American Culture For Democracy

AMERICAN CULTURE FOR DEMOCRACY
CONTENTS
Aim of the Course 2

The American Political System 3
The American School System 12
Immigration to America 21
Media and Communications in America 30
Ethnic Groups and Minorities in America 39
Crime and Drugs in America 48
Democracy and American Interests 57
Questions for Discussion 66
Glossary 91
Bibliography 98
Page 1
AIM OF THE COURSE
This course is about policy issues being discussed and debated by U.S. citizens and
their lawmakers. In seven lectures about domestic and foreign policy matters, it acquaints the
Romanian students with some of today's most important American concerns but leaves
judgements up to the individual. Each lecture provides basic background information,
identifies key questions, and details arguments from differing points of view.
MAIN OBJECTIVES
The topics were chosen because, on the one hand, they are also current issues in
Romania and, on the other hand, they show how much the average Americans are involved in
the public policy debate today. The Americans are discussing these problems in their
communities, in their state capitals, and in Washington, D.C. That dialogue is at the heart of
the course.
Nothing is more important to the democratic form of government in the U.S. than the
informed participation of its citizens in the political process. This course is designed to offer
an example to and stimulate greater civic participation of the Romanian students by ensuring
that when it is time for them to participate in an election, state an opinion, or take a stand on
an issue, they will do so from an informed perspective.
Page 2
THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM
Introduction
The United States of America is a republic, with democratically elected

representatives who deal with the day-to-day workings of government. Government officials
constantly make decisions about important issues. As policymakers, they devise plans for
addressing the nation's needs and for conducting relations with other countries. The process
for dealing with such domestic and foreign issues is called public policy. Developing public
policy is the government's way of meeting national goals, such as defending the country,
protecting the environment, and improving access to health care.
In the U.S.A., the three branches of federal government - executive, legislative, and
judicial - play different, but interrelated, roles in making and implementing public policy.
1. The Executive Branch
The chief executive of the United States is the president, who, together with the vice
president, is elected to a four-year term. A president can be elected to only two terms. Except
for the right of succession to the presidency, the vice president's only Constitutional duties are
to serve as the presiding officer of the Senate; the vice president may vote in the Senate only
in the event of a tie.
The powers of the presidency are formidable, but not without limitations. The
president, as the chief formulator of public policy, often proposes legislation to Congress. The
president can also veto any bill passed by Congress. The veto can be overridden by a two-
thirds vote in both the Senate and House of Representatives. As head of his political party,
with ready access to the news media, the president can easily influence public opinion
regarding issues and legislation that he deems vital. The president has the authority to appoint
federal justices as vacancies occur, including members of the Supreme Court. All such court
appointments are subject to confirmation by the Senate.
Page 3
Within the executive branch, the president has broad powers to issue regulations and
directives regarding the work of the federal overnment's many departments and agencies. He
also is commander in chief of the armed forces. The president appoints the heads and senior
officials of the executive branch agencies; the large majority of federal workers, however, are
selected through a non-political civil service system. The major departments of the
government are headed by appointed secretaries who collectively make up the president's
cabinet. Each appointment must be confirmed by a vote of the Senate. Today,these 14
departments are: State, Treasury, Defense, Justice, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor,
Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy,
Education, and Veterans Affairs.
Under the Constitution, the president is primarily responsible for foreign relations with
other nations. The president appoints ambassadors and other officials, subject to Senate
approval, and, with the secretary of state, formulates and manages the nation's foreign policy.
The president often represents the United States abroad in consultations with other heads of
state, and, through his officials, he negotiates treaties with other countries. Such treaties must
be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate. Presidents also negotiate with other nations
less formal "executive agreements" that are not subject to Senate approval.
2. The Legislative Branch
The legislative branch is made up of elected representatives from ll the states and is
the only branch that can make federal laws, levy federal taxes, declare war or put foreign
treaties into effect. It consists of a Congress that is divided into two groups, called houses:
The House of Representatives comprises lawmakers who serve two-year terms. Each
House member represents a district in his or her home state. The number of districts in a state
is determined by a count of the population taken every 10 years. The most heavily populated
states have more districts and, therefore, more representatives than the smaller states, some of
which have only one.
The Senate comprises lawmakers who serve six-year terms. Each state, regardless of
population, has two senators. That assures that the small states have an equal voice in one of
the Houses of Congress. The terms of the senators are staggered, so that only one-third of the
Senate is elected every two years. That assures that there are some experienced senators in
Page 4
Congress after each election. The main duty of the Congress is to make laws, including those
which levy taxes that pay for the work of the federal government.
A law begins as a proposal called a "bill". It is read, studied in committees,
commented on and amended in the Senate or House chamber in which it was introduced. It is
then voted upon. If it passes, it is sent to the other house where a similar procedure occurs.
Members of both houses work together in "conference committees" if the chambers have
passed different versions of the same bill. Groups who try to persuade congressmen to vote
for or against a bill are known as "lobbies." When both houses of Congress pass a bill on
which they agree, it is sent to the president for his signature. Only after it is signed does the
bill become a law.
3. The Judicial Branch
The judicial branch is headed by the Supreme Court, which is the only court
specifically created by the Constitution. In addition, the Congress has established 11 federal
courts of appeal and, below them, 91 federal district courts. Federal justices are appointed for
life or voluntary retirement, and can only be removed from office through the process of
impeachment and trial in the Congress.
Federal courts have jurisdiction over cases arising out of the Constitution, laws and
treaties of the United States; maritime cases, issues involving foreign citizens or governments,
and cases in which the federal government itself is a party. Ordinarily, federal courts do not
hear cases arising out of the laws of individual states.
The Supreme Court consists of a chief justice and eight associate justices. With minor
exceptions, all its cases reach the Court on appeal from lower federal or state courts. Most of
these cases involve disputes over the interpretation of laws and legislation. In this capacity,
the Court's most important function consists of determining whether congressional legislation
or executive action violates the Constitution.
4. Checks and Balances
When Americans talk about their three-part national government, they often refer to
what they call its system of "checks and balances." This system works in many ways to keep
Page 5
serious mistakes from being made by one branch or another. Here are a few examples of
checks and balances:
• If Congress proposes a law that the president thinks is unwise, the president can veto
it. That means the proposal does not become law. Congress can enact the law despite
the president's views only if two-thirds of the members of both houses vote in favour
of it.
• If Congress passes a law which is then challenged in the courts as unconstitutional, the
Supreme Court has the power to declare the law unconstitutional and therefore no
longer in effect.
• The president has the power to make treaties with other nations and to make all
appointments to federal positions, including the position of Supreme Court justice.
The Senate, however, must approve all treaties and confirm all appointments before
they become official. In this way the Congress can prevent the president from making
unwise appointments.
5. Bill of Rights
Apart from the Constitution, to all Americans another basic foundation of their
representative democracy is the Bill of Rights. This consists of 10 very short paragraphs
which guarantee freedom and individual rights and forbid interference with the lives of
individuals by the government. Each paragraph is an Amendment to the original Constitution.
In the Bill of Rights, Americans are guaranteed freedom of religion, of speech and of
the press. They have the right to assemble in public places, to protest government actions and
to demand change. They have the right to own weapons if they wish. Because of the Bill of
Rights, neither police nor soldiers can stop and search a person without good reason. They
also cannot search a person's home without legal permission from a court to do so.
The Bill of Rights guarantees Americans the right to a speedy trial if accused of a
crime. The trial must be by a jury and the accused person must be allowed representation by a
lawyer and must be able to call in witnesses to speak for him or her. Cruel an unusual
punishment is forbidden.
Many current controversial issues, such as the death penalty and abortion, stem from
conflicts over how the Bill of Rights should be interpreted. Much of the wording in the
Constitution and its amendments is general; therefore, many Americans disagree on how this
Page 6
language applies to certain situations. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Supreme Court
of the United States to determine the meaning of the Constitution.
6. Current Issues
a. Abortion
Abortion has been and still is one of the nation's most controversial issues. Opponents
of legalized abortion believe that human life begins at conception and that aborting a
pregnancy is murder. Foes of abortion also contend that it has led to sexual promiscuity in
American society – especially among teenagers, some of whom may view abortion as an
acceptable means of birth control. Some opponents of legalized abortion also say that the
procedure is harmful to women's health.
Those who believe that abortion should remain legal say that in a free society the
government should not take away a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy. They argue that
abortion is a personal choice and that a woman should have control over her own body. In
addition, abortion rights activists argue that medical experts do not agree on when human life
begins: therefore, abortion cannot be considered murder. They dispute the idea that large
numbers of women view abortion as a means of birth control and instead describe it as a last
resort for women in desperate situations. They also contend that legalized abortion protects
women by allowing them to have qualified physicians perform the procedure - preventing
them from using dangerous, often life-threatening methods to terminate unwanted
pregnancies.
b. Privacy in an Electronic Age
Millions of people throughout the world "surf the Net" regularly for work, shopping,
and entertainment. Hundreds of thousands of World Wide Web sites provide vast quantities of
information, and Internet capabilities enable "Netizens" to send electronic mail messages
around the globe in an instant, trade stocks on Wall Street from their own personal computers,
and order numerous products and services from on-line businesses.
Page 7
However, the Internet has not come without warnings of its attendant problems. The
growing industry of electronic business - "e-commerce" – has raised major questions about
how much personal information companies can obtain from Internet users who visit
commercial Web sites. Business has long relied on personal information about customers who
are most likely to purchase their goods and services. The Internet has provided another way to
gather such information. Many Web sites request - and in some cases require - that visitors
provide personal information like their name, telephone number, and home and e-mail
addresses. Often, this information is used to sell Web site advertising or sold to other
companies for marketing purposes.
Currently, the acquisition and use of information gleaned from the Internet is not
regulated. That is why many Americans worry that privacy standards they have come to
expect will be lost in the electronic world. The Constitution does not protect citizens' privacy
from the actions of other private individuals or businesses. However, Congress can pass laws
that regulate the actions of individuals and businesses. Thus, some citizens think that the
federal government needs to create an Electronic Privacy Bill of Rights. They believe that
Internet consumers should have the right to choose whether personal information is collected
from them and to know how it will be disseminated. Such proponents also support the
creation of a federal agency or office to oversee and enforce these protections.
Those who oppose federal regulations insist that the Internet industry can and will
regulate itself with regard to consumer privacy. Some experts argue that, with the Internet
changing so rapidly, it would be premature to create uniform standards now. Finally, these
Internet advocates argue that federal privacy standards amount to government "policing" of
the Internet.
c. Assisted Suicide
Proponents of assisted suicide say that it allows terminally ill patients to die with
dignity, without prolonged pain and suffering. Right-to-die supporters argue that patients are
being kept alive long after their quality of life has irreversibly deteriorated. They say that
permitting doctors to assist in patients' suicides and establishing guidelines to regulate their
efforts enables patients and their families to make informed decisions about what is best for
them.
Page 8
Opponents argue that doctor-assisted suicides allow too many opportunities for misuse
of the procedure. For instance, they say, older patients and patients with little money might be
pressured to choose to die once they become a financial burden on their families. Some
people oppose the right to die because they believe that humans should not "play God" and try
to decide when it is acceptable for someone to end his or her life. Some doctors reject the idea
because they say it is against their medical code of ethics to actively cause a patient's death.
d. Gun Control
The widespread availability of firearms and the high number of gun-related deaths
have prompted some individuals and groups to organize efforts to control the buying and
selling of firearms. Proponents of gun control want the government to at least require owners
to register their handguns and to perform background checks on all potential handgun buyers
to ensure that they do not have criminal records.
Opponents of gun control argue that restricting gun ownership will not keep criminals
from obtaining guns and will not prevent crime because most criminals do not purchase guns
legally, but instead steal them or buy them from illegal dealers. Opponents also warn that,
ultimately, gun control could disarm the law-abiding general public and place them at the
mercy of well-armed criminals.
7. Political Parties
The United States has two major political parties: the Democratic party and the
Republican party. Most Americans consider the Democratic party the more liberal party. By
that they mean that Democrats believe the federal government and the state governments
should be active in providing social and economic programmes for those who need them,
such as the poor, the unemployed or students who need money to go to college.
Republicans are not necessarily opposed to such programmes. They believe, however,
that many social programmes are too costly to the taxpayers and that when taxes are raised to
pay for such programmes, everyone is hurt. They place more emphasis on private enterprise
and often accuse the Democrats of making the government too expensive and of creating too
many laws that harm individual initiative. For that reason, Americans tend to think of the
Republican party as more conservative.
Page 9
Both major parties have supporters among a wide variety of Americans and embrace a
wide range of political viewpoints. There is so much variety in both major parties that not all
members of Congress or other elected officials who belong to the same party agree with each
other on everything. There are conservative Democrats who tend to agree with many
Republican ideas and liberal Republicans who often agree with Democratic ideas. These
differences often show up in the way members of Congress vote on certain laws. Very
frequently, there are both Democrats and Republicans who do not vote the way their party
leaders suggest. They put their own views or the views of the people they represent ahead of
the views of their party leaders.
It should be noted that members of Congress sometimes cast votes which the people
they represent do not favour. They do this as a matter of conscience or because they believe
they are acting in the best interests of the nation.
There are other, smaller parties in the United States besides the two major parties.
None of these smaller parties has enough popular support to win a presidential election, but
some are very strong in certain cities and states and can have their own state or city
candidates elected or can determine which major party wins by supporting one or the other.
Many people from other nations are surprised to learn that among the political parties
in the United States is a Communist party and other Marxist Socialist parties. They are
surprised because the United States is seen by many as the leader of the nations opposed to
communism. Most Americans do not like the ideas represented by the Communist party and
distrust communism in general. The fact that the party exists, seeks to attract supporters and
participates freely in elections, however, is considered evidence that there are no exceptions to
the freedoms and rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.
The emphasis on freedom, rights and equality has created in citizens of the United
States strong feelings of independence, self-worth and even resistance to discipline, as well as
belief that people should be able to do what they want without interference so long as they do
not interfere with the rights of others.
Conclusion
Most citizens view the United States as the freest society in the world because its
people have so many rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The
Supreme Court, through its rulings, defines and clarifies the meanings of these documents.
Page 10
Court rulings also determine how Americans can exercise their rights, whether or by how
much the government can regulate or limit those rights, and when the rights of one individual
or group should be limited because they are infringing upon the rights of someone else.
Americans also have the right to amend the Constitution if they disagree with a decision of
the Supreme Court or if they think additional rights need to be extended to the people. This
interplay between Supreme Court rulings and the will of the American people shapes the
interpretation of the Constitution and its role in American democracy.
Page 11
THE AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM
Introduction
One of the most ambitious undertakings in the history of education is the American
effort to educate an entire national population. The goal is - and has been since the early
decades of the republic - to achieve universal literacy and to provide individuals with the
knowledge and skills necessary to promote both their own individual welfare as well as that
of the general public. Though this goal has not yet been fully achieved, it remains an ideal
towards which the American educational system is directed.
1. Elementary and Secondary Education
The progress which has been made is notable both for its scope and for the educational
methods which have been developed in the process of achieving it. About 85% of American
students attend public schools (schools supported by American taxpayers). The other 15%
attend private schools, for which their families choose to pay special attendance fees.
Four out of five private schools in the United States are run by churches, synagogues
or other religious groups. In such schools, religious teachings are a part of the curriculum,
which also includes the traditional academic courses of reading, mathematics, history,
geography and science. (Religious instruction is not given in public schools.)
Who decides how much money should be used annually for teachers' salaries, new
computers or extra books? Private schools that meet state standards use the fees they collect
as they think best. But where public taxes are involved, spending is guided by boards of
education (policymakers for schools) at the state and/or district level. The same thing is true
for decisions about the school curriculum, teacher standards and certification, and the overall
measurement of student progress.
Page 12
a. Education - A Local Matter
Each of the 50 states in the United States has its own laws regulating education. From
state to state, some laws are similar; others are not. For example:
• All states require young people to attend school. (The age limits vary; 7 to 16; 6 to 18;
etc.) Thus, every child in America is guaranteed up to 13 years of education. This is
true regardless of a child's race, religion, sex, learning problems, physical handicap or
inability to speak English.
• Some states play a strong role in the selection of learning material for their students.
For example, state committees may decide which publishers' textbooks can be
purchased with state funds. In other cases, decisions about buying instructional
material are left entirely to local school officials.
Americans have a strong tendency to educate their children about major public
concerns - problems such as environmental pollution, nuclear issues, neighbourhood crime
and drugs. Responding to public pressure, boards of education in different areas often add
courses on various relevant issues to the curriculum in grades K to 12.
b. What an American Student Learns
American students pass through several levels of schooling - and thus, several
curricula - on their way to a high school diploma. They attend:
• Elementary School. "Elementary school" usually means grades K (or 1) through 8. But
in some places, the elementary school includes only grades K-6. And sometimes
grades 4, 5 and 6 make up what is called a "middle grade" school. (Many Americans
refer to the elementary grades as "grammar school.")
• Secondary School. "Secondary school" generally means grades 9-12. These grades are
popularly called "high school". However, in many districts, "junior high school"
includes grades 7-9. And when grades 7-9 are included with the 10th, 11th and 12th
grades, all six are said to form a "senior high school."
Though there is no national curriculum in the United States, certain subjects are taught
in all K to 12 systems across the country.
Page 13
Almost every elementary school provides instruction in these subjects: mathematics;

language arts (a subject that includes reading, grammar, composition and literature);
penmanship; science; social studies (a subject that includes history, geography, citizenship and
economics); music; art; and physical education. In many elementary schools, courses in the
use of computers have been introduced. And in some cases, a second language (other than
English) is offered in the upper elementary grades.
Most secondary schools offer the same "core" of required subjects: English,
mathematics, science, social studies and physical education. But school boards differ greatly
from one district to another in the amount of class time they want high school students to
spend on these basic subjects. In some high schools, for example, students must complete
three years of mathematics before graduation. The national average is lower.
The average state requirements for high school graduation amounts to 17.5 "units" of
course work. (A high school unit is equal to about 120 hours [3 hours per week] of classes in
one subject.) Students planning to attend college might take over 20 units.
Students are guided by school counselors in choosing electives, which can range from
specialized academic to vocational subjects. For example, high schools offer more than one
year - in most cases, several years - of math, science and the other core subjects. After they
complete the required units in these core areas (for example, one year of American history),
students can take additional units as electives (perhaps a year of European history and a year
of world political issues).
Other elective courses vary from school to school. Some high schools specialize in
particular types of subjects - business education, or industrial trades, or foreign languages, for
example. A student planning to be a physician would want to attend a school offering
electives in science.
The opportunity for elective courses in high school satisfies some ideals that are very
important to Americans:
• The opportunity to get an education that prepares a person for his or her life's work.
• The opportunity to pursue and study one's own interests.
• The opportunity to discover one's own talents and perfect them.
Page 14
2. Current Issues
a. The Fight Over Bilingual Education
Most Americans agree that it is necessary to help recently immigrated children learn to
speak English - one of the most important tools they will need to succeed in their new
country. What fewer Americans agree on is how the nation's public schools can best meet that
challenge, particularly at a time when immigration to the United States is at a recent high.
Since 1968, the system of teaching students core academic subjects in their native language,
while gradually integrating the teaching of English, has been the norm in many school
districts. Now many think bilingual education was and is an expensive failure; others say it is
still the best way to teach English to the millions of public school students who have limited
language abilities.
Those who oppose bilingual education argue that it is a failed system that has
inadequately prepared students to speak English fluently. They cite the fact that less than 10%
of bilingual students actually transfer into mainstream English-speaking classes each year,
leaving numerous students languishing in segregated classrooms where they have little
opportunity to communicate with their English-speaking peers. Critics also point to disturbing
statistics that indicate the dropout rate for Hispanic students is 30%, more than four times that
of whites. Many of those students came from bilingual classrooms.
On the other hand, supporters of bilingual education argue it is still the most
pedagogically sound way of teaching English while at the same time keeping students at age-
appropriate academic levels. They believe that students are best served by learning to read and
write in their native language and then "transitioning" those skills to English. Many
proponents contend that anti-bilingual efforts are both racist and anti-immigrant. They go on
to say that while one year of intensive English instruction may be enough time to teach
"playground English," it is not nearly enough time for students to learn "academic English" -
the ability to communicate concepts and ideas effectively.
b. School Choice
Many observers of the public school system say that students are not getting the
education they deserve because parents have little say in where their children go to school.
Page 15
They contend that schools have no incentive to improve because they have guaranteed student
enrollments based on geography, not on quality. By giving parents the choice of where to send
their children, these critics argue, schools - much like businesses in a free-market economy –
would have to improve to attract students.
One controversial version of school choice involves issuing vouchers to parents to
help them pay for their children's education at a private school. Many parents with children in
poor public schools, and parents who are already paying tuition fees at private schools,
champion the idea.
Supporters of school voucher plans say holding schools accountable for their
performance would force them to improve. According to proponents, a voucher system would
result, at least in the short-term, in a drop in enrollments – and available funds - at
substandard schools. This would force teachers and administrators at these schools to fix
problems or else risk being closed. Those who favour vouchers believe that low-income
parents should have the opportunity to choose a school based on what is best for their
children, much like parents who can afford private school do already. Encouraging public
schools to improve in order to compete for students will raise the quality of the entire
educational system.
Opponents argue that only those students who are fortunate enough to be accepted at
private schools will benefit from vouchers. They say that there is no solid evidence that
voucher systems improve schools or raise student test scores. Opponents also contend that
vouchers would hurt public schools by enticing the most motivated students and their parents
- often the most involved - to leave the system. Thus, vouchers would leave public schools
void of the very students and parents who are most likely to effect positive change.
3. Higher Education
Out of more than three million students who graduate from high school each year,
about one million go on for higher education. Simply by being admitted into one of the most
respected universities in the United States, a high school graduate achieves a degree of
success. A college at a leading university might receive applications from 2% of these high
school graduates, and then accept one out of every ten who apply. Successful applicants at
such colleges are usually chosen on the basis of (a) their high school records; (b)
Page 16
recommendations from their high school teachers; (c) the impression they make during
interviews at the university; and (d) their scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SATs).
The system of higher education in the United States is complex. It comprises four
categories of institutions: (1) the university, which may contain (a) several colleges for
undergraduate students seeking a bachelor's (four-year) degree and (b) one or more graduate
schools for those continuing in specialized studies beyond the bachelor's degree to obtain a
master's or a doctoral degree; (2) the four-year undergraduate institution - the college - most
of which are not part of a university; (3) the technical training institution, at which high
school graduates may take courses ranging from six months to four years in duration and
learn a wide variety of technical skills, from hair styling through business accounting to
computer programming; (4) and the two-year, or community college, from which students
may enter many professions or may transfer to four-year colleges or universities.
Any of these institutions, in any category, might be either public or private, depending
on the source of its funding. There is no clear or inevitable distinction in terms of quality of
education offered between the institutions which are publicly or privately funded. However,
this is not to say that all institutions enjoy equal prestige nor that there are no material
differences among them. The factors determining whether an institution is one of the best or
one of lower prestige are quality of teaching faculty; quality of research facilities; amount of
funding available for libraries, special programmes, etc.; and the competence and number of
applicants for admission, i.e., how selective the institution can be in choosing its students. All
of these factors reinforce one another.
a. Why Americans Go to College
The United States leads all industrial nations in the proportion of its young men and
women who receive higher education. Why is this? Americans place a high value on higher
education. This is an attitude that goes back to the country's oldest political traditions. People
in the United States have always believed that education is necessary for maintaining a
democratic government. They believe that it prepares the individual for informed, intelligent
political participation, including voting.
In addition to idealistic reasons for going to college, however, most Americans are
concerned with earning a good (or better) income. For some careers - law, medicine,
education, engineering - a college education is a necessary first step. Some careers do not
Page 17
require going to college, but many young Americans believe that having a degree will help
them obtain a higher salary on their first job. Today, that first job is likely to involve handling
information: More than 60% of Americans now work as teachers, computer programmers,
secretaries, lawyers, bankers, and in other jobs involving the discovery, exchange and use of
data (facts). A high-school diploma is not sufficient preparation for most such employment.
b. Selecting a College or University
In addition to learning about a school's entrance requirements (and its fees),

Americans have a lot of questions to think about when they choose a university or college.
They need to know:
• What degrees does the school offer? How long does it take to earn ne? At the
undergraduate (college) level, a four-year "liberal arts" course of study is traditionally
offered which leads to a bachelor of arts (BA) degree in such subjects as history,
languages and philosophy. Many liberal arts colleges also offer a bachelor of science
(BS) degree in physics, chemistry or other scientific subjects. A technical training
institution, offering such courses as agriculture or business skills, offers courses of
varying length, and community college studies last two years.
Graduate schools in America award master's and doctor's degrees in both the arts and
sciences. The courses for most graduate degrees can be completed in two to four years. But if
a graduate programme requires original research, a student could spend many additional
months or even years in a university library or laboratory.
• What curricula does a college or university offer? What are the requirements for
earning a degree? In an American university, each college and graduate school has its
own curriculum. At the undergraduate level, there may be some courses that every
student has to take (for example, classes in world history, math, writing or research).
But students do select their "major" (the field in which they want their degree), plus a
specific number of "electives".
Today a total of more than 1,000 majors are offered in America's colleges and
universities. The combined electives available in these schools probably amount to a number
in the tens of thousands. Typically, an undergraduate student has to earn a certain number of
"credits" (about 120) in order to receive a degree at the end of four years of college. Credits
are earned by attending lectures (or lab classes) and by successfully completing assignments
Page 18
and examinations. One credit usually equals one hour of class per week in a single course. A
three-credit course in biology could involve two hours of lectures plus one hour in a science
lab, every week. A course may last 10 to 16 weeks - the length of a semester.
• Is the college or university a public institution or a private one? If it is private, is it a
religious school? The United States does not have a national (federal) school system,
but each of the 50 states operates its own university, and so do some large city
governments. (The government does grant degrees in the schools it operates for
professional members of the armed services – for example, the United States Naval
Academy at Annapolis, Maryland.) About 25% of all schools of higher education in
the United States are privately operated by religious organizations. Most are open to
students of different faiths, but in some religious schools all students are required to
attend religious services. There are also privately owned schools with no religious
connection.
Both public and private colleges depend on three sources of income: student tuitions,
endowments (gifts made by wealthy benefactors) and government funding. Some
endowments are very large: Harvard, Princeton and Yale Universities have more than a
thousand million dollars each. Public institutions receive a larger portion of public tax monies
than do private schools.
• How large is the school? There are many small American colleges - some with fewer
than 100 students. But the larger universities tend to keep attracting larger numbers of
enrollments. (For example, the State University of New York has more than 60
campuses in different parts of the state.)
4. Current Issues
About 12 million students currently attend schools of higher education in America.

They have at their disposal great libraries (Harvard alone has more than 10 million volumes),
the latest technology, and faculties with a tradition of research accomplishments. They are
free to pursue their interests, to develop their talents, and to gain professional rank. Still,
many Americans are not satisfied with the condition of higher education in their country.
Critics point out that:
• One out of every eight highly talented high school graduates does not go on to college.
Page 19
• Only half the students who enroll in college for a bachelor's degree actually achieve
their goal. (Is the curriculum too hard? Not challenging enough?)
• College education has become excessively vocational work-related, therefore it may
no longer be developing in students the shared values and knowledge that traditionally
bind Americans together.
As one response to the last issue many colleges have begun reemphasizing a core curriculum
that all students must muster.
Conclusion
Americans cherish their right to express opinions on such issues as: "What is
America's proper role as the world's oldest Constitutional democracy; its largest economy; its
first nuclear power?" But they are also painfully aware of how complex such issues are. To
take part in dealing with new problems, most Americans feel they need all the information
they can get. Colleges and universities are the most important centres of such learning. And
whatever improvements may be demanded, their future is almost guaranteed by the American
thirst to advance and be well-informed.
Page 20
IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA
Introduction
The United States was built by immigrants, many seeking a new life in a new land.
Before 1882, anyone could move to the United States. But as the population grew, the federal
government decided to control immigration. The first immigration laws limited the number of
newcomers from countries such as China and Japan so that the ethnic makeup of the United
States would be preserved. In 1965, the government limited not only the number of
immigrants from Europe, Asia, and Africa, but also, for the first time, immigrants from
countries in the Western Hemisphere. In 1997, the United States admitted approximately
800,000 legal immigrants. However, immigration swelled by another 275,000 people who
illegally crossed U.S. borders.
Unlike previous waves of immigrants who dispersed more evenly throughout the
country, the newcomers of the last 30 years have settled primarily in certain regions. In areas
like the American Southwest, California, and Florida, recent immigrants - many of them
Hispanic - reside in greater percentages than in other places. As a result, some Americans
perceive the country as being overwhelmed by immigrants and have asked policymakers to
create new laws that discourage immigration.
In 1996, Washington lawmakers passed three new laws that have changed immigration
control and immigrants' rights in the United States. The controversy surrounding this
legislation made immigration one of the most divisive public policy issues of the 1990s.
Recently, the growing influence of a new bloc of voters - newly naturalized immigrants - has
caused some elected officials to reconsider their positions on immigration, ensuring that the
debate over immigration policy will continue well into the new century.
Page 21
1. The Priority System
The United States restricts legal immigration to a certain quota a year. Within the legal
limit for new arrivals, there is a priority system. This system helps to decide who enters the
United States first. People who are allowed to enter earliest are the unmarried children, older
than 21, of American citizens. Second in line are spouses and unmarried children of resident
aliens. Further back in line are people with special skills, such as medical doctors and nurses.
People who do not qualify for the preference list have only a limited possibility of
immigrating because most of the spaces are taken by people who do qualify for the list.
The United States also accepts other groups of people in addition to the "regular"
immigrants: refugees and asylees. Refugees are people who flee their homelands because of
persecution resulting from their politics, race, religion, nationality, or membership in a
particular social group. The Refugee Act of 1980 authorizes the president, in consultation with
the Congress, to establish an annual ceiling on the number of refugees who may enter the
United States. The act also allows the president to admit any group of refugees in an
emergency. Asylees are foreign citizens who claim refugee status while inside the United
States or at a port of entry. Not everyone who applies for asylum is accepted. To be accepted
for asylum, an applicant must prove that he is subject to racial, political or religious
persecution.
The United States also tries to reunite families that have been separated by
immigration. Family members with relatives in the United States can come to the country
even if the legal limit for the year is already filled.
2. Changing Demographics
Overall, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimates that about 5
million illegal immigrants currently reside in the United States, of which 54% are of Mexican
origin (in spite of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 which was designed to
stop the flow of illegal immigration from Latin America by imposing sanctions against U.S.
employers who hire illegal immigrants). The majority of these residents are called EWIs,
meaning "entered without inspection." Such immigrants often come into the country between
official border crossings. Approximately 40% of the illegal alien population are
"nonimmigrant overstays" - people who arrived legally but overstayed their visas.
Page 22
The presence of large numbers of both legal and illegal immigrants has contributed to
dramatic changes in the racial, ethnic, and cultural composition of the United States. In 1998,
the Census Bureau estimated that almost one in ten U.S. residents is foreign-born - the
greatest proportion since the 1930s. And this group is growing at a rate four times faster than
the country's population as a whole.
These numbers will have a profound effect on the demographic makeup of the country
over the next fifty years. Currently, whites account for 74% of the population; blacks, 12%;
Hispanics, 10%; and Asians, 3%. But some estimates predict that by 2050, the number of
residents with Hispanic heritage will represent a quarter of the population. Some experts
believe that by as early as 2010, whites will no longer be the majority in California and that
similar demographic shifts in New York, Texas, Maryland, and New Jersey will soon follow.
3. Attitudes About Immigration
Many Americans believe that their country cannot absorb more immigrants. They
contend that newcomers take jobs away from Americans – particularly low-skilled workers -
because they enlarge the labour pool and are willing to work for lower wages. In addition,
advocates of immigration restrictions point to the large cost to taxpayers for health and
education benefits for illegal immigrants.
Critics of restrictions argue that immigrants are important to the country. They turn
around the job argument, asserting that immigrants accept low-skill, low-age jobs that many
native-born Americans will not. Moreover, these critics say, immigrants come to the United
States with a diligent work ethic that increases the country's productivity and helps the
economy. They also point out an undercurrent of racism in the restriction proposals.
4. Recent Federal Legislation
Heated criticism of U.S. immigration policy has resulted in new laws at the federal
level. In 1996, Congress passed and the president signed into law, three controversial bills
with implications for both legal and illegal immigrants.
• 1996 Anti-Terrorism Act. One provision in the Anti-Terrorism Act hastened the
procedures for deporting immigrants with criminal records. It also expanded the
number of crimes punishable by detention and deportation. In fiscal year 1997, the
Page 23
Immigration and Naturalization Service deported about 50,000 aliens convicted of

crimes, a major increase over previous years. However, officials point out that many
deportees illegally return to the United States.
• Welfare Overhaul. In August 1996, President Clinton signed a sweeping new welfare
reform bill. This legislation made illegal immigrants ineligible for virtually all federal
and state benefits except emergency medical care, immunization programmes, and
disaster relief. It also denied legal immigrants food stamps and Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) - a program for older, blind, and disabled people. Controversy erupted in
1997 as many of these provisions went into effect. In response, Congress amended the
law, dropping the provision that denied SSI benefits for legal aliens. Since then, other
benefits have been restored to legal immigrants. Meanwhile, many local government
officials protested new mandates calling on them to determine a welfare recipient's
immigration status and report illegal immigrants to the INS.
• 1996 Immigration Act. The complex Immigration Act of 1996 is the most extensive
immigration legislation passed by Congress in a decade. The new law doubled the
border patrol force to 10,000 agents over five years and added fences in the most
heavily trafficked areas of the U.S.-Mexican border. Like the welfare reform law,
provisions of the 1996 Immigration Act stirred controversy. For example, the law
granted sweeping powers to immigration agents, allowing them to make on-the-spot
expulsions of noncitizens. Many legal experts challenged those powers on the grounds
that immigrants are entitled to hearings.
5. Current Issues
a. Immigrants and the Economy
According to the Commerce Department, the United States will need 1 million new
information-technology employees over the next decade. Already, more than 300,000 job
vacancies exist in this field. The United States currently limits the number of highly skilled
workers who can enter the country on special work visas. Some have argued that this number
should be raised.
Those who support raising the number of employment-based visas - which allow
immigrants with skills and talents needed by American companies to work in the United
Page 24
States - believe that highly skilled legal immigrants help the economy. Many members of the
business community say that they cannot find enough multilingual and technically trained
American workers to help keep the nation competitive in the global economy. Therefore,
American companies recruit highly educated and trained immigrants to fill this void. They
argue that these legal residents have provided U.S. firms with specialized job skills and
thereby have helped these industries grow.
On the other hand, opponents say that American jobs are being lost to foreigners. They
argue that foreign workers are not necessarily better skilled than American candidates but are
willing to accept less pay and are less likely to challenge poor working conditions because
they depend on their sponsor company for their legal right to remain in the United States.
These critics argue that easing the ability of American companies to "import" employees
depresses industry wages. And some say that increasing the number of work visas will
contribute to the already high immigrant population in this country, draining resources and
degrading the quality of life for all.
b. English Only?
As the number of immigrants from Latin America and Asia has increased, many
Americans have felt the presence of another culture - and another language – in their
community. Although many citizens appreciate the vitality and diversity that new cultures
bring, some believe the nation's own identity is threatened. These Americans think that a
common language binds people together in a society. They fear that a bilingual society might
splinter the country along cultural and racial lines. Responding to these concerns, some
members of Congress advocate that the United States make English its official language.
Supporters of adopting English as the official U.S. language believe that English
unifies the nation, and that non-English-speaking immigrants are isolated because they cannot
communicate with most Americans. Making English the official language would encourage
immigrants to learn it. Many people, including some recent immigrants, think that the
government wastes taxpayers' money by printing tax forms, ballots, laws, and court
proceedings in other languages. Some English-only proponents believe that the U.S.
government should focus on teaching English to immigrants so they can find jobs and
assimilate into American society. Otherwise, they caution, immigrants may not be able to find
Page 25
worthwhile jobs and will be forced to rely on expensive government social service
programmes.
Other Americans believe that making English the official language of the United
States would fundamentally exclude some people from voting, understanding U.S. laws, or
participating in America's judicial system. These opponents of the English-only movement
argue that the movement is fuelled by racism and a fear of immigrants, not by economic
reasons. Critics point out that not only have immigrants assimilated into the United States
throughout its history without being obligated to speak English, but they have made many
social, political, and economic contributions to U.S. society along the way. Finally, they argue
that forcing one language on Americans is a violation of free speech rights.
c. Denying Benefits to Illegal Immigrants
Many taxpayers in states with large numbers of illegal immigrants express outrage at
the spiralling cost of social programmes. Many Americans believe that the government, by
providing free services to undocumented immigrants, is unintentionally encouraging people to
enter the United States illegally. People who want to deny social services to illegal immigrants
argue that would-be illegal aliens would think twice before crossing the border once they
realized that they would not get free medical care and education in the United States.
Although most Americans agree that illegal immigration is a problem, many oppose
denying social services to undocumented residents and their children. They think such laws
will not discourage illegal immigration because foreigners come to the United States
primarily to work, not to collect social benefits. Opponents point to studies indicating that
illegal immigrants rely on social benefits in the same proprtions as other Americans. They
argue that preventing immigrants from receiving medical care and education services will
result in an unhealthy, poorly educated underclass. Many critics believe that the government
should instead focus its anti-illegal immigration policies on controlling the U.S.-Mexican
border.
d. Detaining Immigrants
Page 26
Trying to carry out tough detention and deportation laws passed in 1996, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is struggling to find places to hold noncitizen,
legal residents who are scheduled for deportation because of criminal records. A piece of
complex immigration reform bills of 1996 calls for the INS to deport legal aliens with certain
types of criminal convictions, even if they have already served out their punishments. Some
of these detainees, known as "lifers," are stuck in an indefinite detention status because their
own countries either will not accept them or do not have deportation relationships with the
United States, such as Cuba. Immigrant advocates argue that this indefinite detention
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
6. No More "Melting Pot"?
In the past, Americans used to think of the United States as a "melting pot" of
immigrants. A "melting pot" meant that as immigrants from many different cultures came to
the United States, their old ways melted away and they became part of a completely new
culture. The United States was likened to a big pot of soup, which had bits of flavor from each
different culture. All of the different cultures were so well blended together that it formed its
own new flavor.
Today, Americans realize that the simple "melting pot" theory is less true. Instead,
different groups of people keep many of their old customs. Often groups of Americans from
the same culture band together. They live together in distinctive communities, such as
"Chinatowns" or "Little Italys" – areas populated almost exclusively by Americans of a single
ethnic group - which can be found in many large American cities. Living in ethnic
neighbourhoods gives new Americans the security of sharing a common language and
common traditions with people who understand them.
In time, however, people from different backgrounds mix together. They also mix with
native-born Americans. Old traditions give way to new customs. The children of immigrants
are often eager to adopt new, American ways. They often want to dress in American fashions,
to speak English and to follow American social customs. By one estimate, about 80% of
European immigrants marry outside their own ethnic groups by the time they reach the third
generation. Third generation means that their great-grandparents were immigrants. Yet as
Page 27
successive generations become more "Americanized," they often retain significant elements
of their ethnic heritage.
7. American Traits
Understanding immigration helps to explain some of the traits of the American people.
For example, immigrants move to the United States because they are looking for a better life.
It takes a lot of courage to leave behind everything that is familiar and come to a new country.
Since before the independence of the United States, Americans have been a people willing to
take risks and try new things. This willingness to strike out for the unknown takes an
independence and an optimism that also is thought to be a characteristic of the American
people today.
Immigrants also come to the United States because they differ from the majority of
people surrounding them and because Americans also are known to be generally accepting of
people with different ideas.
Americans are also a people who are quick to learn and are open to new experiences.
They have to be. Immigrants both today and in the past have a whole new world to learn
about. They often have to learn everything from a new language to new social customs and
new ways to make a living.
Immigrants also believe in the dream of the United States. They believe that by
working hard and obeying the laws, they can have a better life. Often Americans who have
been in the United States longer become less acutely aware of the rights and advantages that
they have. Immigrants help native-born Americans to appreciate the good things to be found
in the United States.
John F. Kennedy, who was president during the early 1960s, was the grandson of an
Irish immigrant. Kennedy once said that the United States was "a society of immigrants, each
of whom had begun life anew, on an equal footing. This is the secret of America: a nation of
people with the fresh memory of old traditions who dare to explore new frontiers ..."
Conclusion
As more and more people of different races and cultures enter the United States and
the racial composition of the country changes, debates about immigration become more
Page 28
intense. Some U.S. citizens favor tighter immigration restrictions and argue that immigrants
take jobs away from Americans, resist learning English, and drain social services. Others,
however, point to America's historical commitment to immigration and believe that
immigrants keep the nation economically competitive and culturally rich. The question of
whether to close America's doors will continue to be debated in the courts, in Congress, and in
communities where immigrants choose to settle.
Page 29
MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS IN AMERICA
Introduction
Freedom of the press is an essential part of democracy. Newspapers, television news

programmes, and radio talk shows have the important role of keeping citizens informed about
domestic and world events. Thus, the news media have been called the watchdogs of
democracy because journalists are expected to keep an eye on the government for the people.
The ability of journalists to write and broadcast without fear of government censorship is a
cornerstone of freedom in America.
The 1990s have witnessed the emergence of new technologies that have revolutionized
how the news is gathered and consumed. Many Americans now rely on the Internet for news.
But what will be the effect of these new information technologies? Some experts think that
the government will be more responsive to the people as news and opinions are exchanged
faster. Others argue that recent trends in the media - particularly the blurring between news
and entertainment - may do more harm than good to the democratic process.
1. The First Amendment
Among other rights, the First Amendment guarantees people's right to freedom of
speech and the press: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press...." Ever since 1791, when the Bill of Rights became part of the Constitution, the
First Amendment has served as the conscience and shield of all Americans who reported the
news, who wished to make their opinions public, or who desired to influence public opinion.
Over the past two centuries, however, the means of communication - what we now call the
"media" - have grown immensely more complex. Today the term "the press" has expanded to
refer to any news operation in any media, not just print. These various organizations are also
commonly called the "news media."
Page 30
This media explosion has created an intricate and instantaneous nerve system shaping
the values and culture of American society. News and entertainment are beamed from one end
of the American continent to another. The result is that the United States has been tied
together more tightly, and the media have helped to reduce regional differences and customs.
People all over the country watch the same shows, often at the same time. The media bring
the American people a common and shared experience - the same news, the same
entertainment, the same advertising.
2. Freedom of the Press and National Security
Wars and other events that have national security implications for the United States
test the boundaries of the First Amendment. In times of war, the government has often placed
limitations on the press, arguing that making public certain details - such as military strategies
- might risk both American lives and national security. Others, however, believe that it is
unconstitutional to suspend First Amendment rights, even during emergencies.
In 1991, the U.S. government cited national security as the reason for restricting news
media coverage of the Persian Gulf War in Iraq. The Pentagon regulated the movements of
journalists by giving only the "press pool" - a small group of reporters - limited access to
military operations and other information. The pool reporters were always accompanied by
military personnel and were supposed to share their findings with those left behind. In
addition, ten categories of information were deemed "not releasable." Some of this
information was sensitive, such as the number of troops and aircraft stationed in the Gulf, but
journalists also were forbidden to disclose the names or hometowns of most soldiers they
interviewed.
Many constitutional scholars believe that the military is not justified in restricting the
media by using press pools. Others, however, respond that the press does not have a right to
full access to U.S. military information.
3. Television and Politics
In 1941, television broadcasting began in the United States. By 1949, there were more
than 100 television stations and two regular news programmes on NBC and CBS. By 1955,
35 million American homes had televisions. The new medium of television quickly became
Page 31
more powerful than radio. This fact did not escape politicians, who saw television as a
potentially powerful weapon in their election campaigns.
Television's role in choosing the president has been particularly significant. Some
critics contend that television reporting on presidential campaigns has led to an emphasis on
style over substance. Others argue that television coverage has better informed people about
the issues.
• The Kennedy/Nixon Debate. In the 1960 presidential election Senator John Kennedy
defeated Vice President Richard Nixon by fewer than 100,000 votes of the 70 million
cast. Although historians disagree over what gave Kennedy his razor-thin margin of
victory, few can doubt the significance of the televised debate. On September 16,
1960, Kennedy and Nixon met in a studio in Chicago for the first-ever presidential
debate to be broadcast on television. That night, more than 70 million Americans
watched the two candidates discuss their opinions on foreign and domestic policy. On
camera, Kennedy looked youthful and well rested. Nixon, however, was recovering
from an illness and seemed tired and haggard. Afterwards, public opinion polls of
television viewers declared Kennedy the "winner"; those who had listened on the
radio, however, thought that Nixon came out ahead. After the election, Kennedy told a
friend, "It was TV that turned the tide."
• Bill Clinton on MTV. In 1992, Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas appeared on a series
of television programmes that were atypical for presidential candidates. Facing
accusations about his personal life, Clinton was questioned about his marriage in a
special 13-minute interview. Later in the campaign, he donned a pair of sunglasses and
played the saxophone on the Arsenio Hall Show in an attempt to appeal to wider
audiences. He also went on MTV to take questions from young citizens. Most
political analysts agree that Clinton's television appearances improved his image with
the American public and helped him with the presidency.
4. The Influence of the "New Media"
Over the course of the 20th century, radio and television had a tremendous impact on
the dissemination of news and information. Recent advances in technology have created
innovative ways of transmitting news. Experts have dubbed these telecommunications
Page 32
technologies - cable television, interactive television, electronic mail, and the Internet - the
"new media."
a. News Everywhere
In 1980, the Cable News Network (CNN) became the first 24-hour television news
channel. CNN helped further the notion of a global village, where people in different
countries could witness events around the world "live" on television and communicate
instantly via electronic mail or facsimile. Since 1996, two more 24-hour cable news channels,
MSNBC and the FOX News Network, have gone on the air.
Newspapers and radio programmes have changed as well, offering the public
information in new formats. For example, since 1992 the newspapers USA TODAY has
offered readers "news at a glance" in an easy-to-read, colourful format. Many news
consumers also rely on talk radio personalities to offer opinions and information about current
events.
b. The Internet
The Internet has become a major news source for many Americans. In recent years,
news organizations and technology companies have raced to put information on the Internet -
material available almost instantly to millions of "plugged in" computer users. Internet users
can "surf" different Web sites in which newspaper articles, important speeches, interviews,
and key pieces of legislation can be accessed. Currently, about 40 million people around the
world get news from the Internet.
5. Public Trust of the Media
Today, the public can choose from an abundance of media sources. However, many
people question whether much of what they are reading, hearing, and seeing is reliable. They
worry that reporters are not using credible sources or checking their facts. Some think that
news conglomerates - companies that own more than one newspaper, magazine, or television
station - are more concerned about generating profits than providing legitimate, accurate news
coverage.
Page 33
Some experts are apprehensive about the media's preoccupation with sensationalist
topics. They argue that over the last few years the press has become obsessed with stories
such as the death of Princess Diana, the O.J. Simpson murder trial, and the scandals
surrounding President Clinton - all at the expense of hard news. Critics claim that mainstream
newspapers are becoming more like supermarket tabloids and that, as a result, the public is
not being kept informed about events and issues that really make a difference in their lives.
Overall, the news media appears to have lost much of the trust they once had from the
American public.
Some observers believe that one way to address cynicism about the press would be to
create a national news council, composed of journalists, to monitor the coverage of people
and events. However, others say that criticism of the press is overblown. They contend that
journalists are generally committed professionals who provide a valuable public service.
Besides, media watchers point out, readers and viewers publicly denounce certain media
coverage yet privately consume it, thus keeping ratings and profits high. These critics say that
the American people have to learn to separate the "real" from the "sensational."
6. The Risk of Being Sued
One growing pressure on reporters and editors is the risk of being sued. Even though
the First Amendment protects the press from government interference, the press does not have
complete freedom. There are laws against libel and invasion of privacy, as well limits on what
reporters may do in order to get a story. Libel is any false and malicious writing or picture that
exposes a person to public ridicule or injures his reputation. If a broadcast or published story
falsely implies that a private citizen committed a crime or is mentally incompetent, for
example, the victim would probably win a libel suit. But Supreme Court Decisions have made
it much harder for public officials or well-known public figures to prove libel. Such persons
must prove not only that the story is wrong, but that the journalist published his story with
"active malice."
The right of privacy is meant to protect individual Americans' peace of mind and
security. Journalists cannot barge into people's homes or offices to seek out news and expose
their private lives to the public.
Americans' right to a fair trial, guaranteed by the Constitution, has provoked many a
media battle. Judges have often ordered journalists - many times unsuccessfully - not to
Page 34
publish damaging information about a person on trial. Also, in most states journalists may be
jailed for contempt of court for refusing to identify the sources for their story if demanded by
a court.
TV newspeople operate under an additional restriction called the Fairness Doctrine.
Under this rule, when a station presents one viewpoint on a controversial issue, the public
interest requires the station to give opposing viewpoints a chance to broadcast a reply.
In recent years, more news organizations are settling cases out of court to avoid costly
- and embarrassing - legal battles. Editors say that major libel suits, which generally ask for
millions of dollars in damages, are having a "chilling effect" on investigative reporting. Most
affected are small news operations which do not have large profits to finance their defence.
Press critics, however, say the chill factor also works the other way - against people who feel
they have been wronged but cannot afford to sue.
In short, the United States confronts a classic conflict between two deeply held beliefs:
the right to know and the right to privacy and fair treatment. It is not a conflict that can be
resolved with a single formula, but only on a case-by-case basis.
7. Current Issues
a. The New Media and an Informed Public
While new information technologies - especially the Internet and cable television -
have made it possible for news consumers to get news on demand, they have also increased
the possibility for misinformation. Some experts think that the new media have contributed to
an increased focus on scandal coverage and a loosening of important journalistic standards.
Others argue that the Internet provides an open forum for discussing ideas and debating
policy, which ultimately strengthens democratic institutions.
Critics of the new media believe that the tremendous amount of information now
available 24 hours a day has left citizens overwhelmed by choices and underwhelmed by
content. They argue that the average citizen lacks the media savvy necessary to discriminate
between fact and fiction when it is all reported in the same fashion. On-line journalism in
particular has sped up the news cycle and created a demand for constant updates, at the
expense of accurate reporting and thoughtful analysis. Many Americans are concerned that
Page 35
Internet reporters rely on rumour instead of fact and that reputable news organizations, eager
to keep up, are running stories they have not yet verified.
While most concede that the new media have some drawbacks, many Americans
believe that these advanced technologies are helping to keep people better informed. Some
argue that most practitioners of the new journalism know that their reputations will be made
on the accuracy of their information; thus, they need to be just as careful as traditional
journalists. These proponents claim that the 24-hour news channels help educate voters and
give them greater access to their elected leaders and that the Internet has created a forum for
citizens' voices to be heard. Consequently, supporters of the new media say, government
officials are becoming more responsive to the needs of the people.
b. Journalistic Ethics
Many people, both inside and outside the mainstream media, say that journalistic
ethics are headed downwards. The notion of journalists as sources of uncensored, truthful
information for the electorate has long been considered one of the pillars of American
democracy. Now, people question whether a combination of factors - including increasing
competition for viewers and readers; corporate ownership of the media; and the rapidly
blurring line between information and entertainment - have caused irreparable damage to
journalism.
Those who believe that journalistic ethics are in decline argue that the basic tenets of
good journalism - multiple sources; fair, nonbiased reporting; and a focus on government,
public policy, and politics - have been replaced by an overabundance of editorializing, too
much scandal coverage, and the "dumbing down" of news content. These critics also maintain
that because most major media outlets are now owned by corporate stockholders out to make
a profit, the sacred line between the editorial department and the marketing department has
been lost. Thus, profit motivation, instead of the public interest, drives decisionmaking.
Finally, these critics say that growing competition among news sources has caused a "rush to
press" and a loss of filtering devices and editorial processes that have historically ensured the
accuracy and relevance of the coverage.
On the other hand, many media critics point out that scandal has always been a part of
journalism. In fact, they contend that fairness and accuracy levels were once much worse
when newspapers were controlled by political parties and readers simply subscribed to the
Page 36
paper whose ideology they agreed with. These experts disagree with claims that journalists
have lowered their standards and instead suggest greater scrutiny of the media by the public.
Some in the field think that journalistic practices are actually more scrupulous today than in
decades past because reporters are more aware of the public's scepticism. Finally, many others
point to the fact that news organizations have continued to prove their credibility by
uncovering corporate wrongdoing, even though they may be owned by giant media
corporations themselves.
c. Free Airtime for Candidates
Political campaigns for Congress and the presidency are expensive. Some Senate
races, for example, cost as much as $50 million. A major reason for the huge cost is the
expense of television airtime. If candidates have a lot of money at their disposal, they can buy
television commercials and get their message out to more people. Candidates with little name
recognition and limited funds, however, cannot compete effectively because they are unable
to buy time on the airwaves. The end result, experts say, is that voters are not given a real
choice on election day.
To level the playing field, many political leaders and journalists are trying to convince
television stations to offer free airtime to candidates. Proponents of free airtime think that
giving candidates more direct access to voters would benefit the political process. They also
argue that viewers would be more engaged in the election if candidates could address them
with prepared, uninterrupted speeches. Some think that this forum would encourage
candidates to offer thoughtful commentary on the issues rather than sound bites and attacks on
their opponents.
Critics, on the other hand, argue that there are already many media sources that voters
can use to educate themselves about the candidates and the issues. Some point out that giving
free airtime is unnecessary because many television stations and networks already offer
public-affairs shows on which candidates participate. Critics also warn that candidates might
use free airtime to attack their opponents rather than discuss issues. Others contend that it is a
citizen's responsibility to be proactive in researching the issues and the candidates.
Page 37
Conclusion
Because of the tremendous power it wields, the press has often been called the "fourth
branch" of government. By choosing which issues to cover and how to cover them, the media
can influence whether a bill is passed, if U.S. troops go to war, and which presidential
candidate is elected. Some argue that news media have too much power and often use it
irresponsibly. Others respond that the press promotes democracy by keeping citizens
informed, searching for the truth, and exposing corruption and scandals. As new technologies
revolutionize information sharing, many people believe that citizens are gaining a greater
voice in government and that the news media's role as the watchdog of democracy is growing.
Page 38
ETHNIC GROUPS AND MINORITIES IN AMERICA
Introduction
The United States is a country of many ethnic groups. An ethnic group is made up of
people who share one or more characteristics which make them different from other groups.
They may share specific racila or physical traits, speak their own language or practise a
distinctive religion. They are usually bound to one another by common traditions and values,
and by their own folklore and music. Some of their activities may be determined by unique
institutions, such as a complex family structure or the social practices within their
communities. Members of an ethnic group tend to see themselves - and to be seen by
outsiders - as separate from other people.
THE HARVARD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN ETHNIC GROUPS lists 106
major groups in the United States today, including Native Americans, Albanians, Afro-
Americans, Arabs, Burmese, Chinese, Eskimos, Filipinos, Greeks, Irish, Italians, Jews,
Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and Swiss. There are really more. For example, there are more than
170 different Native American tribes. For the sake of simplicity, the encyclopedia treats them
as one. In the same way, Syrians, Jordanians, Egyptians, and Palestinians are all counted as
Arabs.
Most members of ethnic groups long established in the United States have lost much
of the distinctiveness of their culture. Third generation Germans, for example, may only speak
English and may think of themselves as "plain" Americans. Third generation Chinese,
however, often retain their language and many cultural and family traditions. They will
usually define themselves as Chinese-Americans.
Members of most ethnic groups are full participants in the broad tapestry of American
life, even if they keep alive many of their old traditions. The Irish, Danes, Germans, Italians,
Poles, Jews, Mormons and Catholics, for example, have moved into almost all social,
economic and political sectors.
Some ethnic groups, however, suffer disadvantages which continue to keep them from
freely participating in some areas of American professional and cultural life. Poverty and all
Page 39
the deprivation that goes with it often make it more difficult for black Americans and Puerto
Ricans to acquire the social and educational skills needed to enter more desirable and more
highly paid occupations. Racial prejudice and discrimination against blacks, Chinese and
Native Americans has often meant that many members of those groups have been forced to
live and work in narrow sectors of American life.
Those ethnic groups which suffer systematic economic or social disadvantages are
called minority groups. About one of every five Americans is a member of such a group. In
the past, many minority groups overcame the barriers that confronted them. The Irish, the
Italians and the Germans, the Catholics and the Jews all faced hostility and discrimination
which severely restricted their opportunities for decades. In time they largely overcame these
barriers and became fully integrated into national life. There are many signs that today's
minorities are following the same path. For several decades, it has been an official aim of
public policy to encourage such an outcome.
1. Discrimination and Civil Rights Reforms
Although the United States has made great progress towards protecting its people from
discrimination, some Americans favour stronger laws to guarantee that women and minorities
are treated fairly by employers, businesses, and schools.
However, others believe that civil rights laws – particularly affirmative action policies
- have gone too far. They contend that certain government-granted rights and guarantees,
designed to redress past wrongs against certain groups of people, may actually discriminate
against other groups.
Forty years after the beginning of the modern civil rights movement, Americans have
differing opinions about the meaning of "rights" and whether policies to correct past
injusticies are still necessary. Some think that too many groups in the United States still face
discrimination and that it would be a mistake to abandon protections they believe have
worked so well.
a. Affirmative Action
In the early 1960s, President John F. Kennedy issued a series of executive orders
requiring federal contractors to "take affirmative action" to ensure that their hiring practices
Page 40
did not discriminate on the basis of race or gender. His successors, Lyndon Johnson and
Richard Nixon, expanded these programmes.
The goal of affirmative action is to match the racial and gender composition of the
workplace and higher education with that of society as a whole. The policies require
governments and government contractors to take an active role to help some minority groups
overcome past discrimination, by considering race or gender as a factor when hiring or
awarding contracts. Many businesses, universities, and colleges have voluntarily adopted
affirmative action programmes.
However, many Americans believe that affirmative action can lead to racial quotas and
charge that it promotes reverse discrimination, mostly against whites. In 1998, a proposition
to end most affirmative action programmes in Washington state passed overwhelmingly.
Supporters of eliminating affirmative action hope other states will follow suit.
b. Voting Rights Act
Passed in 1965, the Voting Rights Act forbids literacy tests, poll taxes (taxes that are
used to prevent low-income Americans from voting), and intimidation of voters in any state.
c. Civil Rights Restoration Act
In 1988, Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act which prevents institutions
that receive government money from discriminating in any of their programmes on the basis
of gender, race, age, or disability.
d. Laws Against Gender Discrimination
The women's rights movement made great progress in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1963,
Congress adopted the Equal Pay Act, which guaranteed equal pay for men and women who
perform equal work. In the early 1970s, the Supreme Court applied clauses of the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments to strike down laws that discriminated against women. A 1972 law
barred gender-based discrimination in all education programmes receiving federal support.
And in 1978, Congress amended the Civil Rights Act to prohibit job discrimination against
Page 41
pregnant women. Despite progress in achieving equal rights, many Americans believed that
only a constitutional amendment could correct gender discrimination for good.
2. Discrimination Against People with Disabilities
In the past, Americans with disabilities were segregated in special schools and
commonly denied college educations. Consequently, they often had to settle for low-paying
jobs. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 outlawed some barriers to equal education and created
job opportunities for disabled people. The law prohibited employers who receive federal aid
or who work on government contracts from refusing to hire people with disabilities. The act
also required that colleges make buildings accessible to people who are blind or in
wheelchairs.
In 1990, Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the most
extensive civil rights legislation since the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This law protects people
with physical and mental disabilities by prohibiting discrimination in employment,
transportation, telecommunications, services, and public places such as restaurants, theatres,
and stores. In 1997, Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
which revamped an older law guaranteeing adequate public education to disabled children and
providing more funding to schools.
3. Discrimination Against Homosexuals
In recent years, homosexual men and women have asked the government to protect
them from discrimination. Although federal law does not extend civil rights protections based
on sexual orientation, several cities, counties, and states have passed bans on discrimination
against gay men and lesbians.
Same-sex marriages are not legally recognized in any state and specifically prohibited
by 29 states and Congress. Married people can often be covered under their spouse's health
plans, file joint tax returns, and make important medical decisions for their spouses, but
homosexual couples are often denied these rights. Gay rights activists, who believe that
marriage is a basic human right that any committed couple is entitled to, support the
legalization of same-sex marriage. Some local governments have granted certain rights to gay
Page 42
couples and allowed them to register as "domestic partners," and many companies recognize
same-sex couples in their benefits policies.
4. A Progress Report
Many Americans believe that most of the civil rights violations and inequities of the
past are just that - past. Women and racial minorities have made tremendous strides in all
aspects of public life. Female-owned businesses have increased from 500,000 in 1972 to
almost 8 million in 1996. Women now receive more than half of all college degrees awarded.
In 1995, 13% of African Americans had attended at least four years of college as compared to
just 3% in 1960. The percentage of blacks living in the suburbs - evidence of a steadily
growing black middle class - more than doubled between 1950 and 1995.
Nonetheless, many Americans believe that women and minorities still face obstacles
in society, including pay discrepancies, racism and sexism, and a disproportionate share of
problems like violence and poverty. While it is true that significant civil rights progress has
been made over the years, many lawmakers and advocates argue that there is more work to be
done.
5. Current Issues
a. Reverse Discrimination or Necessary Remedy?
Many governments, federal contractors, businesses, and universities have encouraged

the recruitment and hiring of racial minorities and women through affirmative action
programmes. However, these policies have been challenged on many fronts across the United
States. In recent years, members of Congress have introduced bills that would end affirmative
action. The Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action programmes must address specific,
identifiable past acts of discrimination as opposed to a general presumption of discrimination.
Opponents of affirmative action believe that decisions based on race or gender alone
violate the core American value of equal opportunity under the law. They argue that
affirmative action forces employers, universities, and governments to fill specific quotas,
which can lead to race and gender being placed above all other qualifications. Such policies,
according to critics, lead to better-qualified whites and Asians being denied employment or
Page 43
educational opportunities. Furthermore, some contend that affirmative action implies that
minorities and women cannot compete on their own merit, thereby undermining their efforts
and accomplishments.
Many Americans, on the other hand, maintain that affirmative action has been an
effective tool for correcting bias in hiring, college enrollment, and government contracting.
They argue that, though there have been major advances in civil rights over the last thirty
years, it has not been enough to make up for hundreds of years of slavery and second-class
citizenship. According to supporters, affirmative action is not simply retribution for past
injusticies but an attempt to level the playing field. They believe that affirmative action is
necessary to force businesses and schools to make an effort to search for qualified female and
minority candidates who may not have the same resources and access as white males.
b. Comparable Worth
The Equal Pay Act of 1963 guarantees "equal pay for equal work," regardless of
gender or race. However, studies show that the average salary for a woman is about 70
percent of the average salary for a man, and that jobs filled mainly by women pay less than
comparable jobs held by men. Some civil rights advocates believe that salaries for jobs
commonly held by women should be raised to the level of men's salaries for jobs that require
comparable effort, skill, experience, education, and responsibility - that is, equal pay for work
of comparable value.
Supporters of comparable worth argue that the pay disparity shows that women are
still discriminated against in the workplace. They say that comparable worth standards could
first be applied through a job rating system that would assign points to each job based on the
type of skills and experience required. Advocates believe that such a system would help
overcome differences in wages caused by tradition, male-dominated unions, and employer
preferences in selecting men for high-paying jobs.
Critics of comparable worth argue that wage differences are not the result of
discrimination but rather of free-market forces such as competition and laws of supply and
demand. They believe that women generally earn less than men because women do not have
the same education, experience, or career goals. Opponents of comparable worth point out
that women are gradually moving into higher-paying jobs and that the wage gap is narrowing
Page 44
overall. They add that determination of comparable worth is subjective, impossible to enforce,
and costly to implement.
Despite the opposition, several states now require public agencies to pay the same
salaries to employees in jobs traditionally held by women that require skills comparable to
those required in jobs commonly held by men.
c. Prosecuting Hate
Crimes committed because of a bias against an individual's or group's race, religion,

ethnic origin, or sexual orientation can be designated as hate crimes. Hate crimes are most
commonly committed because of race, followed by religion and then sexual orientation. Most
states and the federal government have special statutes that mandate stiffer penalties for
criminals convicted of hate crimes. Deciding who should be protected by hate crime laws is
controversial; most states as well as the federal government do not include crimes motivated
by the victim's sexual orientation.
Opponents of special designations for hate crimes note that, by definition, these
actions are already illegal and do not require additional penalties. They also argue that all
crime is offensive and damaging, regardless of the criminal's motivation. Some experts
maintain that hate crime laws are unconstitutional. They say that the laws violate people's
First Amendment rights by more heavily punishing those with particular viewpoints. Critics
believe that this is a slippery slope that could lead to prosecuting people based on their ideas.
Advocates of special penalties for hate crimes believe that tougher sentences are
needed to address the damage these crimes inflict on the victim and on society at large. They
argue that the motivations for hate crimes, such as racism and homophobia, harm the
community and humanity in general. Some experts favour hate crime laws because, like
antidiscrimination laws, they can discourage prejudice. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled in
1993 that hate crime penalty enhancements do not violate First Amendment rights.
d. Employment Nondiscrimination and Sexual Orientation
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits unreasonable

discrimination. Over the years, the Supreme Court has ruled that certain groups who have
been the victim of past discrimination, such as women and racial minorities, receive
Page 45
heightened protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Currently, federal law prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, national origin, and disability but does
not extend similar protection to homosexuals. Homosexual advocates have lobbied for such
protection in various areas, including employment discrimination.
Recent Supreme Court decisions have both pleased and disappointed activists on both
sides of this issue. In 1996, the Supreme Court struck down a Colorado law that prohibited
nondiscrimination laws for gays. More recently, the Court has indicated that it is unwilling to
grant homosexuals heightened protection under the law. Currently, only ten states prohibit
discrimination based on sexual orientation.
In 1996, an attempt in the U.S. Senate to extend job antidiscrimination protection to
homosexuals lost by one vote. The next year, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act
(ENDA) was introduced in both houses of Congress. This act prohibited bias in hiring based
on sexual orientation. Ultimately, neither the House nor Senate voted on the proposed bill, but
there are plans to reintroduce the legislation in the 106th Congress.
Supporters of ENDA cite numerous American businesses that have already included
homosexual nondiscrimination clauses in their employment policies. They argue that passing
ENDA will merely extend equal rights to gays, not bestow special rights. They also point out
that the proposed federal legislation explicitly prohibits quotas or preferential treatment.
Opponents of the legislation believe sexual orientation is a choice, unlike race or
gender, and therefore not deserving of special protection. Some believe granting homosexual
protected class status would encourage an immoral lifestyle and further contribute to the
breakdown of the family in American society. Still others believe that local communities need
to make individual decisions about the issue.
6. The Future
When economic life falters, group conflict and prejudice increase. This is because
people see themselves as competing for the same scarce resources, such as jobs.
The American economy is undergoing a historic transformation. Traditional industrial
jobs are being lost to other countries. Most of the new jobs have been concentrated in service
sectors, many of them requiring skills beyond the level of many ethnic minority members.
Many people are also trapped by poverty in the central areas of large cities, where few new
Page 46
jobs are being created. The social demoralization of some ethnic minorities is also a barrier
that keeps them from taking advantage of actual opportunities that are available to them.
The belief in an essential equality among all people has been part of the cultural
heritage of Americans since the founding of the United States. Many efforts have been made
in recent decades to reform social and economic life to conform to the ideal. Today, despite
vigorous debate over specific programmes and policies, all levels of government regard aid to
the disadvantaged and the enforcement of antidiscrimination laws as very important areas of
their activities.
The social drama of the struggle for equality and acceptance will continue, as it has for
over 300 years. As always, the leading roles in this drama will be played by ethnic groups, old
and new.
Conclusion
Despite the progress achieved in extending civil rights to all Americans over the past
thirty years, some citizens believe that discrimination is still a major problem. They say that
the federal government has not done enough to eliminate discrimination against minorities,
women, homosexuals, and people with disabilities. However, others argue that government
actions to make up for past discrimination have gone too far and actually discriminate against
other groups, particularly white males. Lawmakers and the public must decide how much they
are willing to scale back these policies without giving free rein to discrimination in U.S.
companies and universities.
Page 47
CRIME AND DRUGS IN AMERICA
Introduction
Crime touches the lives of millions of Americans, regardless of age, race, gender, or
income. Whether they have been victims or not, many Americans say that the fear of crime
lessens their sense of security. However, studies show that crime, although pervasive, affects
certain sectors of the population more adversely than others.
In the early 1990s, "crimes against the person" - murders, assaults, and robberies -
increased in the United States. Over the past few years, however, the violent crime rate has
dropped. In October 1997, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported that the murder
rate reached its lowest level since 1967. Law enforcement officials credit this decline to a
number of factors: better neighbourhood policing, stricter jail sentences, and tighter gun
control laws. However, despite these encouraging statistics, about 1.7 million violent crimes
are still committed every year in the United States.
Fighting crime is an enormous task because many economic and social issues
contribute to lawlessness, including poverty, splintered families, drugs, unemployment, and
the availability of firearms. Consequently, policymakers disagree on where to focus their
anticrime policies: stricter law enforcement or programmes aimed at crime prevention. Many
Americans believe that harsher punishment and stronger law enforcement will reduce crime;
others say that it is most important to attack the underlying social problems that commonly
lead to crime.
1. Violence in America
More than 13 million crimes are committed annually in the United States. Almost 90%
of these are crimes against property, such as burglary or car theft; the rest are violent crimes.
Violent crimes - murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault - continue to be a top
concern of many citizens. However, government statistics indicate that crime rates are
Page 48
dropping, often dramatically, across the country. In 1997, the homicide rate reached a thirty-
year low. In the first six months of 1998, the number of violent crimes dropped 7% below the
previous year; murders fell by 8%. Law enforcement officials and sociologists attribute this
decline to a combination of factors, including the aging of large sections of the population,
tougher sentencing laws, more effective community policing, gun control laws, crime
prevention efforts, and low unemployment. In some places, such as New York City, a "broken
windows" policy - which attemps to prosecute even small crimes like breaking windows and
spraypainting graffiti in the hopes of deterring larger ones - has proved successful in keeping
communities safer.
Although the overall violent crime rate has declined, violent crimes committed by
juveniles, particularly homicide, rose throughout the early 1990s. Experts attributed the rise to
a breakdown of families and communities, as well as the influence of gangs, access to
weapons, and the use of drugs. But, in 1995, those numbers began dropping and continued to
do so throughout the decade. Still, public fears about juvenile crime remain high, fuelled by a
series of well-publicized schoolhouse shootings in the late 1990s.
2. What Causes Crime?
Some experts say the roots of crime are poverty, drug abuse, and lack of employment
and education opportunities. Others contend that the judicial system is failing to rehabilitate
violent criminals or keep them off the streets.
a. Poverty
Experts say that low-income workers and the unemployed are more likely to be
depressed and frustrated and therefore more inclined to commit unlawful acts. This appears to
be especially true in low-income urban areas, where homicide is the leading cause of death
among African-American males between the ages of 25 and 45. In 1997, the federal
government defined the poverty threshold as $16,400 for a family of four and $12,800 for a
family of three. In other words, families were classified as living in poverty if their annual
incomes fell below those levels. By this definition, in 1997, 35.6 million Americans - slightly
more than 13% of the U.S. population - lived in poverty. Although the poverty level in the
Page 49
United States has remained somewhat stable over the last thirty years, it is still one of the
highest in the industrialized world.
Poverty affects certain groups more than others. The elderly, children, single mothers,
and minority groups make up a disproportionate share of those in poverty. For example, in
1997, although the national poverty rate was 13.3%, the poverty rate for African Americans
was 26.5%, 27.1% for Latinos, and 20% for children. Children comprise 40% of the poor yet
only 26% of the total population. They have become, in the words of one expert, "the face of
poverty."
Americans disagree on the causes of poverty. While most believe that the lack of
educational opportunity is a major reason, some also contend that capitalism inevitably
divides societies into rich and poor. Other cite behavioural factors that may promote a cycle of
dependence - beginning with the inability to find or hold a steady job and possibly extending
to other problems such as alcoholism and drug abuse. Because there are disagreements over
its roots, lawmakers face difficult decisions about the best way to address poverty.
When millions of Americans fell into poverty during the early 1930s, the states were
financially ill-equipped to provide for the needy, and no federal policy was in place to deal
with the problem. President Franklin Roosevelt and Congress wrote landmark legislation,
known collectively as the New Deal, to combat the effects of the Great Depression. The new
legislation included massive job programmes that provided work for unemployed Americans.
Other programmes focused on people who did not work because of age or disability. The
legislation also aimed to provide decent housing for the poor.
• Social Security. Formally named Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, Social
Security was created in 1935 to provide assistance to low-income elderly Americans.
The largest social programme today, Social Security is a self-perpetuating trust fund,
financed by equal contributions from employer and employee. The amount individuals
receive at retirement is based on their average monthly earnings over a number of
years while they were working. All citizens over age 65, regardless of income, are
eligible to receive varying levels of Social Security benefits.
• Public Housing. Another part of the New Deal legislation was the U.S. Housing Act,
passed in 1937. The act aimed to eliminate slums and construct low-rent housing for
low-income Americans. For the next three decades, local public-housing authorities
built and operated apartment buildings. However, many such buildings fell into
disrepair and needed more and more government funding for maintenance. Therefore,
Page 50
in 1974, Congress created the Section 8 programme to revitalize public housing and
control federal spending. Under Section 8, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) subsidizes the rent for low-income tenants. According to federal
guidelines, public-housing residents must contribute 30% of their income towards rent
and HUD makes up the difference.
• The Great Society. The legacy of Roosevelt's New Deal continued with President
Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty. In 1964, President Johnson declared that no society
could be great with poverty in its midst. Along with major civil rights legislation,
Johnson implemented social programmes designed to eliminate poverty by moving
people up the economic ladder through vocational education and job training. He also
promoted programmes to help poor and older Americans get enough food and
adequate health care.
Johnson called his plan the Great Society.
o Food Stamps. The U.S. Department of Agriculture instituted the federal food
stamp programme in 1964 to ensure that people with little or no income would
have enough to eat. Instead of providing money, the food stamp programme
gives coupons, or vouchers, that are redeemable only for food. In 1997, the
U.S. government spent about $20 billion on food stamps.
o Medicaid. Medicaid is a joint federal-state programme which provides low-
income people with free or subsidized medical care. President Johnson and
Congress created Medicaid in 1965 to provide health insurance for the low-
income elderly and the poor. An estimated 33 million people were on the
Medicaid rolls in 1997, with the federal government spending $95.6 billion
(57% of the total) while states spent $72 billion (43%).
o Medicare. Medicare is a federal programme financed through the Social
Security Administration, which provides a national system of retirement and
other benefits. Medicare, also instituted in 1965, pays health care benefits to
almost 40 million older and disabled Americans. The government alloted more
than $200 billion for Medicare payments in 1997. While many lower-income
older Americans benefit from Medicaid, all people of retirement age receive
Medicare benefits.
• The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. In 1996,
Congress passed a historic welfare reform bill called the Personal Responsibility
Page 51
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. The new law authorized states to run their
own welfare programmes using block grants from the federal government called
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Among the major provisions of the
law are requirement that adults on welfare find work within two years and receive
benefits for no more than a total of five years during a lifetime.
b. Millions of Guns
Law enforcement officials cite the availability of guns and the willingness of people to
use them as major factors in the high crime rate. Americans own more than 200 million
firearms, including handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Although legal purchases are regulated,
people can buy guns illegally with relative ease. In 1996, there were about 9,000 handgun-
related homicides in the United States, down from 11,000 in 1995. Some attribute this decline
in part to the passage in 1993 of the Handgun Control Act (also known as the Brady law),
which mandates a five-day waiting period for anyone buying a handgun. In 1994, Congress
also approved a ban on the manufacture, sale, or possession of 19 types of semiautomatic
assault weapons.
c. The Role of Drugs
Most experts say that the sale and use of illegal drugs, particularly heroin and cocaine,
contribute greatly to violent crime. Many illegal drugs are addictive, and users often commit
crimes to support their drug habits. In addition, drug trafficking - the business of
manufacturing and selling drugs - is lucrative. Shootings and murders are commonplace in the
drug trade, as drug dealers compete for territory and money.
According to a 1997 survey by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
drug use among young people is increasing. The survey found that almost 11% of 12- to 17-
year-olds admitted to using illegal drugs in the month preceding the survey, double the
percentage reported in 1992. Of the total population aged 12 and over, 6.4% reported using
illegal drugs in the prior year.
Some people say illegal drugs are flooding into the country because of sophisticated
production and trafficking methods used in foreign nations – the "supply side" theory. Others
counter that drugs find their way into the United States because of the huge markets for
Page 52
narcotics - the "demand" theory. These different theories are important because each requires
a different solution. The supply-siders advocate fighting the drug war abroad, at U.S. borders,
and with the street dealers. Those who believe in the demand theory advocate spending
money on prevention and education programmes at home. Others think that any successful
antidrug effort must be a combination of both approaches.
Currently, the federal government allocates about 70% of its antidrug budget to
curbing the supply of illegal substances. This effort seeks to destroy crops used to make drugs
in foreign countries, encourages those nations to plant other crops, and tries to intercept
shipments of narcotics before they enter the United States. The remaining 30% of the federal
antidrug budget is spent on education and treatment programmes to reduce the demand for
drugs.
3. Fighting Crime
In 1994, Congress passed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which
provided $30 billion over six years for crime control. Major provisions of the new law
included funding to add 100,000 police officers nationwide; a ten-year ban on certain
semiautomatic assault weapons; an expansion of the death penalty to cover additional federal
crimes; and approval to impose a mandatory life sentence on any criminal convicted of three
felonies for violent crimes (a provision known as "three strikes, you're out").
• Megan's Law. Victims' rights advocates around the country have lobbied hard for
legislation meant to protect potential victims. Most notable are a series of protective
laws named after young victims. One such example is New Jersey's Megan's Law,
memorializing 7-year-old Megan Kanka, who was brutally murdered in 1994 by a
known sex offender living in her neighbourhood. Megan's Law has served as the
model for a federal law and numerous state laws that require various types of public
notification when convicted sex offenders and child molesters are released into the
community.
Many civil liberties advocates challenge these notification laws, arguing they violate
privacy rights. Supporters cite the high recidivism rate for child molesters and maintain that
parents and community members have a right to protect their children from potential harm.
Page 53
4. Current Issues
a. Lessening Gun Violence
In 1998 and 1999, several major U.S. cities began a new campaign to lessen gun
violence in their communities by suing gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers. City
officials complain that these companies knowingly turn a blind eye on the illegal gun market
and that manufacturers should be responsible for adding safety mechanisms that would
prevent unauthorized persons from using guns. Their attorneys argued that manufacturers
should be held liable for contributing to the "public nuisance" - including police and hospital
costs – of gun violence. Gun industry advocates say that they are abiding by the law and have
begun trying to limit the type of lawsuits that can be brought by city officials.
b. Mandatory Sentencing
About 2 million men and women are locked up in the nation's jails and prisons - a
record high. One of the reasons for the large U.S. prison population is that judges often have
no choice but to impose mandatory prison sentences for first-time criminals, particularly drug
offenders. Mandatory sentencing laws obligate judges to send offenders to prison. These laws
became popular during the 1980s as a way to combat the increase in crime produced by the
illegal drug trade, particularly the buying and selling of crack cocaine.
Many law enforcement officials think that mandatory sentencing laws send a strong
message to would-be drug dealers that they face time in jail if caught and convicted. Experts
also argue that the judicial system has to act forcefully to keep people safe from drugs and the
violence that often stems from their sale and use. In addition, proponents of mandatory
sentencing laws believe that U.S. taxpayers are willing to spend their tax money to get drug
offenders off the streets by locking up criminals and building prisons. Finally, many point out
that mandatory sentencing helps make the justice system fair, ensuring the same punishment
for similar crimes.
However, critics contend that mandatory jail terms for drug felons are too expensive
and do little to reduce violent crime. Some experts contend that mandatory sentencing laws,
which include first-time nonviolent drug felons, have caused prison overcrowding. They
Page 54
believe that this will inevitably lead to early parole for more violent criminals. Furthermore,
most argue that these laws take discretionary control away from judges who otherwise might
choose a rehabilitation programme for some drug offenders.
c. Juvenile Crime
The adult criminal system traditionally focuses on punishment. The criminal system
for individuals under the age of 18, on the other hand, has generally concentrated more on the
prevention of crime and the rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents. However, largely because
of the fear of rising juvenile crime, almost all fifty states have reformed their juvenile justice
laws so that, in some instances, minors can be tried - and imprisoned - as adults.
Supporters of these changes in the juvenile justice system say that violent criminals -
no matter what age - deserve harsh punishment. They argue that the juvenile justice system -
created more than 100 years ago to deal with petty thieves, truants, and vandals - has become
outdated as younger criminals commit increasingly violent crimes. Such proponents believe
that the judicial system needs to give younger criminals a strong message about the
consequences of their actions. Some maintain that the United States should establish a
uniform minimum age at which juveniles can be tried as adults for certain crimes.
Opponents of these policies argue that placing teens in the adult justice system will
turn them into hardened criminals because they are exposed to experienced, often-violent
adult offenders. Instead, many people support strong crime prevention and rehabilitation
programmes such as community centres, boot camps, adult mentors, and help with education
and employment. They rationalize that such programmes offer less expensive and less
traumatic alternatives to overcrowding prisons with teenagers. Furthermore, rehabilitation,
rather than just punishment, encourages young people to become productive adults.
Conclusion
Many local, state, and federal lawmakers believe the falling crime rate is evidence that
present crime fighting methods are working. However, some observers contend that the recent
anticrime laws that have emerged from state legislatures and Congress are, at best, short-term
solutions. They think the roots of crime - poverty, the breakdown of families, and drug abuse -
have yet to be properly addressed by the government and that the increase in drug use among
Page 55
young people is an ominous sign for the future. Therefore, many lawmakers call on law
enforcement officials and communities across the country to continue to be vigilant in their
anticrime efforts, by strengthening both law enforcement and crime prevention efforts.
Page 56
DEMOCRACY AND AMERICAN INTERESTS
Introduction
In recent years, many countries have become democracies. In 1999, there were 117
democratic governments, more than twice the number of democracies in the 1970s. As
democracy has spread, so too have core democratic values such as human dignity and
equality.
In an effort to secure the fundamental rights of every human being, world leaders have
signed several agreements, including the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. At the same time, some nations have continued brutal human rights violations. Recent
years have produced genocide by ethnic and tribal leaders in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Rwanda
and political executions in Burma and China. Even democratic governments do not always
respect the individual rights of their people.
For decades, policymakers in the United States have promoted democracy and human
rights around the world. However, the degree to which these objectives are in America's
national interest is a matter of debate. Should human rights in other countries be a top foreign
policy priority of the United States? Should American leaders send troops to encourage
democracy overseas? While U.S. policymakers want to promote democratic governments,
they must also protect other vital interests, such as maintaining beneficial economic and
diplomatic relationships.
The United States is the oldest continuous democracy in the world. Throughout much
of the 20th century, U.S. leaders promoted democracy overseas. They supported fair and free
elections in other countries because they are beneficial to U.S. national interests, such as
security and trade.
Because their leaders are elected by the people, democratic governments are often
more politically stable than dictatorships. Such leaders often share American values and are
eager to become U.S. military allies. In addition, democracies are not imperialistic; they tend
to respect the national borders of other countries. Thus, the United States is safer from
military attack if there are more democratic nations.
Page 57
Democracies usually have free-market economies; that is, their economies are
controlled by the forces of supply and demand, not by government leaders. Because the U.S.
economy is so large, other free-market countries want to trade goods and services with the
United States. Many economists assert that greater international trade, especially increases in
U.S. exports to other countries, improves the American economy.
Finally, democratic nations often share American ideals. Elected officials tend to
permit more individual freedoms, such as freedom of expression and religion. As these ideals
take root in more countries, U.S. leaders believe that the American way of life is more secure.
Therefore, U.S. officials believe it is important to support and promote democracy.
1. The Spread of Freedom
Although the United States was founded on principles of individual liberties, more
than 150 years passed before those freedoms were granted to everyone in American society.
Only after freeing its slaves and granting suffrage to women could the United States truly be
called the "Land of Liberty." Some argue that, even today, the United States needs to work on
ensuring equality and freedom for all its people. Similarly, it has taken centuries for
democracy to spread around the world, and even within democratic countries individuals
enjoy varying degrees of freedom and equality.
a. Empires Collapse
During the 17th and 18th centuries, France, Germany, Great Britain, Holland,
Portugal, and Spain established colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East.
From the late 19th century through the mid-20th century, European powers began to lose
control of those colonies. One reason for the end of European imperialism was the high cost
of maintaining and administering these territories. After World War II, the international
community's support for "self-determination" - the belief that a country should have the
ability to govern itself without outside control or interference - further diminished colonial
power.
After gaining independence in the 1950s through the 1970s, most former colonies
aligned with either the United States or the Soviet Union. These were the most tense years of
the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union were vying for world influence
Page 58
and power. Some newly independent nations sided with the West and formed democratic
governments. Examples include Botswana and Mauritius in Africa, India and Malaysia in
Asia, and several Caribbean nations.
Among these democracies, however, citizens have a broad range of electoral and
personal freedoms. For example, Malaysia's political system is dominated by one political
party, and the Malay government restricts the freedoms of speech, press, and public assembly.
Thus, democratic elections do not always lead to the same kind of freedom to which
Americans are accustomed.
b. The Fall of the Iron Curtain
With the end of the Cold War and the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, the "Iron
Curtain" that separated eastern and western Europe collapsed, and so did many of the political
distinctions between democratic countries in the West and communist countries in the East.
Most former Soviet republics, including Russia and Ukraine, and Eastern European countries,
such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Romania, have held democratic elections
and are converting to market economies.
The fall of the Soviet Union also had a ripple effect outside Europe. New democracies
emerged in Asia (Mongolia) and Africa (Benin, South Africa, and Zambia). Today, all Latin
American countries except Cuba have democratically elected governments. Once again,
however, those citizens sometimes have limited electoral and personal freedoms.
The end of the Cold War and decolonization have resulted in an unprecedented
number of democracies. Nevertheless, most governments in Africa and the Middle East and
many in Asia still do not hold free elections or honour individual rights.
2. The U.S. Role in Democratization
For many years, U.S. leaders have promoted democracy in other countries. During the
Cold War, American policymakers focused on containing authoritarian communist
governments and supporting democracy among U.S. allies. Since the breakup of the Soviet
Union in 1991, U.S. interests are no longer threatened by communism. American leaders have
exerted their influence using a variety of tools, including close diplomatic ties, military
alliances, trade, foreign aid, and - if necessary - military intervention.
Page 59
• Haiti. In some situations, American leaders have sent U.S. troops to support
democracies in other countries, particularly in the Western Hemisphere. In 1994,
President Bill Clinton sent American troops to Haiti to help restore that country's
democratically elected president to power. While U.S. forces were on the way to Haiti,
its military leaders, who had seized power from the president in a 1991 coup, agreed
to step down. American soldiers remained in the Caribbean nation until 1996 as part of
a United Nations (UN) force to ensure a peaceful transition back to democracy. A
newly elected president took office in 1996. However, when UN troops left Haiti in
1997, its government and economy remained weak, and reports of human rights
abuses continued.
• Bosnia. A 3-year-long war in the former Yugoslavian republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
prompted U.S. military intervention in 1995. In December of that year, President
Clinton sent 20,000 U.S. troops to Bosnia as part of a 60,000-strong NATO force.
Their duty was to enforce the Dayton Agreements, a U.S.-brokered peace plan. The
presence of U.S., Russian, and NATO troops helped Bosnians to vote peacefully in a
national election in 1996 and in local elections in 1997. However, on-site observers
think the elections were not entirely free and fair.
In addition, U.S. troops have been used to arrest accused and indicted human rights
violators in Bosnia. The accused are tried before the International Criminal Tribunal - a court
which was established in 1993 by the United Nations and which meets in the Hague,
Netherlands.
3. Human Rights
The term "human rights" incorporates a broad range of ideas that are often described
in four categories. Most central are the rights that protect an individual's security.
Governments should protect citizens from genocide; slavery; torture; cruel, degrading, or
inhuman punishment; arbitrary arrest or imprisonment; denial of fair trial; and invasion of
their homes. Human rights also encompass people's ability to secure their basic human needs,
such as food, clothing, shelter, education, and health care. Furthermore, there are civil and
political liberties, including freedom of speech, press, association, and the freedom of
movement within and to and from a person's country. Finally, there are human rights laws
Page 60
pertaining to freedom from discrimination on the basis of race, colour, ethnic origin, religion,
social status, and gender.
a. Human Rights Documents
To avoid repeating the tragedies of World War I and World War II, many of the world's
leaders met in 1945 to create the United Nations. In doing so, they assessed their core values
on human dignity and rights. Since then, the United Nations, many regional organizations,
and individual countries have developed statements calling for the protection of the basic
rights of every person.
The first global human rights documents were the UN Charter, approved in 1945, and
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, approved by the United Nations in 1948. A
centrepiece of global human rights legislation, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is
largely based on the U.S. Bill of Rights, Britain's Magna Carta, and France's Declaration of
the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Other important human rights documents include the
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Economic,
Social, and Cultural Rights, both approved by the United Nations in 1966. These documents
form the basis of international law that protects human rights in all countries that have signed
them.
b. Human Rights Activism
As the number of democratic countries and human rights laws have grown, concern
for such rights around the world has also increased. Human rights advocates have created a
number of nongovernmental organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights
Watch, which publicize rights violations and encourage concerned governments and
individuals to pressure the offending leaders to improve their human rights records.
At one time, human rights were considered matters of internal governmental policy.
Today, many foreign governments claim a legitimate right to pressure other countries about
violations. Human rights have gained credibility as foreign policy issues because of improved
global communications and the large increase in international trade and investment over the
last 30 years.
Page 61
c. Linking Human Rights and Trade
In recent years, the United States and China have carried on a visible conflict over
human rights. U.S. officials have often criticized China's treatment of dissenters and
prodemocracy activists; China believes its internal matters are not the business of the U.S.
government. This conflict represents a thorny problem for American policymakers because
China is a large country with a booming import-export business. The clash between U.S.
business interests in China and American values of individual liberty is a classic case of
competing concerns in foreign relations.
In 1989, President George Bush decided to renew a special trading privilege called
"most favoured nation" (MFN) trade status for China. It grants China goods reduced tariffs
upon entering U.S. ports. Therefore, with MFN status, Chinese goods are less expensive and
thus more attractive in the American market. Human rights activists criticized this decision
because it came soon after China's military attack on prodemocracy demonstrators in Beijing's
Tiananmen Square.
In the early 1990s, human rights organizations discovered that Chinese prison labour
was being used to make goods for export to the United States. In addition, the U.S. State
Department reported that China continued its unfair judicial procedures and mistreatment of
political dissidents. Therefore, in 1994, President Clinton threatened to revoke China's MFN
trade status unless its human rights record improved.
Chinese leaders vehemently opposed linking trade with human rights, an issue they
considered a domestic matter. American business interests also opposed the link because they
feared that Beijing would retaliate and cut off U.S. investment in China's growing economy.
Human rights organizations supported the president's policy. However, after heated exchanges
between U.S. and Chinese leaders, President Clinton softened his stance on Chinese human
rights violations. He stated that the prison labour issue was resolved and that further human
rights concerns would be handled separately from trade issues. Accordingly, China's MFN
status was renewed in June 1994. Since then, it has been renewed every year.
d. Democracies and Human Rights
The violation of human rights is not limited to authoritarian governments like China's.
There are many countries that hold relatively free and fair elections while restricting some
Page 62
fundamental democratic rights and liberties. For example, several Latin American countries
had long periods of military rule between decolonization and democratization. Therefore,
aspects of military rule continue in some democracies in the region. Human rights activists
accuse Mexican and Brazilian police forces of human rights violations, and they say that both
countries sometimes use improper judicial procedures. Right groups claim that law
enforcement officials in these countries execute people without giving them trials and
illegally hold people in jail without charges.
4. Current Issues
a. Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Policy
Although human rights now attract worldwide attention, many Americans disagree
about whether the U.S. government should make it a central issue in its foreign policy.
Some Americans believe that freedom is a universal right of all human eings and that
U.S. foreign policy must reflect values such as individual liberty, equality, and justice.
Moreover, some observers warn that the freedoms of the United States and its allies cannot be
secure in a world where freedom is threatened everywhere else. Thus, they argue that U.S.
stability will be enhanced if more countries grant their citizens greater freedoms. Supporters
of a foreign policy based on human rights believe the United States should condemn and take
some form of action against any government that uses terror or brutality, even if it has
otherwise friendly relations with the United States.
Critics of this approach say the United States should not pursue policies based
primarily on morality. They contend that U.S. leaders have to be pragmatic and work with all
economically and militarily powerful countries, placing practical issues, such as trade and
security, ahead of human rights. For example, many think the United States cannot afford to
be too critical of China's human rights policies because Chinese leaders, if pushed too hard,
could threaten U.S. allies in Asia with military action and restrict U.S. access to China's
lucrative market.
Furthermore, many experts believe that if American leaders pressure an ally with a
less-than-perfect human rights record to dismantle its leadership, an even more repressive
government could take over. Critics claim that the United States has a stronger national
interest in building beneficial economic relationships than in forcing countries to become
Page 63
democratic and that these strong economic ties will eventually bring about democratic
change.
b. Trying Human Rights Violators
At the end of World War II, war criminals were brought to trial in courts or tribunals
established by international agreements. Nazi leaders stood before judges from the victorious
nations - including the United States - at Nuremberg, Germany, to answer charges of
committing genocide and crimes against humanity. Similar trials wre held in Tokyo from 1946
to 1949 to judge accused Japanese war criminals.
In 1993, the UN Security Council established an International Criminal Tribunal to
prosecute those responsible for ethnic cleansing and war crimes in the civil wars fought in the
former Yugoslavia. The next year, the council established a similar tribunal to prosecute high-
level officials responsible for the genocide in Rwanda. Both tribunals have met with limited
success, their biggest complaint being the lack of cooperation from the nations involved and
at times even from Security Council member states who have not fully suported the court's
efforts. The United States - while not always eager to use its troops to arrest war criminals in
Bosnia - has generally encouraged the courts to proceed.
However, in 1998 the United States did not support the treaty drawn up at a meeting of
153 nations in Rome, establishing a permanent International Criminal Court. This court was
established to prosecute crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, and aggression in
international and internal conflicts. The United States and several other major powers fear that
smaller countries could gain too much power on the court, thereby bypassing the influence of
the world's strongest nations - some of which are members of the UN Security Council. Many
Americans also fear the loss of national sovereignty to the decisions of an international
tribunal - an issue often raised by those who believe the United States should not be forced to
comply with decisions made by international bodies like the United Nations or the World
Trade Organization. For example, champions of U.S. sovereignty do not want U.S. troops
being called into a foreign country to enforce what may be a dangerous and expensive
mission mandated by an international court.
Advocates of the permanent court say that without the support of the United States and
other strong nations, the tribunal will not be successful. They contend that the United States
has an obligation to the rest of the world to help bring war criminals and human rights
Page 64
violators to justice if it is going to continue to take the lead in negotiating peace settlements
and participating in peacekeeping missions abroad. Supporters also point out that U.S.
sovereignty has not been threatened in the past by international tribunals like those at
Nuremberg or The Hague; therefore, America officials have no reason to fear that happening
if the permanent court is established.
Conclusion
For decades, American policymakers have promoted democracy, but today's human
rights abuses remind them that a viable democracy should honour individual liberties - not
just allow democratic elections. In addition, those governments must have fair judicial
procedures. The dilemma for U.S. policymakers is that protecting human rights does not
always coincide with promoting other interests, such as trade. While many American leaders
remain committed to the ideals upon which their country was founded, they also believe that
they must balance those ideals with present-day realities, such as economic interdependence
and national security.
Page 65
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM
1. Explain the functions of the three branches of government in the U.S.A. Compare them
with those in Romania.
2. Point out major differences between the function of political parties in the U.S.A. and in
Romania.
3. Debate: Constitutional Rights

a) Abortion should remain legal.
b) The government should regulate the Internet to protect users’ privacy.
c) Doctor-assisted suicide should be allowed.
4. Comment on the following quotations:

• Must a government of necessity be too strong for the liberties of its people or too
weak to maintain its own existence? (Abraham Lincoln)
• Whenever by an unfortunate occurrence of circumstances an opposition is
compelled to support the government, the support should be given with a kick and
not a caress and should be witdrawn at the first available moment. (Randolph
Churchill)
• To govern is to choose. (Pierre Mendes-France)
• The art of governing is not letting men grow old in their jobs. (Napoleon
Bonaparte)
• Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are busy driving
taxicabs and cutting hair. (George Burns)
Page 66
5. Vocabulary Practice:
A. Write the letter of the word set that best completes the sentence.
1. When the _____ was removed from power, a(n) _____ government was set up
to maintain civil rule until elections could be held.
A. precinct – imperial C. sovereign - imperial
B. preamble – provisional D. potentate – provisional
2. The _____ to the document gives the party’s on issues.

A. jurisdiction - diplomacy C. preamble – stance
B. potentate – preamble D. negotiation - hierarchy
3. After the armed _____ , the people met to _____ a new leader.
A. negotiation – ratify C. jurisdiction – inaugurate
B. insurrection – inaugurate D. diplomacy – impeach
4. We recommended who should be lected to the ____ of our ____.

A. charisma – potentate C. hierarchy – precinct
B. sovereign – jurisdiction D. diplomacy – hierarchy
5. The country’s ____ will ____ a new constitution.

A. potentate – intervene C. hierarchy – impeach
B. precinct – rescind D. sovereign – ratify
6. The candidate will ____ his opponent’s attempts to ____ poverty.

A. rescind – intervene C. inaugurate – ratify
B. denounce – eradicate D. impeach – rescind
7. The ambassador’s ____ did not make up for his lack of skill in ____.
A. charisma – diplomacy C. stance – insurrection
B. jurisdiction – negotiation D. hierarchy – charisma
Page 67
8. The mayor tried to ____ the order, but the matter was outside his ____.
A. ratify – negotiation C. eradicate – precinct
B. rescind – jurisdiction D. impeach - stance
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the same meaning as the italicized
word.
1. charisma
A. knowledge B. attraction C. rank D. eloquence
2. ratify
A. organize B. challenge C. reason D. approve
3. stance
A. belief B. size C. greed D. order
4. impeach
A. obligate B. accuse C. impose D. influence
5. imperial
A. chaotic B. rebellious C. majestic D. weighty
6. hierarchy
A. structure B. chamber C. freedom D. control
7. sovereign
A. vocation B. chief C. council D. employee
8. provisional
A. makeshift B. maverick C. economic D. routine
Page 68
9. rescind
A. duplicate B. charge C. repeal D. include
10. eradicate
A. prevent B. insist C. project D. destroy
Page 69
THE AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM
1. Describe the differences between the structure of the educational system in the U.S.A. and
in Romania. Discuss their respective advantages and disadvantages.
2. What problems do minorities in the U.S.A. have to face and how does the American
educational system try to solve them?
3. Debate: Education
a) Public schools should provide bilingual education.
b) The government should give parents vouchers to pay for private schools.
c) Homeschooling should be encouraged.

• The things taught in schools are not an education but the means of an education.
(Ralph Waldo Emerson)
• No one can become really educated without having pursued some study in which
he took no interest. For it is part of education to interest ourselves in subjects for
which we have no aptitude. (T.S. Eliot)
• Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. (William Butler
Yeats)
• Education is what survives when what has been learnt has been forgotten. (B.F.
Skinner)
• If you think education is expensive – try ignorance. (Derek Bok)
A. Write the letter of the word that best completes the sentence.
1. George, who wants to do research in animal communications, must
first finish his basic studies in ____ .
A. biology B. philosopher C. curriculum D. evaluation
Page 70
2. The teacher emphasized the seriousness of ____ and urged students to

avoid copying and to document all quotations.
A. evaluation B. dissertation C. plagiarism D. reformatory
3. In your quest for knowledge, you have become quite a(n) ____ .
A. evaluation B. sophomore C. philosopher D. prank
4. After six months in the ____ math class, Fred had raised his scores up
to grade level.
A. rudimentary B. truant C. prolific D. remedial
5. The first year at college is rough; you’ll have more fun as a ____ .
A. philosophy B. sophomore C. sorority D. colleague
6. Statistics show that ____ students have problems later in life, too.
A. truant B. rudimentary C. academic D. prolific
7. My mother has been working on her ____ for three years; but she will
finish in the spring.
A. prank B. evaluation C. dissertation D. plagiarism
8. In choosing a college, it is important to study each school’s ____ .

A. sorority B. curriculum C. reformatory D. sophomore
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the same meaning as
the italicized word.
1. colleague
A. university B. associate C. stranger D. driver
2. academic
A. informal B. athletic C. scholastic D. tedious
Page 71
3. aide
A. opponent B. helper C. teacher D. student
4. excel
A. surpass B. defeat C. sell D. enjoy
5. prank
A. plank B. favour C. idea D. trick
6. prolific
A. deep B. scarce C. abundant D. proud
7. sorority
A. organization B. brotherhood C. sorrow D. superiority
8. rudimentary
A. difficult B. essential C. lasting D. rude
9. evaluation
A. appraisal B. loss C. evacuation D. mischief
10. comprehend
A. pity B. release C. know D. correct
Page 72
IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA
1. Explain the impact of immigration on American society.

2. Discuss possible consequences of recent changes in the pattern of immigration.
3. Debate: Immigration
a) The U.S.A. should increase the number of work visas for highly skilled
immigrants.
b) The U.S.A. should adopt English as its official language.
c) The American government should deny social services to illegal immigrants.

• America is a willingness of the heart. (F. Scott Fitzgerald)
• Part of the American dream is to live long and die young. (Edgar Z. Friedenberg)
• The greatest American superstition is belief in facts. (Hermann Keyserling)
• America – the best poor man’s country in the world. (William Allen)
• In the United states there is more space where nobody is than where anybody is.
This is what makes America what is is. (Gertrude Stein)
1. The ____ supported the efforts to ____ the university.
A. alumni – integrate C. conformity - segregate
B. confederation – jeer D. cabal – integrate
2. The ____ gang began to ____ as soon as the speaker began.

A. choral – integrate C. heterogeneous - segregate
B. populous – integrate D. unruly - jeer
Page 73
3. I like this ____ group of people because of their total lack of ____
A. populous – hubbub C. heterogeneous - conformity
B. unruly – cabal D. choral - conformity
4. There was quite a ____ when the ____ submitted their proposal.
A. furor – clergy C. troupe – confederation
B. tumult – cabal D. hubbub – exodus
5. In summer there is a mass ____ from the ____ areas.

A. tumult – unruly C. exodus - populous
B. hubbub – populous D. furor - heterogeneous
6. The members of the ____ wanted to ____ themselves from the town.
A. clergy – integrate C. commune - integrate
B. alumni – jeer D. commune - segregate
7. A(n) ____of the F.B.I. was investigating the activities of the ____ .
A. confederation – hubbub C. auxiliary - cabal
B. furor – troupe D. alumni - conformity
8. There was ____ in the South when the ____ of the states was formed.
A. tumult – confederation C. hubbub – exodus
B. conformity – troupe D. furor – alumni
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the opposite meaning of the
italicized word.
1. clergy
A. choir B. laypeople C. ministers D. graduates
Page 74
2. conformity
A. diversity B. overthrow C. uproar D. similarity
3. segregate
A. understand B. isolate C. mock D. merge
4. populous
A. famous B. uninhabited C. obese D. dense
5. hubbub
A. quiet B. clamour C. league D. mixture
6. tumult
A. distress B. bustle C. peace D. company
7. jeer
A. mock B. applaud C. endanger D. arrest
8. integrate
A. resolve B. notice C. mix D. isolate
9. exodus
A. arrival B. reality C. flight D. uproar
10. furor
A. fight B. fuss C. passion D. calm
Page 75
MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS IN AMERICA
1. Explain the function of the news agencies.

2. What, in your opinion, are some advantages or disadvantages of having a great choice
of radio and TV programs available?
3. Debate: The Media

a) Journalistic ethics are declining.
b) The new media have helped citizens become more informed.
c) Television stations should give free airtime to political candidates.
• One newspaper a day ought to be enough for anyone who still prefers to retain
a little mental balance. (Clifton Fadiman)
• News is the first rough draft of history. (Benjamin Bradlee)
• What you see is news, what you know is background, what you feel is opinion.
(Lester Markel)
• Television is chewing gum for the eyes. (Frank Lloyd Wright)
• Television is not the truth. Television is a god-damned amusement park.
Television is a circus, a carnival, a travelling troupe of acrobats, storytellers,
dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers and football players.
We’re in the boredom-killing business. (Paddy Chayefsky)
1. The journalist’s ____ skills were limited, and often he was ____ .
. A. linguistic – incoherent C. guttural - linguistic
Page 76
B. lucid – verbose D. eloquent – guttural
2. We were grateful for the ____ of the speech because the technical ____
made it too difficult to understand.
A. oratory – usage C. brevity - jargon
B. dialect – emphasis D. usage - idioms
3. Her unusual ____ did not detract from her ____ explanation.
A. dialect – lucid C. idioms - incoherent
B. diction – verbose D. jargon - prosaic
4. I have to ____ his work because he has trouble with English ____ .
A. contradict – emphasis C. incite - idioms
B. enunciate – emphasis D. edit - usage
5. In spite of the lecturer’s precise ____ , her speech was far from ____ .
A. emphasis – prosaic C. dialect - guttural
B. oratory – verbose D. diction - eloquent
6. Jim learned to clearly ____ the many ____ sounds of German.
A. equivocate – eloquent C. incite - eloquent
B. enunciate – guttural D. edit - guttural
7. The linguist did not ____ about her dislike of many English ____ .
A. incite – emphasis C. equivocate - idioms
B. contradict – jargon D. enunciate - dialect
Page 77
8. I did not want to ____ him, but his advertising campaign seemed too ____ .
A. contradict – prosaic C. incite - guttural
B. enunciate – incoherent D. edit -lucid
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the same meaning as the
italicized word.
1. emphasis
A. language B. stress C. neglect D. poem
2. brevity
A. briefness B. logic C. speed D. beauty
3. lucid
A. murky B. unstable C. tiresome D. clear
4. verbose
A. poetic B. talkative C. full D. bossy
5. eloquent
A. wordy B. sincere C. rational D. expressive
6. incoherent
A. irrational B. vulgar C. clear D. flashy
Page 78
7. contradict
A. formulate B. disagree C. agree D. chatter
8. equivocate
A. determine B. argue C. evade D. equal
9. prosaic
A. dull B. poetic C. amusing D. pure
10. incite
A. fight B. leave C. provoke D. detain
Page 79
ETHNIC GROUPS AND MINORITIES IN AMERICA
1. Why can the U.S.A. hardly be called a “homogenous” nation?

2. What recent developments have affected the role of women in American society?
3. Debate: Women and Minorities

a) Affirmative action should be abolished.
b) Special penalties should apply to hate crimes.
c) Federal law should protect homosexuals from employment discrimination.

• Governments exist to protect the rights of minorities. The loved and the rich need
no protection – they have many friends and few enemies. (Wendell Phillips)
• Shall we judge a country by the majority, or by the minority? By the minority,
surely. (Ralph Waldo Emerson)
• A minority may be right, and a majority is always wrong. (Henrik Ibsen)
• We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.
(Benjamin Franklin)
• It is always the minorities that hold the key of progress; it is always through those
who are unafraid to be different that advance comes to human society. (Raymond
B. Fosdick)
1. ____ dances will be the featured entertainment at this year’s ____ .
A. Cultural – decoration C. Enduring - idolatry
Page 80
B. Ethnic – fete D. Cultural - ablution
2. This ornate ____ is ____ of the 15th century.
A. escutcheon – reminiscent C. cavalcade - irreverent
B. memento – enduring D. taboo – reminiscent
3. Your ____ comments should be forgotten, not preserved for ____ .
A. ancestral – idolatry C. irreverent - posterity
B. cultural – reverence D. enduring – fete
4. Our community has a diverse ____ and ____ heritage.
A. irreverent – enduring C. irreverent – devout
B. ancestral – irreverent D. cultural- ethnic
5. Each guest received a(n) ____as a ____ of the occasion.
A. decoration – memento C. cavalcade - fete
B. ablution – posterity D. memento – decoration
6. Profanity is ____ in our ____ household.
A. ablution – ethnic C. taboo- devout
B. idolatry – sacrosanct D. posterity – cultura
7. ____ of their leader was a(n) ____ throwback to the Dark Ages.
A. Cavalcade – devout C. Idolatry - cultural
Page 81
B. Adage – irreverent D. Posterity - ethnic
8. In many religions ____ symbolizes a ____ way of life.
A. memento – cultural C. reverence - reminiscent
B. taboo – sacrosanct D. ablution - devout
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the opposite meaning of the
italicized word.
1. enduring
A. permanent B. brief C. lost D. timeless
2. reminiscent
A. quizzical B. strange C. unusual D. futuristic
3. posterity
A. future B. location C. ancestors D. outlook
4. sacrosanct
A. torn B. exempt C. eminent D. vulgar
5. reverence
A. disrespect B. worship C. sanity D. joy
6. taboo
A. honesty B. allowance C. strength D. forest
7. ancestral
A. ancient B. past C. future D. recent
8. commemorate
A. celebrate B. disregard C. consider D. build
Page 82
9. irreverent
A. sacrosanct B. artistic C. ancient D. cultural
10. devout
A. immortal B. impious C. dishonest D. inactive
Page 83
CRIME AND DRUGS IN AMERICA
1. Compare and contrast the measures taken by the U.S. government and the Romanian
government to reduce drug use among the youth.
2. Should drug convictions carry mandatory sentences?
3. Debate: Crime and Drugs
a) Gun control laws reduce violent crime.

b) Who is to blame for the gun violence in the U.S.A.?
c) Juveniles should never be tried as adults.

• The number of malefactors authorizes not the crime. (Thomas Fuller)
• All punishment is mischief. All punishment in itself is evil. (Jeremy Bentham)
• Capital punishment is as fundamentally wrong as a cure for crime as charity is
wrong as a cure for poverty. (Henry Ford)
• The study of crime begins with the knowledge of oneself. (Henry Miller)
• Prisons don’t rehabilitate, they don’t punish, they don’t protect, so what the hell
do they do? (Jerry Brown)
1. Mary has been working for years to improve the ____ system in her state.
A. compulsory B. penal C. impending D. pecuniary
2. He received a(n) ____ requiring him to appear in court.

A. extortion B. restitution C. citation D. malefaction
Page 84
3. Anne felt a sense of ____ doom as the jury returned with its verdict.
A. penal B. pecuniary C. impending D. compulsory
4. ____ seized by the customs authorities included drugs and weapons.

A. Citation B. Restitution C. Extortion D. Contraband
5. Giving forty hours of community service to children was part of the ____ he
made for having vandalized the park.
A. restitution B. malefaction C. citation D. contempt
6. The town was scandalized when the death of Mrs. Brown was discovered to be
____ , and Mrs. Brown’s daughter was arrested.
A. extortion B. restitution C. matricide D. larceny
7. Clarissa’s attempt to ____ the “crime of the century” failed when her plan was
discovered.
A. allege B. perpretate C. filch D. waive
8. The gang used ____ to squeeze payment for protection from the shop
owners.
A. extortion B. citation C. contempt D. larceny
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the same meaning as the italicized
word.
1. filch
A. find B. contribute C. steal D. release
2. harass
A. entertain B. harm C. disturb D. compliment
3. contempt
Page 85
A. happiness B. admiration C. sorrow D. disdain
4. incarcerate
A. accuse B. burn C. imprison D. defend
5. malefaction
A. charity B. crime C. illness D. neutrality
6. indemnify
A. insure B. destroy C. help D. sue
7. waive
A. curse B. relinquish C. desire D. insist
8. compulsory
A. inspired B. voluntary C. organized D. forced
9. larceny
A. friendship B. poverty C. reward D. stealing
10. confiscate
A. grant B. take C. surrender D. allow
Page 86
DEMOCRACY AND AMERICAN INTERESTS
1. What are human rights?

2. What is the relationship between democracies and human rights?
3. Debate: Democracy and Human Rights

a) U.S. foreign policy should focus on protecting human rights.
b) The U.S.A.. should support a permanent international court to try human
rights violators.
c) The U.S.A. should economically punish nations that do not practice religious
tolerance.
• Democracy is based upon the conviction that there are extraordinary

possibilities in ordinary people. (Harry Emerson Fosdick)
• It has been said that Democracy is the worst form of government except all
those other forms that have been tried from time to time. (Winston Churchill)
• People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the
people. Of course, that is not true. Decisions are made by a majority of those
who make themselves heard and who vote – a very different thing. (Walter H.
Judd)
• My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular.
(Adlai Stevenson)
• As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea
of democracy. (Abraham Lincoln)
Page 87
1. Most city governments operate through a(n) ____ .
A. parliament B. oppression C. bureaucracy D. legation
2. The military dictator was forced to ____ in order to save his life.
A. abdicate B. gerrymander C. curtail D. bestow
3. The official’s ____ caused upheaval in his native country.
A. caucus B. defection C. parliament D. caste
4. The nation’s ____ chooses a new President every four years.
A. defection B. transition C. caucus D. electorate
5. The ____ bill included the day care provision and other proposals.
A. inalienable B. omnibus C. politic D. plenipotentiary
6. Congress has granted this committee ____ rights to carry out the investigation.
A. inalienable B. omnibus C. politic D. plenipotentiary
7. The party tried to ____ some districts in order to retain power.
A. gerrymander B. abdicate C. extradite D. bestow
Page 88
8. The government is attempting to ____ the flow of drugs into this country.
A. abdicate B. bestow C. extradite D. curtail
B. Circle the letter of the word that most nearly has the same meaning as the
italicized word.
1. bestow
A. withold B. present C. evaluate D. conceal
2. transition
A. meeting B. power C. conversion D. preservation
3. caucus
A. council B. statement C. intention D. rebellion
4. inalienable
A. inherent B. untested C. lost D. powerful
5. manifesto
A. disclaimer B. betrayal C. authority D. proclamation
6. subterfuge
A. openness B. gain C. ignorance D. camouflage
7. politic
A. deceptive B. clumsy C. cunning D. sociable
Page 89
8. oppression
A. dignity B. tyranny C. liberation D. compulsion
9. parliament
A. legislature B. opinion C. despotism D. party
10. legation
A. dignity B. statement C. delegation D. rights
Page 90
GLOSSARY
Administration – The officials and agencies of the executive branch which carry out the
public policies established by the legislative branch of the government.
affirmative action - Programmes through which businesses, schools, and other institutions
expand opportunities for women and members of minority groups.
alien – One who is not a citizen (or national) of the state in which he/she lives; usually, an
alien owes allegiance to a foreign power but may gain citizenship by naturalization.
amendment – A change in, or addition to, a constitution.
appeal – Legal proceeding in which a case is carried from a lower court to a higher court for
review.
bill – A formal proposal for a new law.
Bill of Rights – The first ten amendments to the Constitution. They prevent the national
government from tampering with fundamental rights and civil liberties, and emphasize the
limited character of national power.
broadcast media – Mass media that transmit information electronically.
cabinet – A group of presidential advisers composed of the heads of the executive

departments and other key officials.
Page 91
checks and balances – A government structure that gives each branch some scrutiny and
control over the other branches.
citizen – One who owes allegiance to a state and is entitled to its protection; American
citizenship may be acquired by birth (1) in the United States or (2) to American citizen-
parents abroad, and (3) by naturalization.
civil rights – Powers or privileges guaranteed to individuals and protected from arbitrary
removal at the hands of government or individuals.
civil rights movement – Political mobilization of the people to promote racial equality.
civil service – The system by which most appointments to the federal bureaucracy are made,
to ensure that government jobs are filled on the basis of merit and that employees are not fired
for political reasons.
Cold War – In the 1950s, a period of increased tension that stopped short of outright military
conflict, during which the adversarial nature of U.S. – Soviet relations was clear. Americans
were called upon to give priority to defense spending over domestic spending.
confederation – A loose association of independent states that agree to cooperate on specified

terms.
conservatives – Generally, those people whose political ideology favours a narrow scope for
government. Also, those who value freedom more than equality but would restrict freedom to
preserve social order.
counties – The major units of local government in most States; existing as agencies of the
State and empowered in law enforcement, welfare agencies, and maintenance of highways,
schools, and courts.
criminal case – A court case involving a crime, or violation of public order.
Page 92
democracy – A system of government in which, in theory, the people rule, either directly or
indrectly.
department – he largest unit of the executive branch, covering a broad area of government
responsibility. The heads of the departments, or secretaries, form the president’s cabinet.
discrimination – Acts of irrational suspicion or hatred, directed towards a specific group of

people.
equality of opportunity – The idea that each person is guaranteed the same chance to
succeed in life.
executive branch – The law-enforcing branch of a government.
federalism – The division of power among a central government and regional governments.
food stamp program – A federally funded program that increases the purchasing power of
needy families by providing them with coupons that they can use to purchase food.
free enterprise – An economic system based on private ownership, individual initiative,

profit, and competition.
general election – A national election held, by law, in November of every even-numbered

year.
government – The legitimate use of force to control human behavior within territorial
boundaries; also, the organization authorized to exercise that force.
impeachment – The formal charging of a government official with treason, bribery, or other
high crimes and misdemeanors.
judicial branch – The branch of government that interprets law.
Page 93
justices of the peace – Elected officials who preside over minor civil cases and
misdemeanors; jurisdiction is generally very limited.
legislative branch – The law-making branch of government.
libel – Written defamation of character.
liberals – Generally, those people whose political ideology favours a broad scope for
government, those who value freedom more than order but not more than equality.
literacy – Test of a potential voter’s ability to read and write; once used in several States to
prevent voting by blacks and other minorities but now outlawed.
lobby – An organized group of individuals that seeks to influence public policy. Also called
an interest group.
lobbyist – A representative of a lobby.
mandate – Support for and/or commands relating to policy stands that a constituency gives to
its elected officials.
market economy – An economy in which the prices of goods and services are determined
through the interaction of buyers and sellers, that is, through supply and demand.
mass media – The means employed in mass communication, often divided into print media
and broadcast media.
Medicare – A health-insurance programme for all persons over the age of sixty-five.
minority rights – The benefits of government that cannot be denied to any citizens by
majority decisions.
misdemeanor – Crime less serious than a felony (e.g. a traffic violation), punishable by a
small fine and/or short jail term.
Page 94
New Deal – The measures advocated by the Roosevelt administration to alleviate the
Depression.
political party – An organization that sponsors candidates for political office under the
organization’s name.
political system – A set of interrelated institutions that link people with government.
poll tax – A tax of $1 or $2 on every citizen who wished to vote. Although it was no burden
on white citizens, it effectively disenfrachised blacks.
poverty level – The minimum cash income that will provide for a family’s basic needs,
calculated as three times the cost of a market basket of food that provides a minimally
nutritious diet.
precedent – A judicial ruling that serves as the basis for the ruling in a subsequent case.
presidential government – Form of government characterized by a separation of powers

between independent and coequal executive and legislative branches, as in the United States.
President of the Senate – The Vice President of The United States.
print media – Mass media that transmits information through the publication of the written
word.
public assistance – Government aid to individuals who can demonstrate a need for that aid.
racism – A belief that human races have distinct characteristics such that one’s race is
superior to, and has a right to rule, others.
ratification – Formal approval, final consent to the effectiveness of a constitution,

constitutional amendment, or treaty.
Page 95
representative government - System of government in which public policies are made by

officials who are selected by the voters and held accountable to them in periodic elections.
republic – A government without a monarch; a government rooted in the consent of the

governed, whose power is exercised by elected representatives responsible to the governed.
republicanism – A form of government in which power resides in the people and is exercised
by their elected representatives.
reverse discrimination – A description of affirmative action by critics of that policy, that

giving preference to females and/or non-whites is unfair to members of the majority group.
rights – The benefits of government to which every citizen is entitled.
school district – An area for which a local government unit administers elementary and
secondary school programmes.
separation of powers – The assignment of law-making, law-enforcing, and law-interpreting

functions to separate branches of government.
sexism – Sex discrimination.
social equality – Equality in wealth, education, and status.
social insurance – A government-backed guarantee against loss by individuals without regard

to need.
social security – Social insurance that provides economic assistance to persons faced with
unemploymant, disability, or old age. It is financed by taxes on employers and employees.
social welfare – Government programmes that provide the necessary minimum living
standards for all citizens.
suffrage – The right to vote.
Page 96
two-party system – A political system in which two major political parties compete for
control of the government. Candidates from a third party have little chance of winning office.
veto – The president’s disapproval of a bill that has been passed by both houses of Congress.
welfare state – A nation in which the government assumes responsibility for the welfare of its
citizens, redistributing income to reduce social inequality.
Page 97
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Bowman, Ann O'M. & Richard C. Kearney, STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENT,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1990.
• Fitzhenry, Robert. I. (ed.), BOOK OF QUOTATIONS, Chambers, Edinburgh, 1986.
• Janda, Kenneth & Jeffrey M. Berry & Jerry Goldman, THE CHALLENGE
• OF DEMOCRACY, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1989.
• May, Ernest R., A PROUD NATION, McDougal, Littell, Evanston, 1985.
• McClenaghan, A. William, MAGRUDER'S AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, Allyn
• and Bacon, Inc., Newton, 1987.
• McDougall, Littell, VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT, McDougall, Littell,
Evanston, 1989.
• Stevenson, D.K., AMERICAN LIFE AND INSTITUTIONS, Ernst Klett
Verlag, Stuttgart, 1987.
• Tarasovici, Amy E. & Tim Walker, CURRENT ISSUES, Close Up
• Foundation, Alexandria, 1999.
Page 98

American Culture For Democracy

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

American Culture For Democracy

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AMERICAN CULTURE FOR DEMOCRACY

Aim of the Course 2

AIM OF THE COURSE

THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM

The United States of America is a republic, with democratically elected

1. The Executive Branch

2. The Legislative Branch

3. The Judicial Branch

4. Checks and Balances

b. Privacy in an Electronic Age

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM

1. Elementary and Secondary Education

a. Education - A Local Matter

b. What an American Student Learns

Almost every elementary school provides instruction in these subjects: mathematics;

a. The Fight Over Bilingual Education

a. Why Americans Go to College

b. Selecting a College or University

In addition to learning about a school's entrance requirements (and its fees),

About 12 million students currently attend schools of higher education in America.

1. The Priority System

3. Attitudes About Immigration

4. Recent Federal Legislation

Immigration and Naturalization Service deported about 50,000 aliens convicted of

a. Immigrants and the Economy

c. Denying Benefits to Illegal Immigrants

6. No More "Melting Pot"?

MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS IN AMERICA

Freedom of the press is an essential part of democracy. Newspapers, television news

1. The First Amendment

2. Freedom of the Press and National Security

3. Television and Politics

4. The Influence of the "New Media"

5. Public Trust of the Media

6. The Risk of Being Sued

a. The New Media and an Informed Public

c. Free Airtime for Candidates

ETHNIC GROUPS AND MINORITIES IN AMERICA

1. Discrimination and Civil Rights Reforms

b. Voting Rights Act

c. Civil Rights Restoration Act

d. Laws Against Gender Discrimination

2. Discrimination Against People with Disabilities

3. Discrimination Against Homosexuals

a. Reverse Discrimination or Necessary Remedy?

Many governments, federal contractors, businesses, and universities have encouraged

Crimes committed because of a bias against an individual's or group's race, religion,

d. Employment Nondiscrimination and Sexual Orientation

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits unreasonable

CRIME AND DRUGS IN AMERICA

2. What Causes Crime?

c. The Role of Drugs

a. Lessening Gun Violence

DEMOCRACY AND AMERICAN INTERESTS

1. The Spread of Freedom

b. The Fall of the Iron Curtain

2. The U.S. Role in Democratization

a. Human Rights Documents

b. Human Rights Activism

c. Linking Human Rights and Trade

d. Democracies and Human Rights

a. Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Policy

4. We recommended who should be lected to the of our .

5. The country’s will a new constitution.

6. The candidate will his opponent’s attempts to poverty.

2. The gang began to as soon as the speaker began.

5. In summer there is a mass from the areas.

6. Jim learned to clearly the many sounds of German.

2. This ornate is of the 15th century.

3. Your comments should be forgotten, not preserved for .

4. Our community has a diverse and heritage.

5. Each guest received a(n) as a of the occasion.

6. Profanity is in our household.