national gvnt and state gvnt shared federalism: work together, don't have separate jobs, jurisdiction overlaps Laboratories of Democracy consequence of federalism: states are laboratories of democracies, 1. states can experiment 2. federalism is a pressure valve: a way to let off steam in a political system (ex: abortion (national issue, abortion is a constitutional rights), gay rights (state issue) 3. Decentralized federalism can lead to policy competition among states: tax revenue, business: there's always a possibility in a federal system that there will be a competitive environment; competitive federalism produces efficiency vs competition among states can lead to a race to the bottom competition in the labs: federalism allows states to experiment: LABRATORIES OF EXPERIMENT Candidate Centered-Elections post-ww2 era of Democratic majorities in Congress coincided w/ emergence of a candidatecentered pattern of electoral politics Party organizations and political action committees (organizations that raise and distribute money for campaigns) help when the campaign shows promise most congressional campaigns were personal and centered on local interests/values during 19th century: congressional candidates' fates were decided by national trends they could do little personally to shape or control ticket-splitting: voting for candidates of different parties for different offices: this weakened parties as New Deal controversies faded, party lines became blurred and party loyalty among voters declined in a candidate-centered system of electoral politics, ambitious/talented ppl rarely challenge incumbents if they see no chance in winning most successful incumbents get reelected by appearing invincible Divided Party Control of GVNT (divided gvnt) twice in 20th century prezzies enjoyed huge majorities in both chambers: 1930's New deal FDR and 1960's Johnson Great Society divided gvnt: when party in opposition to prez controls either or both legislative chambers, the prez confronts majorities w/ different policy preferences and a political stake in looking bad m when neither side is willing to compromise, the gridlock causes little accomplishment as relations w/ Congress become more uncooperative, prezzies rely more on their constitutional/unilateral resources: vetoes, threats to veto, exec orders, centralized administration, exec privilege divided gvnt has become the norm, it wasn't always the norm consequence of divided gvnt: gridlock, games of chicken, strategic disagreement strong argument: a divided gvnt is a recipe for gridlock and confusion: NOBODY IS IN CHARGE, NOTHING WILL GET DONE, AND NOBODY WILL KNOW WHO TO BLAME some argue: that's not true ^; it turns out, divided gvnt doesn't matter that much b/c you're exaggerating how a system works when it's "unified" even when you do get divided gvnt, there are incentives for the gvnt to get things done 1. games of chicken: last minute agreements after back/forth

2. strategic disagreement: there's no deal, neither side is going to accept a deal with the other one: one side would rather have the issue than the policy: it's strategic to keep an issue on the table that you can beat the other side on the head w/ another reason for strategic disagreement: you might be willing to compromise but ppl on the extreme side of your party won't be happy and your coalition will split 3. accountability problems: who to blame? who to give credit to? 4. unilateral action 5. institutional combat: Congress v Prez ex: impeachment of prez Clinton: a Dem Congress probably would not have voted to impeach Clinton; more active, vigorous conflict between branches

consequences of divided gvnt: there's an argument that says divided gvnt is a really good thing and so what if it means less gets done? it means necessary/smart things get done!

Civil Liberties v Civil Rights civil liberties: Consitution's protection from gvnt power, meaning the gvnt may not take these freedoms away civil rights represent those protections by gvnt power, or things gvnt must secure on behalf of its citizens the difference: civil rights require gvnts to act, whereas civil liberties are well served when gvnt does nothing modern-day civil rights include more than civic rights of political expression and participation civil rights include safeguards against any effort by gvnt/dominant groups to subjugate another group civil rights include rights of individuals in their relations w/ one another Senate "Balance" (free v slave state) 1820 Missouri Compromise: Missouri could enter as a slave state, Maine as a free state; this maintained the balance in Senate between free/slave states South agreed to admit California as a free state and upset the balance in exchange for the Fugitive Slave Law: compelling northerners to honor southerner's property claims to slaves Constitutional Obstacles to Abolition public policy was left to state control, allowing slavery to flourish within the South African Americans faced 2 major obstacles in securing rights: 1. constitution reserves authority for states 2. constitution separates powers among 3 branches of gvnt Missouri Compromise 1819 Missouri petitioned Congress for admission as a slave state 1820 Missouri Compromise: Missouri could enter as a slave state, Maine as a free state; this maintained the balance in Senate between free/slave states the compromise was a political solution: neither side was too happy but it allowed agreement abolitionist movement reminded the nation of its hypocrisy in condoning slavery Wilmot Proviso Wilmot Proviso banned slavery in recently acquired territories Wilmot's proposal failed 1848 Free Soil Party: antislavery South agreed to admit California as a free state and upset the balance in exchange for the Fugitive Slave Law: compelling northerners to honor southerner's property claims to slaves

Compromise of 1850: allowed residents of territories to decide for themselves whether to apply for statehood as a slave or free state Compromise of 1850 Compromise of 1850: allowed residents of territories to decide for themselves whether to apply for statehood as a slave or free state Free Soil by 1848 Wilmot's allies joined teh abolitionists in the new antislavery Free Soil Party free soil party won 10% of national popular vote 6 years later: free soil party joined republican party Abolitionism abolitionist movement reminded the nation of its hypocrisy in condoning slavery antebellum/during civil war: persistent abolitonsistm movement forced shift from life/liberty rights to full citizenship Dred Scott Case 1857 Supreme Court decided in Dred Scott v Sandford that the fed gvnt could not prevent slavery in territories and that African Americans were not citizens Prez Jackson appointed Roger B. Taney as new Chief Justice (Marshall died in 1835) Jackson liked Taney b/c of his advocacy of states' rights 1857 Dred Scott v Sandford Taney: African Americans are not citizens, escaped slaves had to be returned to their owners, fed laws outlawing slavery north of line set by Missouri Compromise unconstitutionally infringed on settlers' territorial rights to self-gvnt/private property 14th amendment: Congress's way of invalidating the Court's decision in Dred Scott 14th Amendment granted citizenship (14th amendment) 14th amendment: no state will deprive any person of life, liberty, or property w/out due process nor deny any person equal protection of laws section 2 of 14th amendment: if a state fails to allow black males to vote in fed/state elections, the number of seats allocated to it will be reduced proportionately 14th amendment: Congress's way of invalidating the Court's decision in Dred Scott Congress made readmission to the Union contingent on a state's ratification of 14th amendment the Supreme Court interpreted the 14th amendment to mean only that states could not abridge privileges of the constitution civil liberties protections: Bill of Rights, 14th amendment, Supreme Court applies 14th amendment to states irony: the 14th amendment failed to achieve its immediate objective of protecting slaves, a century later, it extended the rights/liberties of all citizens in direction unimaginable to its authors 15th Amendment guaranteed the right to vote 15th amendment: right of citizens of the US to vote shall not be denied by the US or by any state on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude 15th amendment: granted former slaves the right to vote only 2 times of success for fighting against discrimination: 1. Reconstruction after Civil War 2. 1960's attack on segregation Black Codes

1865-1870 slaves were formally emancipated (13th amendment), granted citizenship (14th amendment), and guaranteed the right to vote (15th amendment) for most states, freeing the slaves and granting them citizenship were 2 different things with African Americans now a whole, not 3/5, the South would gain 13 seats black codes: southern laws: effectively prevented former slaves from voting and thus supporting Lincoln Reconstruction: South would be transformed from a slave society into a free one in which African Americans would fully enjoy the privileges of citizenship.. Jim Crow System 1890's Jim Crow Laws were adopted throughout the South to disenfranchise black citizens and physically separate African Americans and whites Jim Crow Laws institutionalized segregation of African Americans and whites in schools, prisons, public parks, restrooms, housing, and public conveyances white primary: excluded African Americans from voting in primary elections poll tax: levied on all registered voters, which typically had to be paid months before the election literacy test: most notorious/effective: local white registrars would require prospective black voters to read and interpret arcane passages of the state's constitution these laws also caught many poor/illiterate whites most states provided grandfather clauses, which exempted those whose grandfathers had voted before the Civil War White Primary white primary: excluded African Americans from voting in primary elections part of Jim Crow system b/c winning the Democratic primary in the solidly Democratic South was just as significant as winning the general election, this effectively disenfranchised blacks Grandfather Clause grandfather clauses exempted those whose grandfathers who had voted before the Civil War from the registration requirements like poll tax, literacy test Plessy v Ferguson coup de grace 1896: Plessy v Ferguson: Supreme Court ruled that the South's Jim Crow laws and systematic segregation constitutional the Court ruled that gvnt-enforced segregation of the races was constitutional as long as the facilities for African Americans and whites were equal separate but equal doctrine: officially sanction segregation throughout the South for next halfcentury Brown v Board of Education NAACP directly attacked Plessy 1954 Brown v Board of Education Chief Justice Earl Warren: separate educational facilities are inherently unequal the Brown decision was met by massive resistance across the South some state legislatures asserted that public education lay beyond the national gvnt's jurisdiction and that they would ignore the Court's illegal decision Brown v Board of Education: Court ordered public schools to desegregate w/ "all deliberate speed" instead of setting a deadline; segregationist fed judges went super slow Supreme Court can reverse lower-court decisions but doing this too much damages their reputations

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Civil Rights Act of 1964: authorized the national gvnt to end segregation in public education and public accommodations civil rights was a big issue in 1964 prez election 1964 election results: largest prez landslide in history 1965 northern Democrats dominated both chambers sex discrimination was included in the 1964 Civil Rights Act South's strategy of adding sex to the bill b/c they thought it would weigh the legislation down backfired; Congress passed the legislation protest in 1963 in Birmingham forced Democratic Party to commit to an aggressive civil right policy and led directly to passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 successful collect action Voting Rights Act of 1965 1965 northern Democrats dominated both chambers each of the civil rights laws had same fatal flaw: they required individuals to prove discrimination in court 1965 demonstrations in Alabama televised Congress pass and Johnson signed Voting Rights Act of 1965: it authorized the Department of Justice to suspend restrictive electoral tests in southern states that had history of low black turnout for first time, southern politicians paid attention to new black constituents 1970 Congress passed an extension to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requiring that ballots also be available in Spanish in constituencies where at least 5% of population is Hispanic Lyndon B. Johnson Lyndon Johnson's vehicle into national arena was 1957 Civil Rights Act which allowed African Americans who felt their right to vote had been denied b/c of race sue their state in fed court the 1957 Civil Rights Act represented more politically Johnson lost prez nomination to Kennedy but got the vp nomination Power of persuasion Democratic congressional leaders committed themselves to passing civil rights legislation during 1960's Kennedy and Johnson broke w/ South and committed the nation to an activist civil rights policy twice in 20th century prezzies enjoyed huge majorities in both chambers: 1930's New deal FDR and 1960's Johnson Great Society Congress discovered that prez Johnson had created a number of exec agremeents tendering foreign aid funds to countries that kept token forces in Vietnam Presidents as "Clerk" the Framers mandated that prezzies be leaders but gave them tools to be no more than clerks the 19th century Prez: Clerk and Wartime Commander: the prez spent time giving out patronage jobs, cabinet gvnt, wartime leadership (only during wartime is there substantial expansion of executive authority) we expect our prezzies to be leaders but the office guarantees no more than that they will be clerks Power to Persuade Richard Neustadt: Power as Persuasion the power to persuade: the prez is the deal maker

Neustadt: we expect our prezzies to be leaders but the office guarantees no more than that they will be clerks key to prez success= persuasion, the ability to persuade depends on bargaining persuasive power is more than charm or reasoned argument status adds something to persuasiveness; authority adds more a prez can trade on dependence from others persuasion= 2-way street; loyalty is reciprocal power to persuade= the power to bargain persuasion becomes give-and-take the more an officeholder's status and his powers are independent from the prez, the stronger will be his potential pressure on the prez the probabilities of power do not derive from the literary theory of the Constitution Truman was more influential with the Marshal Plan b/c it directly involved Congress a president's chance to choose is higher when a message must be sent or a bill signed than when the sphere of action is confined to the executive Going Public prezzies view going public as a viable alternative to negotiating w/ opposition on Capitol Hill bully pulpit: Teddy Roosevelt's term: refers to advantageous position afforded the office for rallying public support today, prezzies spend a lot of time, energy, staff taking their messages directly to Amer ppl prezzies don't just use tv: they communicate their messages through appearances at graduation exercises, union conferences, conventions

Going Public: first mover advantage: prez can set the tone: GOING PUBLIC IS DANGEROUS/RISKY

instead of bargaining, presidents choose to go public: Bush went public w/ the war Clinton's confrontation w/ Newt Gingrich: using the Bully Pulpit Clinton was triumphant in terms of public opinion and popularity; but if you look at the final budget deal, the Republicans did pretty well Permanent Campaign House of Rep is in permanent campaign because they are constantly being reelected Unilateral Action when prezzies try to extend their influence through unilateral actions, opponents say the prez is turning the office into an imperial presidency: an elected monarch w/ a retinue of aides to do his bidding as relations w/ Congress become more uncooperative, prezzies rely more on their constitutional/unilateral resources: vetoes, threats to veto, exec orders, centralized administration, exec privilege when presidents can change a policy unilaterally, they gain the opportunity to exercise agenda control over Congress' choices Power of Unilateral Action: things the presidents have done w/out asking permission: 1. Louisiana Purchase, 2. Annexation of Texas, 3. freeing of slaves (emancipation proclamation), 4. designation of public lands for a system of national parks, 5. Japanese-American internment, 6. desegregation of the military unilateral action is one of the reasons why Bush was so successful in the Iraq War Debate

Executive Order executive orders: formal instructions: it has the force of law until the prez or a successor retracts it, Congress nullifies it, fed court rules against it exec orders are most frequently enlisted to establish exec branch agencies, modify administrative rules, change procedures 20th century: prezzies realized "take care" clause gave them more authority than their predecessors claimed Teddy Roosevelt first to expand the "take care" view fed courts have used "take care" as justification and have rejected it Incumbency Advantage the decline in party loyalty among voters offered incumbents a chance to win votes that once would have gone to the other party incumbent reelection rates have generally been higher since the mid 1960's incumbents win reelection consistently b/c they work so hard at it and they work so hard b/c so much of their electoral life is in their own hands in a candidate-centered system of electoral politics, ambitious/talented ppl rarely challenge incumbents if they see no chance in winning most successful incumbents get reelected by appearing invincible one argument: incumbents win b/c of gerrymandering: drawing districts in ways that favor the opportunities of your candidates interest groups/PACs give money to incumbents overwhelmingly Rationale for Having Committees legislation is only as effective as the quality of knowledge underlying its inception common solution to performing complex tasks efficiently: division of labor and specialization division of labor= rise of committee, subcommittee systems, specialized research agencies Speaker of the House ad hoc committees: the Speaker appoints them to handle bills that are particularly sensitive House: Speaker manipulates how the bill is handled speaker of the house became the majority's leader and agent speakers given the authority to appoint committees, make rules, manage legislative process on the majority party's behalf 1910 Speaker was stripped of his power to appoint committees and chairs the leadership structure was turned into a more decentralized/impersonal structure by weakening the Speaker, House members chose to tolerate higher transaction costs to reduce their conformity costs 1970's Dems strengthened hands of the Speaker b/c they saw smaller potential conformity costs in centralizing authority 1995 House Republicans gave their leader an unusually strong hand to overcome their coordination and other collective action problems Congress is subject to conditionally party gvnt: the degree of authority delegated to and exercised by congressional party leaders varies w/ (is conditioned by) the ideological consensus among members the majority party in the House is led by the Speaker of the House, whose chief assistants are the majority leader and the majority whip the minority party has a leader and a whip but no speaker Conditional Party Government

Congress is subject to conditional party gvnt: the degree of authority delegated to and exercised by congressional party leaders varies w/ (is conditioned by) the ideological consensus among members when majority party members are mostly unified on policy and they delegate more to leaders a leader is the agent of his members you overcome transaction costs of legislating lower conformity costs than if the party is divided BUT when party members are not unified on policy, there is an incentive to take powers away from party leaders Committee Government committee and party systems are closely integrated and mutually dependent House committees are more powerful than Senate committees standing committees have fixed jurisdiction (they deal w/ the same legislative topics) and stable membership top committees: money committees b/c there activities are so central to Congress's main source of power in the fed system: it's control over the budget Rules Committee (House): controls flow of legislation from committees to the floor least desirable committees: those dealing w/ internal administration (members' ethics) joint committees= permanent committees compose of members from both chambers joint committees gather information and oversee executive agencies but do not report legislation Standing committees: fixed jurisdiction over a set of policies division of labor and specialization committees have gate-keeping power bill goes to committee, then to subcommittee, then to hearings, then gets marked up then gets put on the chamber calendar provides information for Congress to deal w/ complexities of modern law making having ppl specialize allows them to develop the expertise that they need for Congress to succeed in law-making aka division of labor promote reelection: get on a committee that is of special concern to your district ppl can gravitate to committees that are of most use to their reelection campaigns committee system is pretty decentralized: there are a lot committees Disadvantage: impartial information for Congress, special benefits for committee member's districts Seniority System one solution to reduce transaction costs: use fixed rules when making decisions ex: seniority rule: allocating first choice in committee chairs, offices to majority members who have served longest ex: follow precedent following precedent/seniority inevitably increases the power of some members at the expense of others in Senate: seniority became the criterion for selecting committee chairs seniority rule reduced transaction/conformity costs, avoided election and appointment by party leaders Party Polarization

as congressional parties became more unified, they also became more polarized along ideological lines ideological polarization thus helped to internally unite the parties, separate them from each other, and strengthen party leaders national politics is becoming more visible and more polarized and more national what happens when you combine the filibuster w/ party polarization!? it's hard to end a filibuster if you're in the minority and the system is polarized, a filibuster sucks the more polarized the system, the more keen you are on blocking what the other side wants to do Filibuster individuals or small groups can filibuster: hold the floor making endless speeches so that no action can be taken on the bill or anything else- to try to kill bills that the majority would enact filibustering is routine now so the new reality is that the support of 60 senators is needed to pass any controversial piece of legislation except the budget resolution, which is protected by a special rule in Senate: the minority party usually contributes to unorthodoxy via filibusters unorthodox procedures have become the congressional norm if you're in the minority and the system is polarized, a filibuster sucks the more polarized the system, the more keen you are on blocking what the other side wants to do politicians in the minority don't get blamed for using the filibuster; the majority does! the irony: the change in the 1970's was pushed by liberal democrats: what they were trying to do was make filibusters less significant filibusters are a lot easier to carry out now filibuster= the right of unlimited debate senators buy lower conformity costs at the price of higher transaction costs Costless Filibuster politicians in the minority don't get blamed for using the filibuster; the majority does! as ppl started to filibuster more, they paid a little price for it you'd think that blocking a majority would have a price; it really doesn't b/c most voters aren't attentive enough to know that a filibuster is going on; they only see DC isn't getting stuff done Cloture Rule individuals or small groups can filibuster: hold the floor making endless speeches so that no action can be taken on the bill or anything else- to try to kill bills that the majority would enact a 3/5 majority of the Senate membership is required to invoke cloture (which allows a maximum of 30 additional hours of debate on a bill before a vote must be taken) cloture rule: it takes 60 votes to end the debate Dual Principals Problem with both Congress and the president seeking to control policy, outcomes may reflect the demands of either? or neither? they're both principals! President and Congress jointly control design, staffing, funding of bureaucracy Congress: creates agencies and can eliminate/change them at any time President: heads of departments and executive agencies and members appointed by the president (Senate approval) and serve at the presidents pleasure (can dismiss them)

Spoils System giving agency managers more authority to hire/promote/fire staff would reduce civil service protections against partisan spoils system Andrew Jackson believed that no experience is necessary to be in public office Jackson advocated rotation in office: an official would serve in a position for a short/fixed period, then move to something else The Jacksonian idea was to democratize the civil service along w/ the rest of the political system spoils system: the winning party gives out jobs, "spoils" ppl that helped bring the party to victory the spoils system had problems: dangers of incompetence and corruption red tape: procedures, layers of paperwork, demands for stricter adherence to form Pendleton Act 1883 after Civil War: emerging industrial economy raised administrative problems that a civil service composed of short-term amateurs was poorly suited to address most dramatic incident: Whiskey Ring 1883 Pendleton Act: basis of modern civil service: put only 10% of fed jobs under the merit system ; by FDR, 80% were based on merit system w/ merit system, career bureaucrats inevitably develop their own personal/institutional interests: hidden action and hidden information become problems the agents can play their principals against one another the Act also authorized prez to issue exec orders extending civil service system to other classes of workers Merit System the merit system rewards conscientious, long-term service; it doesn't encourage entrepreneurial risk taking giving agency managers more authority to hire/promote/fire staff would reduce civil service protections against partisan spoils system characteristic features of bureaucratic institutions: 1. hierarchical structure of authority: command flows downward and info flows upward 2. division of labor: specialization of tasks 3. set of abstract rules 4. impersonality: treat everyone the same 5. career system: appointments/advancement demonstrated by merit 6. specified goals: collective action 1883 Pendleton Act: basis of modern civil service: put only 10% of fed jobs under the merit system ; by FDR, 80% were based on merit system Logic of Agency Design (incentives shaping bureaucracy in US) Terry Moe: the design of the Amer bureaucracy reflects interests, strategies, compromises of those who exercise political power those in positions of power are not necessarily motivated by the national interest when choices are made about structure, choices are made about policy what sorts of structures do various political actors want for their own interests? structure is valuable to interest groups to write legislation, put experts on public payroll, grant them authority to fill in details there is no guarantee the experts will always act in group's best interest conflict of interest and asymmetric info: unavoidable problems

most direct approach: impose a set of rules to constrain bureaucratic behavior the group has the power to choose who its agents will be reputation= key: expertise, intelligence, honesty, loyalty, policy preference, ideology reputation= predictability; predictability facilitates control Through 1. judicious allocation of bureaucratic roles/responsibilities 2. incentive systems 3. structural checks, bureaucrats can be free from detailed formal instructions presidents want power in the hands of their own political appointees agency bureaucrats have career/insitutional interests 2 basic types of bureaucratic players: 1. political appointees 2. careerists careerist= pure bureaucrats political appointees= short-term participants the agency is NOT a truly independent force Lecture: bureaucracy as delegation: principals and agents: principals = elected officials, agents= bureau

bureaucracy as delegation: principal to agent relationships elected officials are the "principal"; bureau is the "agent" prez and Congress are the two principals/"bosses" Pros of Delegation: specialization, flexibility/discretion, blame avoidance, credible commitment (how do I know you won't reneg later on, once I've done what you want me to do), lock-in victories Cons of delegation: accountability, "agency costs" , "capture" (agents will work for prez, not their boss OR interests will try to get control) police patrols v fire alarms monitoring like crazy = police control fire alarm: you deal w/ it when it needs to be dealt w/ in practice, Congress finds private groups to pull the fire alarms how can you be confident that the groups will pull the alarm?

Police Patrols v Fire Alarms

Big Questions -Do institution's matter? in a democracy, how do the institutional arrangements really affect the majority's ability to do what it wants? - Are politicians servants of the public or are they just self-serving? why do we need them? -Were the Framers really geniuses (the constitution hasn't changed much) or are Americans simply very lucky? -How can the US call itself a democracy when so many features of its national politics are designed to frustrate majority rule? -Was it inevitable that so many policies once left to the states are now handled by the fed gvnt? - Does America's constitutional system impede or promote the cause of civil rights? -Why would a majority in society ever seek to extend/protect the rights of its minorities in the face of huge costs? - Are civil rights generic or do we define them differently across groups according to issues for which they seek protection? - Why do members of Congress show such a strong inclination to be individually responsive but collectively irresponsible?

-Congressional incumbents rarely lose elections. Why then are they obsessed with the electoral implications of nearly everything they do? - What happened historically to transform the prez from the chief clerk of the gvnt to a formidable politician whose preferences must be taken into account? - Does the modern presidents' ability to sway public opinion really help them in dealing w/ other politicians in Washington, and if so, how? -Does the growth of the institutional presidency risk transforming America's executive into an isolated, imperial office? -Who controls the bureaucracy? the prez? congress? the courts? no one? -Why do efforts to make gvnt agencies more accountable lead to the proliferation of red tape? -How can the gvnt grow while the bureaucracy shrinks?