american goverment
Syllabus
? 1. The American Political System
? 2.Supreme court Decision - Making
? 3.the American public & political knowledge
? 4.political interest , by education
? 5.political ideology in the united states
? 6.party identification in the US
?7.turnout in American elections
?8.pluralist theory
?9.pluralist theory & group competition
?10.the new deal party system
?11.electoral history of the new deal system
?12.the old v. new way of nominations
?13.the democratic marathon,2008
?https://www.wendangku.net/doc/fc17506879.html,mittees of the 111th Congress
1.the American political system(next page)
2. Supreme Court Decision Making
[1] Request to Review a Case
A party in a legal action must request that the Supreme Court review a case (the nature of the request takes various forms --- an appeal, a writ of certiorari, or a writ of certification).
Requests come from a party after a decision in a State Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals, or (in rare instances) specialty courts (admiralty and maritime).
[2] The Rule of Four
For the Supreme Court to hear a case, the rule of four prevails. Four justices (of 9) must vote to hear a case. Typically, the requests are examined and filtered through the law clerks hired by the justices. When a case seems particularly important in raising a constitutional issue,
Rules of the Game
Interest Groups
“People”
Human Nature “Real World”Expressed Officeholders Government Policy Background Social Conditions Public Opinion Election Congress Agenda
Abilities Events & Crises -- Polls Selection President Options
Wealth Problems -- Protests Persuasion Supreme Court Decision
Policy= A government-sponsored “course of action” designed to in fluence the behavior of people, conditions in the real world, & the rules of the political game
the judges themselves examine the appeal and then decide whether it merits review.
[3] Oral Arguments
If a case is accepted, an oral argument is scheduled. On the selected date, attorneys representing each side in the case appear before the members of the Court. Each side is allotted 30 minutes to make its argument. Judges may ask questions and are free to interrupt the attorneys.
[4] Conference
Some time after the oral arguments, the justices meet in conference. No one is present except for the nine justices. The justices discuss the case. Following the discussion, there is a preliminary vote. Given nine justices, the possibilities are: 9-0, 8-1, 7-2, 6-3, or 5-4. The vote establishes a majority for one side or the other.
[5] Opinion Assignment
In certain instances, the Court simply announces its decision. This is called a per curium decision. In the more prominent cases, the Court will issue a written opinion which describes the question, the decision, and the legal reasoning behind the decision. Opinions thus present the Court’s interpretation of the Constitution.
The justice who will write the majority opinion is determined in the following way. If the Chief Justice votes in the majority, he will assign the opinion to a justice (he can assign the opinion to himself). If the Chief Justice does not vote with the majority, the most senior justice in the majority will make the assignment.
[6] The Written Opinion
After the assigned justice writes the opinion, it is circulated among the justices. Members have the option of changing their vote in light of the opinion. Justices may sometimes confer with one another in revising the opinion. When the final draft is completed, justices have the option of “signing” the opinion or not.Justices also have the option of writing a concurring opinion. This is an opinion, which agrees with the outcome and vote but for reasons different than the majority opinion. Justices in the minority have the option of writing a dissenting opinion stating their reasons for disagreeing with the majority.
[7] Announcement:
At a specified time, the Court announces its opinion from the bench, excerpts of the opinions are read, and copies of all written opinions are released and, in addition, placed on the internet.
3. the American public & political knowledge
The Level of Political Information among the American Public
Percent Question Year
63% Know whether their House incumbent is a Democrat or Republican 1995
60% Know the president nominates federal judges 1992
58% Know that Roe v. Wade is about abortion rights 1989
58% Know that the Supreme Court decides constitutional questions 1992
57% Know that the Republican Party is the more conservative party 1992
55% Can name one of two U.S. Senators from their state 1989
50% Can name the president of Russia (Yeltsin at the time) 1994
48% Can name the Secretary of State (Powell) 2002
46% Can identify the first ten amendments as the Bill of Rights 1989
40% Can name their representative to the House 1997
34% Can name the secretary of state (Albright) 1990
30% Know term of U.S. House member is two years 1998
29% Can Name the Secretary of Defense (Rumsfeld) 2002
25% Can name both U.S. Senators from their state 1999
8% Can name the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court 1987
Source: Adapted from Robert Erikson and Kent Tedin, American Public Opinion, 7th Edition (Table 3.1) and 6th Edition (Table 3.1).
4. political interest , by education
Each election year since 1964, the National Election Study survey has asked the following question:
“Some people seem to follow what's going on in government and public affairs most of the time, whether there's an election g oing on or not. Others aren't that interested. Would you say you follow what's going on in government and public affairs most of the time, some of the time, only now and then, or hardly at all?”
This graph presents the average proportion (1964-1998) answering most or some of the time for four levels of education.
5.political ideology in the united states
Political Interest, by Education
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
P e r c e n t
Ideology in the American Public, 1973-2006
6.party identification in the US
Party Identification, 1952-2004 Year Democrats Independents Republican Dem
Advantage 1952 47 23 28 19
1954 47 22 27 20
1956 44 23 29 15
1958 49 19 28 21
1960 45 23 30 15
1962 46 21 28 16
1964 52 23 25 27
1966 46 28 25 21
1968 45 30 25 20 1970 44 31 24 20 1972 41 34 23 18 1974 38 37 22 16 1976 40 37 23 17 1978 39 38 21 18
1980 41 34 23 18 1982 44 30 24 20 1984 37 34 27 10 1986 40 33 27 13 1988 35 36 28 7
1990 39 35 25 14 1992 35 39 26 9 1994 34 35 31 3 1996 37 35 27 10 1998 37 36 26 11 2000 34 40 24 10 2002 34 36 30 4 2004 32 39 28 4 2008 36 37 27 9
Source: Compiled by the author from National Election Studies.
7.turnout in American elections
Turnout in American National Elections,
1952-2008
Presidential Elections
(Percent of Eligible Electorate Casting a Ballot for President) Year Turnout
1952 62.3%
1956 60.2%
1960 63.8%
1964 62.8%
1968 62.5%
1972 56.2%
1976 54.8%
1980 54.2%
1984 55.2%
1988 52.8%
1992 58.1%
1996 51.7%
2000 54.2%
2004 60.3%
2008 62.3%
Congressional Midterm Elections
(Percent Casting a Ballot in Elections for the House of Representatives) 1954 43.5%
1958 45.0%
1962 47.7%
1966 48.7%
1970 47.3%
1974 39.1%
1978 39.0%
1982 42.0%
1986 38.1%
1990 38.4%
1994 41.1%
1998 38.1%
2002 39.5%
2006 43.6%
8. pluralist theory
Interest Groups, Pluralist Theory, and Policy Making
The “logic” of this section
(a)We will review what is called the “economic” or “market” model noting how free
markets operate
(b)Assuming markets operate as expected, they generate certain desirable features
(c)The next segment will show that “pluralist theory” is an attempt to “apply” the market model to interest groups; it hinges on interest group
competition and is based upon three key propositions
(d)If the “political model” operates as expected, then the policy making process will produce equally desirable features
(e)We will then “critique” or critically analyze “pluralist theory”
The Propositions of Pluralist Theory
Proposition #1: Representation --- Leaders and Members
Leaders are assumed, in their political activity, to represent the political beliefs and preferences of the membership as it pertains to the issue at hand. In other words, it is assumed that when organized labor opposes a trade agreement, this opposition is a reflection, in part, of members’ preferences.
Proposition #2: The Doctrine of Countervailing Influences
Here is where the market analogy comes into play. There are two aspects to this
proposition.
Formation: For every existing interest group, there will -- eventually and
Inevitably -- arise a competing group whose policy preferences will conflict with the original group (note that this is equivalent to
a political law of physics). It also parallels the competitive logic of the market model.
Competition: The countervailing groups will then compete --- directly --- to influence the making of policy.
Proposition #3: The Role of Government.
Access: Groups will be granted access to government decision makers to register
their competing claims
Policy: The policy made by government will be the product of bargaining and negotiation among competing interests and their allies.
Policy is thus a product of compromise and mutual adjustment among competing interests.
The Conclusions of Pluralist Theory
If policy making conforms to the three propositions, then pluralist theory concludes that “policy outcomes” are:
Fair and Representative. The competing sides each have the opportunity to make their
case in the halls of government.
Balanced. The policy that results represents a “balance” of the political forces on each side. This is akin to the “equilibrium” of
supply and demand in the market model.
Desirable. Pluralist theory argues if the propositions hold, larger and more encompassing
interest s will typically prevail over smaller, narrower interests. Thus, the system approaches or approximates the “public interest.”
9.pluralist theory & group competition
Pluralism Revisited
10. the new deal party system
The Foundation of the New Deal Party System
The Democratic “New Deal Coalition”
[1] Blue Collar Workers & Organized Labor
*2+ “Big City” Political Or ganizations in the Industrial Midwest & Northeast
(e.g., Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit,
Chicago, Milwaukee)
[3] Ethnics -- Irish, Italian, Greeks, Eastern European immigrants –
populating the urban centers
[4] Catholics and Jews
[5] African-Americans
[6] Ideological Liberals & Progressive Republicans
*7+ The “Solid South”
The Republican Minority
*1+ Corporate American (The “Financial Establishment”)
[2] Business and Professional Classes
[3] Rural a nd “Small Town” America
[4] White Anglo-Saxon Protestants
[5] Ideological Conservatives
11. electoral history of the new deal system
Come from Professor Dennis M. Simon
Introduction to American Government and Politics