Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States

9TH EDITION

The Challenge of Democracy American Government in Global Politics Essentials Edition

KENNETH JANDA Northwestern University

JEFFREY M. BERRY Tufts University

JERRY GOLDMAN Chicago-Kent College of Law

DEBORAH J. SCHILDKRAUT Tufts University

Updated and Abridged by

KEVIN W. HULA Loyola University Maryland

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions, some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. For valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest.

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

The Challenge of Democracy: American Government in Global Politics, Essentials Edition, Ninth Edition

Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey M. Berry, Jerry Goldman, Deborah J. Schildkraut, Kevin W. Hula

Senior Publisher: Suzanne Jeans

Executive Editor: Carolyn Merrill

Acquisitions Editor: Anita Devine

Development Editor: Betty Slack

Assistant Editor: Patrick Roach

Editorial Assistant: Eireann Aspell

Media Editor: Laura Hildebrand

Brand Manager: Lydia LeStar

Market Development Manager: Kyle Zimmerman

Content Project Manager: Alison Eigel Zade

Senior Art Director: Linda May

Manufacturing Planner: Fola Orekoya

Rights Acquisition Specialist: Jennifer Meyer Dare

Production Service: Cenveo Publisher Services

Text Designer: Rokusek Design

Cover Designer: Cassandra Chu

Cover Images: ª Vitaliy Yatskin/istockphoto ª CostinT/istockphoto

Compositor: Cenveo Publisher Services

ª 2014, 2012, 2009 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706

For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions. Further permissions questions can be emailed to

permissionrequest@cengage.com.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012951103

Student Edition: ISBN-13: 978-1-133-60230-9 ISBN-10: 1-133-60230-4

Wadsworth 20 Channel Center Street Boston, MA 02210 USA

Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil and Japan. Locate your local office at international.cengage.com/region

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.

For your course and learning solutions, visit www.cengage.com.

Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com.

Instructors: Please visit login.cengage.com and log in to access instructor- specific resources.

Printed in the United States of America

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 15 14 13 12

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Brief Contents

1 Dilemmas of Democracy 2

2 The Constitution 42

3 Federalism 80

4 Public Opinion, Political Socialization, and the Media 110

5 Participation and Voting 152

6 Political Parties, Campaigns, and Elections 186

7 Interest Groups 238

8 Congress 266

9 The Presidency 304

10 The Bureaucracy 338

11 The Courts 364

12 Order and Civil Liberties 396

13 Equality and Civil Rights 434

14 Policymaking and the Budget 462

iii Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Contents

Boxed Features xvii

Preface xix

1 Dilemmas of Democracy 2 1.1 The Globalization of American Government 5

1.2 The Purposes of Government 7

Maintaining Order 8

Providing Public Goods 9

Promoting Equality 9

1.3 A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Government 11

The Concepts of Freedom, Order, and Equality 12

Two Dilemmas of Government 16

Compared with What? The Importance of Order and

Freedom in Other Nations 16

Ideology and the Scope of Government 19

A Two-Dimensional Classification of Ideologies 23

1.4 The American Governmental Process: Majoritarian

or Pluralist? 25

The Theory of Democratic Government 27

Institutional Models of Democracy 30

1.5 Democracy and Globalization 36

American Democracy: More Pluralist Than Majoritarian 37

Summary 38

Assessing Your Understanding 40

2 The Constitution 42 2.1 The Revolutionary Roots of the Constitution 45

Freedom in Colonial America 45

The Road to Revolution 46

Revolutionary Action 47

The Declaration of Independence 48

v Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

2.2 From Revolution to Confederation 49

The Articles of Confederation 50

Disorder Under the Confederation 51

2.3 From Confederation to Constitution 51

The Virginia Plan 52

The New Jersey Plan 53

The Great Compromise 54

Compromise on the Presidency 55

2.4 The Final Product 56

The Basic Principles 56

The Articles of the Constitution 59

The Framers’ Motives 62

The Slavery Issue 62

2.5 Selling the Constitution 63

The Federalist Papers 64

A Concession: The Bill of Rights 66

Ratification 68

2.6 Constitutional Change 68

The Formal Amendment Process 68

Interpretation by the Courts 70

Political Practice 70

2.7 An Evaluation of the Constitution 72

Freedom, Order, and Equality in the Constitution 72

The Constitution and Models of Democracy 73

Politics of Global Change: A New Birth of Freedom: Exporting

American Constitutionalism 74

Summary 77

Assessing Your Understanding 79

3 Federalism 80 3.1 Theories and Metaphors 83

Dual Federalism 84

Cooperative Federalism 86

3.2 The Dynamics of Federalism 87

National Crises and Demands 88

Judicial Interpretation 90

Grants-in-Aid 93

Professionalization of State Governments 96

vi Contents

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

3.3 Ideology, Policymaking, and American Federalism 97

Compared with What? Working for the Public 98

Ideology, Policymaking, and Federalism in Practice 100

3.4 Federalism and Electoral Politics 102

National Capital-State Capital Links 102

Congressional Redistricting 103

3.5 Federalism and the American Intergovernmental System 104

3.6 Federalism and Pluralism 106

Summary 107

Assessing Your Understanding 109

4 Public Opinion, Political Socialization, and the Media 110 4.1 Public Opinion and the Models of Democracy 113

4.2 Political Socialization 115

4.3 Social Groups and Political Values 116

Education 118

Income 118

Region 120

Ethnicity and Race 120

Religion 122

Gender 123

4.4 From Values to Ideology 123

The Degree of Ideological Thinking in Public Opinion 124

The Quality of Ideological Thinking in Public Opinion 124

Ideological Types in the United States 125

4.5 Forming Political Opinions 128

Political Knowledge 128

Costs, Benefits, and Cues 129

Political Leadership 129

Politics of Global Change: Worrying Less About Climate Change 130

4.6 The Media in America 131

The Internet 132

Private Ownership of the Media 134

Government Regulation of the Media 136

4.7 Reporting and Following the News 138

Covering National Politics 138

Presenting the News 139

Contents vii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Where the Public Gets Its News 140

Media Influence on Knowledge and Opinion 140

Setting the Political Agenda 142

Socializing the Citizenry 143

4.8 Evaluating the Media in Government 144

Is Reporting Biased? 144

Contributions to Democracy 146

Effects on Freedom, Order, and Equality 147

Summary 148

Assessing Your Understanding 150

5 Participation and Voting 152 5.1 Democracy and Political Participation 154

5.2 Unconventional Participation 156

Support for Unconventional Participation 156

The Effectiveness of Unconventional Participation 158

Unconventional Participation in America and the World 159

5.3 Conventional Participation 159

Supportive Behavior 160

Influencing Behavior 160

Conventional Participation in America and the World 163

5.4 Participating Through Voting 164

Expansion of Suffrage 165

Voting on Policies 168

Voting for Candidates 170

5.5 Explaining Political Participation 172

Patterns of Participation over Time 172

The Standard Socioeconomic Explanation 172

Low Voter Turnout in America 174

Compared with What? Voter Turnout in European and

American Elections 176

5.6 Participation and Freedom, Equality, and Order 179

Participation and Freedom 179

Participation and Equality 180

Participation and Order 180

5.7 Participation and the Models of Democracy 181

Participation and Majoritarianism 182

Participation and Pluralism 182

viii Contents

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Summary 183

Assessing Your Understanding 184

6 Political Parties, Campaigns, and Elections 186 6.1 Political Parties and Their Functions 189

What Is a Political Party? 190

Party Functions 190

6.2 A History of U.S. Party Politics 192

The Emergence of the Party System 192

The Current Party System: Democrats and Republicans 193

6.3 The American Two-Party System 195

Minor Parties in America 195

Why a Two-Party System? 197

The Federal Basis of the Party System 199

Party Identification in America 199

Politics of Global Change: Fewer Citizens Are Partying 203

6.4 Party Ideology and Organization 204

Differences in Party Ideology 204

National Party Organization 206

State and Local Party Organizations 209

Decentralized but Growing Stronger 210

6.5 The Model of Responsible Party Government 210

6.6 Parties and Candidates 211

Nomination for Congress and State Offices 212

Nomination for President 213

6.7 Elections 217

Presidential Elections and the Electoral College 217

Congressional Elections 220

6.8 Campaigns 221

The Political Context 221

Financing 222

Strategies and Tactics 226

6.9 Explaining Voting Choice 228

6.10 Campaigns, Elections, and Parties 231

Parties and the Majoritarian Model 231

Parties and the Pluralist Model 232

Summary 233

Assessing Your Understanding 235

Contents ix

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

7 Interest Groups 238 7.1 Interest Groups and the American Political Tradition 240

Interest Groups: Good or Evil? 240

The Roles of Interest Groups 241

7.2 How Interest Groups Form 244

Disturbance Theory 244

Interest Group Entrepreneurs 245

Who Is Being Organized? 246

7.3 Interest Group Resources 247

Members 247

Lobbyists 249

Political Action Committees 250

7.4 Lobbying Tactics 252

Direct Lobbying 252

Grassroots Lobbying 254

Information Campaigns 255

Coalition Building 256

7.5 Is the System Biased? 258

Membership Patterns 258

Citizen Groups 258

Compared with What? Pluralism Worldwide 259

Business Mobilization 260

Reform 262

Summary 263

Assessing Your Understanding 264

8 Congress 266 8.1 The Origin and Powers of Congress 268

The Great Compromise 269

Duties of the House and Senate 269

8.2 Electing the Congress 271

The Incumbency Effect 271

2012 Election 275

Whom Do We Elect? 275

8.3 How Issues Get on the Congressional Agenda 277

8.4 Committees and the Lawmaking Process 278

The Division of Labor Among Committees 281

Congressional Expertise and Seniority 283

x Contents

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Oversight: Following Through on Legislation 284

Majoritarian and Pluralist Views of Committees 284

8.5 Leaders and Followers in Congress 285

The Leadership Task 286

Rules of Procedure 287

8.6 The Legislative Environment 288

Political Parties 288

The President 289

Constituents 291

Interest Groups 292

8.7 The Dilemma of Representation: Trustees or Delegates? 293

8.8 Pluralism, Majoritarianism, and Democracy 295

Parliamentary Government 295

Politics of Global Change: Creating a Legislature 296

Pluralism Versus Majoritarianism in Congress 298

Summary 300

Assessing Your Understanding 302

9 The Presidency 304 9.1 The Constitutional Basis of Presidential Power 307

Initial Conceptions of the Presidency 307

The Powers of the President 308

9.2 The Expansion of Presidential Power 309

Formal Powers 309

The Inherent Powers 310

Congressional Delegation of Power 311

9.3 The Executive Branch Establishment 312

The Executive Office of the President 313

The Vice President 314

The Cabinet 315

9.4 Presidential Leadership 317

Presidential Character 318

The President’s Power to Persuade 320

The President and the Public 321

The Political Context 323

Compared with What? From Berlusconi to Bankruptcy:

The Costs of Failed Leadership 324

Contents xi

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

9.5 The President as National Leader 328

From Political Values … 328

… to Policy Agenda 329

Chief Lobbyist 330

Party Leader 331

9.6 The President as World Leader 332

Foreign Relations 332

Crisis Management 333

Summary 334

Assessing Your Understanding 336

10 The Bureaucracy 338 10.1 Organization Matters 340

The Growth of the Bureaucratic State 341

Can We Reduce the Size of Government? 343

10.2 Bureaus and Bureaucrats 344

The Organization of Government 344

The Civil Service 346

Presidential Control over the Bureaucracy 346

10.3 Administrative Policymaking: The Formal Processes 347

Administrative Discretion 348

Rule Making 349

10.4 Administrative Policymaking: Informal Politics 350

The Science of Muddling Through 350

The Culture of Bureaucracy 351

10.5 Problems in Implementing Policy 352

Politics of Global Change: For Whom the Debt Tolls 354

10.6 Reforming the Bureaucracy: More Control or Less? 356

Deregulation 356

Competition and Outsourcing 358

Performance Standards 360

Summary 361

Assessing Your Understanding 363

11 The Courts 364 11.1 National Judicial Supremacy 367

Judicial Review of the Other Branches 368

The Exercise of Judicial Review 370

xii Contents

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

11.2 The Organization of Courts 371

Some Court Fundamentals 371

The U.S. District Courts 374

The U.S. Courts of Appeals 374

11.3 The Supreme Court 376

Access to the Court 378

The Solicitor General 380

Decision Making 380

The Chief Justice 383

11.4 Judicial Recruitment 383

Compared with What? Selecting Judges Around the World 384

The Appointment of Federal Judges 386

Recent Presidents and the Federal Judiciary 387

Appointment to the Supreme Court 387

11.5 The Consequences of Judicial Decisions 389

Supreme Court Rulings: Implementation and Impact 390

Public Opinion and the Supreme Court 390

11.6 The Courts and Models of Democracy 391

Summary 393

Assessing Your Understanding 394

12 Order and Civil Liberties 396 12.1 The Bill of Rights 398

12.2 Freedom of Religion 399

The Establishment Clause 400

The Free-Exercise Clause 402

12.3 Freedom of Expression 405

Freedom of Speech 406

Freedom of the Press 410

The Rights to Assemble Peaceably and to Petition the Government 413

12.4 The Right to Bear Arms 413

12.5 Applying the Bill of Rights to the States 415

The Fourteenth Amendment: Due Process of Law 415

The Fundamental Freedoms 416

Criminal Procedure: The Meaning of Constitutional Guarantees 418

The USA-PATRIOT Act 421

Politics of Global Change: Wiretapping in the Digital Age 422

Detainees and the War on Terrorism 424

Contents xiii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

12.6 The Ninth Amendment and Personal Autonomy 425

Controversy: From Privacy to Abortion 425

Personal Autonomy and Sexual Orientation 427

Summary 429

Assessing Your Understanding 432

13 Equality and Civil Rights 434 13.1 Two Conceptions of Equality 436

13.2 The Civil War Amendments 437

Congress and the Supreme Court: Lawmaking Versus

Law Interpreting 438

The Roots of Racial Segregation 439

13.3 The Dismantling of School Segregation 440

13.4 The Civil Rights Movement 443

Civil Disobedience 443

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 444

The Continuing Struggle over Civil Rights 445

13.5 Civil Rights for Other Minorities 446

Native Americans 446

Immigrant Groups 447

Americans with Disabilities 450

13.6 Gender and Equal Rights: The Women’s Movement 451

Political Equality for Women 451

Prohibiting Sex-Based Discrimination 451

Stereotypes Under Scrutiny 452

13.7 Affirmative Action: Equal Opportunity or Equal Outcome? 453

Reverse Discrimination 454

Compared with What? How India Struggles with

Affirmative Action 456

The Politics of Affirmative Action 458

Summary 458

Assessing Your Understanding 460

14 Policymaking and the Budget 462 14.1 Government Purposes and Public Policies 465

Types of Policies 466

A Policymaking Model 467

14.2 Fragmentation, Coordination, and Issue Networks 470

xiv Contents

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Multiplicity and Fragmentation 470

The Pursuit of Coordination 471

Government by Policy Area 472

14.3 Economic Policy and the Budget 473

Economic Theory 474

Budgeting for Public Policy 475

The Nature of the Budget 476

Preparing the President’s Budget 476

Politics of Global Change: We Buy More, and We Borrow More 477

Passing the Congressional Budget 478

14.4 Taxing and Spending Decisions 482

Tax Policies 482

Spending Policies 483

Summary 491

Assessing Your Understanding 492

Appendix A-1

The Declaration of Independence A-1

The Constitution of the United States of America A-4

Notes N-1 Index I-1

Contents xv

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Boxed Features

Compared with What?

CHAPTER 1 The Importance of Order and Freedom in Other Nations 16

CHAPTER 3 Working for the Public 98 CHAPTER 5 Voter Turnout in European and

American Elections 176

CHAPTER 7 Pluralism Worldwide 259 CHAPTER 9 From Berlusconi to Bankruptcy:

The Costs of Failed Leadership 324

CHAPTER 11 Selecting Judges Around the World 384

CHAPTER 13 How India Struggles with Affirmative Action 456

Politics of Global Change

Chapter 2 A New Birth of Freedom: Exporting

American Constitutionalism 74

Chapter 4 Worrying Less About Climate

Change 130

Chapter 6 Fewer Citizens Are Partying 203

Chapter 8 Creating a Legislature 296

Chapter 10 For Whom the Debt Tolls 354

Chapter 12 Wiretapping in the Digital Age 422

Chapter 14 We Buy More, and We Borrow

More 477

xvii Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Preface

The Ninth Edition of The Challenge of Democracy, The Essentials, is an abridged and updated version of the Twelfth Edition of The Challenge of Democracy. As always, our goal was to streamline the larger text without diminishing any of the qualities that have made it so successful. As we prepared the Ninth Edition, we had a chance to reflect on these past two turbulent years, and, as we always do, have tried to put recent events and trends of this pe- riod into the larger framework of the book.

More than anything else, politics in the United States during these past two years has focused on the economy. After the United States fell precipitously into a recession during the last year of George W. Bush’s presidency, our government has been consumed with trying to pull the economy out of its lethargy. The economy has improved since it began to decline in 2008, but as we write this edition, it is growing at a modest pace and unem- ployment remains stubbornly high. During the 2012 presidential election, Republican challenger Mitt Romney built his whole cam- paign around trying to convince the American people that Barack Obama was a failure who didn’t really understand how market economies work. Obama, for his part, argued that things were get- ting better and that it was Republican economics that led the country down the wrong path in the first place. Although Obama ultimately won reelection in November 2012, his margin of vic- tory was significantly smaller than in 2008.

Another hotly and bitterly debated issue concerned President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Along party-line votes, Democrats in Congress enacted the law in 2010; Republicans, however, con- tinued to fight to keep the law from being implemented, believing that the program would damage the nation’s health care system. In June 2012, a divided Supreme Court upheld the constitutional- ity of most provisions of the new law.

It’s unlikely that the 2012 presidential election will reduce the hyper partisanship of the past two years. There are many divisions

xix Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

in the United States, not unusual in any country, but some mea- sures (such as voting in Congress) show that polarization here is increasing. More broadly, some divisions are enduring as they involve basic value and not transitory issues.

Change has been the watchword in world politics. Of all the developments of the past two years across the globe, perhaps the most significant is the Arab Spring. Revolutions broke out across the Middle East, and some notorious dictators, such as Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, were over- thrown. Another story of enormous consequence is the debt crisis in the European Union (EU). Over the years a number of coun- tries, notably Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal, borrowed too much money, and when the world fell into recession, could not repay their bondholders. The EU’s stumbling economy directly affects the United States as the EU is the largest trading partner for the United States. If Europeans can’t afford to buy as much in the way of American goods, then jobs are lost here as American companies don’t need to produce as much.

Our emphasis on the importance of these recent events in the United States and throughout the world does not change the funda- mental purpose of this text. The Challenge of Democracy is not a book centered on current events. Rather, we use the recent past to illustrate enduring features of American government. Through all nine editions, we have striven to write a book that students will actually read, so we have sought to discuss politics—a complex subject—in a captivating and understandable way. American poli- tics isn’t dull, and its textbooks needn’t be either. Equally impor- tant, we have sought to produce a book that students would credit for stimulating their thinking about politics. While offering all of the essential information about American government and politics, we feel that it is important to give students a framework for analyz- ing politics that they can use long after their studies have ended.

Thematic Framework To accomplish these goals, we built The Challenge of Democracy around three dynamic themes that are relevant to today’s world: the clash among the values of freedom, order, and equality; the tensions between pluralist and majoritarian visions of democracy; and the fundamental ways that globalization is changing American politics.

xx Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Freedom, Order, and Equality The first theme is introduced in Chapter 1 (‘‘Dilemmas of Democ- racy’’), where we suggest that American politics often reflects con- flicts between the values of freedom and order and between the values of freedom and equality. These value conflicts are promi- nent in contemporary American society, and they help to explain political controversy and consensus in earlier eras. For instance, in Chapter 2 (‘‘The Constitution’’) we argue that the Constitution was designed to promote order and that it virtually ignored issues of political and social equality. Equality was later served, however, by several amendments to the Constitution. In Chapter 12 (‘‘Order and Civil Liberties’’) and Chapter 13 (‘‘Equality and Civil Rights’’), we demonstrate that many of this nation’s most contro- versial issues represent conflicts among individuals or groups who hold differing views on the values of freedom, order, and equality. Views on issues such as abortion are not just isolated opinions; they also reflect choices about the philosophy citizens want gov- ernment to follow. Yet choosing among these values is difficult, sometimes excruciatingly so.

Pluralist and Majoritarian Visions of Democracy The second theme, also introduced in Chapter 1, asks students to consider two competing models of democratic government. One way that government can make decisions is by means of majori- tarian principles—that is, by taking the actions desired by a ma- jority of citizens. A contrasting model of government, pluralism, is built around the interaction of decision makers in government with groups concerned about issues that affect them.

These models are not mere abstractions; we use them to illus- trate the dynamics of the American political system. In Chapter 8 (‘‘Congress’’), we discuss rising partisanship in Congress. As par- ties have become more ideologically homogeneous, they have been demonstrating greater unity in their votes on the floor. Yet major- itarian tensions with pluralism remain in Congress. In Chapter 7 (‘‘Interest Groups’’), we also see the forces of pluralism at work. Interest groups of all types populate Washington, and these organizations represent the diverse array of interests that define our society. At the same time, the chapter explores ways in which pluralism favors wealthier, better organized interests.

Preface xxi

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Globalization’s Impact on American Politics Chapter 1 introduces the third theme, the impact of globalization on American politics. Over time we also recognized the growing impact of world politics on our governmental process; thus, our seventh edition of the larger text (summer 2001) added the third theme of globalization. The subsequent events of September 11, 2001, the war in Iraq, and the ongoing struggle in Afghanistan made the importance of globalization evident to all Americans. But globalization involves much more than the problems of con- flict and terrorism. More than ever before, Americans are becom- ing citizens of the world as trade, travel, immigration, and the Internet make the world a more interdependent place. Thus, The Challenge of Democracy examines some of the ramifications of a smaller world on the large landscape of American politics.

The traditional notion of national sovereignty holds that each government is free to govern in the manner it feels best. As the world becomes a smaller place, however, national sovereignty is tested in many ways. When a country is committing human rights violations—putting people in jail for merely disagreeing with the government in power—should other countries try to pressure it to comply with common norms of justice?

Another facet of globalization is the growth of international trade. In many ways the world has become a single marketplace, and industries in one country often face competitors from many other countries around the world. Must a country just stand by and let jobs ‘‘emigrate’’ from within its borders to other countries where companies can produce the same quality goods at cheaper prices? How will the United States cope with the rising demand for oil worldwide as economies like those of China and India expand? These are just some of the issues that the Ninth Edition explores.

Throughout the book we stress that students must make their own choices among the competing values and models of govern- ment. Although the five of us hold diverse and strong opinions about which choices are best, we do not believe it is our role to tell students our own answers to the broad questions we pose. Instead, we want our readers to learn firsthand that a democracy requires thoughtful choices. That is why we titled our book The Challenge of Democracy.

Underlying both the updating of world events and the endur- ing relevance of our themes is our continuing effort to bring the

xxii Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

best recent political science research into The Challenge of Democ- racy. We continually look for recent books and journal articles by our colleagues in the discipline that tell us something new, some- thing important, and something that the readers of The Challenge of Democracy should know about. We invite our readers to look closely at our endnotes, the evidence that supports what we say in the text. If you feel that we missed a source that is particularly im- portant, please let us know.

Substantive Features of the Ninth Edition

Chapter-Opening Vignettes As in previous editions, each chapter begins with a vignette to draw students into the chapter’s substance while exploring the book’s themes. Chapter 2 (‘‘The Constitution’’) opens with a new vignette on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. In Chapter 5 (‘‘Participation and Voting’’), we consider protests by women in Egypt in the wake of the Arab Spring. The opening vi- gnette for Chapter 10 (‘‘The Bureaucracy’’) addresses the morn- ing-after contraceptive pill and politics of drug approval. The new opening vignette for Chapter 15 (‘‘Order and Civil Liberties’’) dis- cusses the controversy over whether the posting of a Christian prayer on the wall of a public high school violates the separation of church and state in our Constitution.

‘‘Politics of Global Change’’ In light of the growing emphasis in our book on globalization, each even-numbered chapter includes a feature on global change. In these ‘‘Politics of Global Change’’ boxes we examine various elements of political change—some troubling, some hopeful. In the feature ‘‘Fewer Citizens Are Partying’’ in Chapter 6 (‘‘Political Parties, Campaigns, and Elections’’), students will see how the decline in party membership in the United States is not unique; European party membership has waned similarly in recent years. In Chapter 8 (‘‘Congress’’) we examine the process of ‘‘Creating a Legislature,’’ looking at how the revolutionary movements in Egypt and Tunisia subsequently led to parliamentary elections in

Preface xxiii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

each nation. In Chapter 10 (‘‘The Bureaucracy’’), the feature ‘‘For Whom the Debt Tolls,’’ discusses efforts to contain the European debt crisis.

‘‘Compared with What?’’ We firmly believe that students can better evaluate how our politi- cal system works when they compare it with politics in other countries. Thus, each odd-numbered chapter has a boxed feature called ‘‘Compared with What?’’ that treats its topic in a compara- tive perspective. In Chapter 3 (‘‘Federalism’’) we look at the per- centage of the population ‘‘Working for the Public’’ at the local, regional, and national levels in eighteen nations. Our comparative perspective in Chapter 5 (‘‘Participation and Voting’’) reports on ‘‘Voter Turnout in European and American Elections.’’ The ‘‘Compared with What?’’ feature in Chapter 9 (‘‘The Presidency’’) focuses on Italy’s former prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and his leadership during a time of economic decline for his country. In Chapter 11 (‘‘The Courts’’), our feature explores methods employed for ‘‘Selecting Judges Around the World.’’ It is interest- ing to note the breadth of options used outside the United States.

New to the Ninth Edition

New and Refined Pedagogy for Student Learning This Ninth Edition of The Challenge of Democracy, The Essentials includes three new pedagogical aids intended to enhance student learning and comprehension of the material. Present in every chapter, these new pedagogical aids are:

• Learning Outcomes and Aplia. A Learning Outcome for each topic begins each chapter. The Learning Outcomes are repeated with the relevant section head throughout the chap- ter text and in the corresponding Aplia questions. Students will be able to further their comprehension of the learning outcomes with the critical thinking questions in Aplia, and instructors will be able to assess students’ progress.

• ‘‘Assessing Your Understanding’’ at the end of each chapter is a self-test organized according to the chapter’s Learning Outcomes. The engaging and thought-provoking questions

xxiv Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

presented here are designed to help students test their mas- tery and understanding of the chapter content.

• Critical thinking questions have been added to all ‘‘Com- pared with What?’’ and ‘‘Politics of Global Change’’ feature boxes, helping students see how the boxed materials relate to and enhance the chapter text material.

New and Updated Content In addition to these overall changes, we have made numerous changes throughout the chapters to keep our book fresh and up to date with contemporary politics. We hope the following chapter-by- chapter summary of substantial changes and revisions will facilitate the transition to the new edition.

Chapter 1: Dilemmas of Democracy • New opening vignette on the Patient Protection and Afford-

able Care Act and the mandate to buy health insurance. • Discussion of NATO strikes in Libya that helped topple

Qaddafi replaces one on U.N. action in Darfur, Sudan. • Elaborated discussion of ‘‘police power’’ to mesh with open-

ing vignette. • New discussion of ‘‘Occupy Wall Street’’ protestors and the

Occupy movement. • Added discussion of Sunni-Shiite religious conflict in Iraq fol-

lowing overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

Chapter 2: The Constitution • Revised and updated opening vignette on the path toward

designing a constitution for the European Union. • Updated Politics of Global Change feature box ‘‘A New Birth

of Freedom: Exporting American Constitutionalism’’ (on the declining influence of the U.S. Constitution on the constitu- tions of new nations).

Chapter 3: Federalism • Updated opening vignette on the U.S. Supreme Court deci-

sion on Arizona’s immigration law. • New material addressing the Supreme Court’s willingness to

impose national standards upon the use of the death penalty in the states.

Preface xxv

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Chapter 4: Public Opinion, Political Socialization, and the Media • Revised opening vignette on public opinion regarding the

death penalty. • Revised and updated discussion of political knowledge,

including new examples and studies on the public’s percep- tion of crime rates and spending for foreign aid.

• New Politics of Global Change feature box ‘‘Worrying Less About Climate Change.’’

• Added discussion of wireless technology and mobile devices. • Noted example of government response to provision of classi-

fied information to WikiLeaks. • Added discussion of FCC and regulation of the Internet,

Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and emerging technologies. • New Figure 4.4, ‘‘Getting the News: Consider the Source.’’

Chapter 5: Participation and Voting • New opening vignette on ‘‘The Protester’’ as Time magazine’s

2011 Person of the Year; noted Egyptian women’s demon- stration in Egypt during the Arab Spring.

• Added discussion of attempt to recall Wisconsin governor Scott Walker.

• Updated discussion of citizens’ direct participation in govern- ment through referenda and initiatives.

• Added discussion of use of Internet and social media to improve citizen participation in government.

Chapter 6: Political Parties, Campaigns, and Elections • New opening vignette on the tea party as a nationwide move-

ment but not a national organization. • New reference to Americans Elect, the online effort to nomi-

nate a 2012 presidential ticket. • Elaborated explanation of the dynamics of our electoral

system. • Updated discussion of how the two parties reflected the val-

ues of freedom, order, and equality in their party platforms. • Incorporated discussion of changes in the presidential nomi-

nation process into the text. • Expanded discussion of Citizens United court case, intro-

duced SpeechNow.org v. FEC, and defined Super PACs.

xxvi Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

• Updated and streamlined discussion of public funding of presidential campaigns, including data on Super PACs.

• New discussion of the outcome of the 2012 election. • New Figure 6.5, ‘‘Drifting Apart: Party Voting in the House

of Representatives over Four Decades,’’ with explanation of how divided government is incompatible with responsible party government.

Chapter 7: Interest Groups • New opening vignette on Facebook and its Washington lobbyists. • Updated discussion of former members of Congress as lobby-

ists, using example of former Connecticut Senator Christo- pher Dodd.

• Updated discussion of information campaigns using example of AT&T attempted takeover of T-Mobile.

• Added discussion of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United case and resultant formation of Super PACs.

• New Figure 7.2 ‘‘The Lobbying Agenda Versus the Public’s Agenda.’’

Chapter 8: Congress • New opening vignette on results of 2010 congressional elec-

tions and debate over government spending bill. • Updated discussion of redistricting. • Updated discussion of members’ use of social media. • Added discussion of cyberstalking and introduction of

Stalkers Act in Congress. • Combined sections ‘‘The Dance of Legislation: An Overview’’

and ‘‘Committees: The Workhorses of Congress’’ to create new section ‘‘Committees and the Lawmaking Process.’’

• Added discussion of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction.

• Added discussion of increasing polarization and the difficulty in reaching compromises, even within parties.

• Revised discussion of filibustering to include explanation of the term hold and added it as a key term.

• Added discussion of the ban on earmarks. • New Politics of Global Change feature box ‘‘Creating a Legis-

lature,’’ focusing on democratic movements and parliamen- tary elections in Egypt and Tunisia.

Preface xxvii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Chapter 9: The Presidency • New opening vignette on election day November 6, 2012, and

reflections on Obama’s presidency. • Revised section on presidential efforts to influence public

opinion, now including example of Italy’s former Prime Min- ister Silvio Berlusconi.

• New Figure 9.2, ‘‘It All Goes Back to the Economy’’ tracking approval ratings of Bush and Obama and index of economic conditions, illustrating the correlation between popularity and economic performance.

• New Compared with What? feature box ‘‘From Berlusconi to Bankruptcy: The Costs of Failed Leadership,’’ discussing how Berlusconi’s performance affected Italy’s economy and its relation with the EU.

Chapter 10: The Bureaucracy • New opening vignette on government regulation of Plan B,

the ‘‘morning-after’’ contraceptive pill. • Added discussion of party effect on the level and type of

regulation. • New Figure 10.2, ‘‘It Makes a Difference,’’ illustrating the cor-

relation between political party control of government and the performance of regulatory agencies.

• New Politics of Global Change feature box ‘‘For Whom the Debt Tolls,’’ on the crisis within the EU.

Chapter 11: The Courts • Condensed discussion of judicial review of state and local

government and merged with section ‘‘Judicial Review of the Other Branches.’’

• Added discussion of the Supreme Court release of oral argument transcripts on the Court’s website and on audio recordings.

• Updated discussion of filibustering judicial nominees. • Noted the Supreme Court’s declining approval ratings.

Chapter 12: Order and Civil Liberties • New opening vignette on controversy over whether the posting

of a Christian prayer on the wall of a public high school violated the constitutional prohibition against establishment of religion.

• New section, ‘‘Order Versus Free Speech: When Words Hurt,’’ with example of the Supreme Court’s decision in Snyder v. Phelps

xxviii Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

upholding free expression rights of members of Westboro Bap- tist Church picketing funerals of military personnel.

• New section, ‘‘Equality and Free Speech,’’ using example of the Citizens United case.

• Updated discussion of the USA-PATRIOT Act. • Updated discussion of efforts to expand same-sex marriage,

noting developments through legislatures, judges, and ballot initiatives.

Chapter 13: Equality and Civil Rights • New opening vignette on affirmative action case and the

debate over using race in admissions decisions, focusing on student Abigail Fisher and the University of Texas decision to deny her admission.

• Added discussion of the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling striking down three of four provisions of the controversial Arizona immigration law.

• Added discussion of revisions to the Americans with Disabili- ties Act.

Chapter 14: Policymaking and the Budget • New opening vignette on designing and implementing public

policies to meet people’s basic needs without infringing on their personal freedom, using the example of the new health care law.

• Revised discussion of health care reform, focusing on the debate over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the individual mandate to purchase health insurance.

• Updated section on distributive policies, redistributional poli- cies, and regulation.

• New example of FDA and USDA regulatory actions on the production and marketing of food.

• Revised discussion of policy evaluation, using the example of the lap band used in weight loss surgery.

• Condensed the section ‘‘Three Decades of Budgetary Reform.’’

• Added discussion on calls for a balanced budget amendment. • Added new paragraph on the politics of a national debt

ceiling. • Revised discussion of policy fragmentation and experimenta-

tion among the states and national efforts to coordinate policies.

Preface xxix

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

About the Authors

Welcoming Our New Author

We are especially pleased and excited to welcome our fifth author, Deborah Schildkraut, to The Challenge of Democracy team. Wadsworth Publishers asked coauthor Jeff Berry to offer a profile of his Tufts colleague:

• Debbie was an undergraduate at Tufts University—not sur- prisingly she majored in political science! The next stop was Princeton University where she received her PhD in 2000. Her first teaching job was at Oberlin College in Ohio, where she worked until 2004. She then accepted a position in the political science department at Tufts, coming back home as it were. Debbie’s scholarship is impeccable, and she’s become a leader in the political science profession in areas of public opinion, immigration, and political psychology. Her first book, Press One for English (Princeton University Press, 2005), was a study of public opinion about language and minorities in the United States. In 2011 she published Ameri- canism in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge University Press), which demonstrates that ethnic minorities embrace ‘‘American’’ values just as deeply as the rest of the population.

xxx Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

This landmark study was recently awarded the prestigious Robert Lane Prize for the best book published during the pre- vious year in the field of political psychology. At Tufts she teaches courses on political psychology, introductory Ameri- can government, political science research methods, political representation, and the politics of ethnicity and American identity. She is also a mother of two young boys. When not working or chasing her sons around, Debbie likes to ‘‘take a hike,’’ especially in New Hampshire’s White Mountains.

• Kenneth Janda is the Payson S. Wild Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Northwestern University. Dr. Janda has published extensively in comparative party politics, research methodology, and early use of computer technology in politi- cal science, for which he received awards from EDUCOM and support from Apple Computer. His American Political Science Association (APSA) awards include the Samuel Eldersveld Lifetime Achievement Award (2000) and the Frank J. Good- now Award (2009) for distinguished service to the profession and the association. Dr. Janda and fellow author Jerry Gold- man shared APSA technology awards in 1992 for IDEAlog, the computer program, and in 2005 for IDEAlog, the website.

• Jeffrey M. Berry is the John Richard Skuse Professor of Polit- ical Science at Tufts University. Dr. Berry is a recipient of the APSA’s Samuel Eldersveld Lifetime Achievement Award (2009) and numerous ‘‘best book’’ awards from the APSA for The Rebirth of Urban Democracy (1994), from the Policy Studies Organization for The New Liberalism (1999), from the APSA for A Voice for Nonprofits (2004), and from the APSA for Lobbying and Political Change (2009).

• Jerry Goldman is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Northwestern University and Research Professor of Law at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law where he is director of the Oyez Project. Dr. Goldman is the 2010 recipient of the first APSA/CQ Press Award for Teaching Innovation in Political Science. He has received many other awards, including the American Bar Association’s Silver Gavel for increasing the public’s understanding of the law, the EDUCOM Medal, and the Roman & Littlefield Prize for Teaching Innovation. In

Preface xxxi

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

2012, Dr. Goldman made the Fastcase 50: ‘‘the fifty most interesting, provocative, and courageous leaders in the world of law, scholarship, and legal technology.’’ Through the OYEZ Project, which uses images, audio, and video to bring the Supreme Court alive, he has brought the U.S. Supreme Court closer to everyone. Collaborating with experts in lin- guistics, psychology, computer science, and political science and with contributions by the National Science Foundation, Professor Goldman created a complete archive of fifty years of Supreme Court audio, which is now accessible on mobile devices through mobile apps Oyez Today and Pocket Justice.

• Kevin W. Hula is an associate professor of political science at Loyola University Maryland, where he teaches the introduc- tory American government course, as well as courses in the presidency, intelligence organizations, and interest groups. His research focuses on interest groups and the executive branch. Dr. Hula is author of Lobbying Together: Interest Group Coalitions in Legislative Politics, for which he received the Emerging Scholar Award from the APSA’s Political Organizations and Parties section. He has been responsible for abridging and updating the Challenge of Democracy Brief, Essential, and Advantage editions since 2000.

For the Instructor: Innovative Teaching Tools

Aplia� for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e • Instant Access Code ISBN-13: 9781133956150 • Printed Access Card ISBN-13: 9781133956143 • Book with Printed Access Card ISBN-13: 9781133602309 • Easy to use, affordable, and effective, Aplia helps students

learn and saves you time. It’s like a virtual teaching assistant! Aplia helps you have more productive classes by providing assignments that get students thinking critically, reading assigned material, and reinforcing basic concepts—all before coming to class. The interactive questions also help students

xxxii Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

better understand the relevance of what they’re learning and how to apply those concepts to the world around them.

Visually engaging videos, graphs, and political cartoons help capture students’ attention and imagination, and an auto- matically included e-book provides convenient access. Aplia is instantly accessible via CengageBrain, www.cengagebrain. com, or through the bookstore via printed access code. Please contact your local Cengage sales representative for more in- formation, and go to www.aplia.com/politicalscience to view a demo.

Free Companion Website for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e • ISBN-13: 9781133949107 • This password-protected website for instructors features all of

the free student assets plus an instructor’s manual, book- specific PowerPoint¤ presentations, JoinIn� ‘‘clicker’’ ques- tions, Resource Integration Guide, and a test bank. Access your resources by logging into your account at www.cengage.com/ login.

CourseReader: American Government 0-30 Selections • Instant Access Code ISBN-13: 9781111479978 • Printed Access Card ISBN-13: 9781111479954 • CourseReader: American Government allows you to create

your reader, your way, in just minutes. This affordable, fully customizable online reader provides access to thousands of permissions-cleared readings, articles, primary sources, and audio and video selections from the regularly updated Gale research library database. This easy-to-use solution allows you to search for and select just the material you want for your courses.

Each selection opens with a descriptive introduction to pro- vide context, and concludes with critical-thinking and multi- ple-choice questions to reinforce key points. CourseReader is loaded with convenient tools like highlighting, printing, note- taking, and downloadable MP3 audio files for each reading.

Preface xxxiii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

CourseReader is the perfect complement to any political sci- ence course. It can be bundled with your current textbook, sold alone, or integrated into your learning management sys- tem. CourseReader 0-30 allows access to up to 30 selections in the reader.

Please contact your Cengage sales representative for details, or, for a demo please visit us at www.cengage.com/coursereader. To access CourseReader materials go to www.cengage.com/sso, click on ‘‘Create a New Faculty Account,’’ and fill out the regis- tration page. Once you are in your new SSO account, search for ‘‘CourseReader’’ from your dashboard and select ‘‘Course- Reader: American Government.’’ Then click ‘‘CourseReader 0-30: American Government Instant Access Code’’ and click ‘‘Add to my bookshelf.’’ To access the live CourseReader, click on ‘‘CourseReader 0-30: American Government’’ under ‘‘Addi- tional resources’’ on the right side of your dashboard.

Custom Enrichment Module: Latino-American Politics Supplement • ISBN-13: 9781285184296 • Latino-American Politics is a thirty-two-page custom supple-

ment that uses real examples to detail politics related to Lat- ino Americans. This can be added to your book via our custom publishing program.

Election 2012: An American Government Supplement • Instant Access Code ISBN-13: 9781285420080 • Printed Access Card ISBN-13: 9781285090931 • Written by John Clark and Brian Schaffner, this booklet

addresses the 2012 congressional and presidential races, with real-time analysis and references.

Political Science CourseMate for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e • Instant Access Code ISBN-13: 9781133956198 • Printed Access Card ISBN-13: 9781133956204

xxxiv Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

• Cengage Learning’s Political Science CourseMate brings course concepts to life with interactive learning, study tools, and exam preparation tools that support the printed text- book. Use Engagement Tracker to assess student preparation and engagement in the course, and watch student compre- hension soar as your class works with the textbook-specific website. An interactive e-book allows students to take notes, highlight, search, and interact with embedded media. Other resources include video activities, animated learning modules, simulations, case studies, interactive quizzes, and timelines.

The American Government NewsWatch is a real-time news and information resource, updated daily, that includes inter- active maps, videos, podcasts, and hundreds of articles from leading journals, magazines, and newspapers from the United States and around the world. Also included is the KnowNow! American Government Blog, which highlights three current events stories per week and consists of a succinct analysis of the story, multimedia, and discussion-starter questions. Access your course via www.cengage.com/login.

PowerLecture DVD with ExamView�R for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e • ISBN-13: 9781133959083 • An all-in-one multimedia resource for class preparation, pre-

sentation, and testing, this DVD includes Microsoft¤ Power- Point¤ slides, a test bank in both Microsoft¤ Word and ExamView¤ formats, online polling and JoinIn� clicker ques- tions, an instructor manual, and a resource integration guide.

The book-specific PowerPoint¤ slides of lecture outlines, as well as photos, figures, and tables from the text, make it easy for you to assemble lectures for your course, while the media-enhanced slides help bring your lecture to life with audio and video clips, animated learning modules illustrating key concepts, tables, statistical charts, graphs, and photos from the book as well as outside sources.

The test bank, revised by James Goss of Tarrant County Col- lege, offered in Microsoft Word¤ and ExamView¤ formats, includes more than sixty multiple-choice questions with answers and page references along with ten essay questions

Preface xxxv

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

for each chapter. ExamView¤ features a user-friendly testing environment that allows you to not only publish traditional paper and computer-based tests, but also Web-deliverable exams. JoinIn� offers ‘‘clicker’’ questions covering key con- cepts, enabling instructors to incorporate student response systems into their classroom lectures.

The instructor’s manual, revised by Sharon Manna of North Lake College, includes learning objectives, chapter outlines, summaries, discussion questions, class activities and project suggestions, tips on integrating media into your class, and suggested readings and Web resources. JoinIn� offers ‘‘clicker’’ questions covering key concepts, enabling instructors to incorporate student response systems into their classroom lectures. A resource integration guide provides a chapter-by- chapter outline of all available resources to supplement and optimize learning. Contact your Cengage representative to receive a copy upon adoption.

The Wadsworth News DVD for American Government 2014 • ISBN: 9781285053455 • This collection of two- to five-minute video clips on relevant

political issues serves as a great lecture or discussion launcher.

IDEAlog IDEAlog, two-time winner of Instructional Software awards from the American Political Science Association, is closely tied to the text’s ‘‘value conflicts’’ theme. After a brief Tutorial about ideology, IDEAlog asks students to rate themselves on the two-dimensional tradeoff of freedom versus order and freedom versus equality. It then presents them with twenty recent poll questions—ten deal- ing with the conflict of freedom versus order and ten pertaining to freedom versus equality. Students’ responses are classified accord- ing to libertarian, conservative, liberal, or communitarian ideologi- cal tendencies. IDEAlog is directly accessible to anyone at http:// IDEAlog.org, but instructors who choose to register their classes receive a special login link for each class. Instructors then

xxxvi Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

can obtain summary statistics about their students’ scores on the ideology quiz.

USPolitics.org The Ninth Essentials Edition continues to be supported by uspolitics.org, Kenneth Janda’s personal website for The Challenge of Democracy. This site offers a variety of teaching aids to instruc- tors who adopt any version of The Challenge of Democracy for courses in American politics. It is divided into two sides: the student side is open to all users, but the instructor side is limited to teachers who register online at uspolitics.org as textbook adopt- ers. The site offers some material not contained on Cengage Learning’s own website, yet it also provides convenient links to the publisher’s site.

For more information on the teaching tools that accompany The Challenge of Democracy, please contact your Cengage Learn- ing sales representative.

For the Student: Effective Learning Aids

Aplia for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e Easy to use, affordable, and convenient, Aplia helps you learn more and improve your grade in the course. Through interactive assignments, including videos, graphs, and political cartoons, you can better understand the essential concepts of American govern- ment and how they apply to real life.

Aplia helps prepare you to be more involved in class by strengthening your critical-thinking skills, reinforcing what you need to know, and helping you understand why it all matters. For your studying convenience, Aplia includes an e-book, accessible right next to your assignments.

Get instant access via CengageBrain or via a printed access card in your bookstore. Visit www.cengagebrain.com for more in- formation. Aplia should be purchased only when assigned by your instructor as part of your course.

Preface xxxvii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Political Science CourseMate for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e Cengage Learning’s Political Science CourseMate brings course concepts to life with interactive learning, study tools, and exam preparation tools that support the printed textbook. The more you study, the better the results. Make the most of your study time by accessing everything you need to succeed in one place. Read your textbook, take notes, watch videos, read case studies, take practice quizzes, and more, online with CourseMate. CourseMate also gives you access to the American Government NewsWatch website— a real-time news and information resource updated daily, and KnowNow!—the go-to blog about current events in American Government. Additionally, CourseMate for The Enduring Democ- racy includes ‘‘The Connections App,’’ an interactive Web app that helps you better understand the relationship between histori- cal and current events and their connection with basic concepts.

Purchase instant access via CengageBrain or via a printed access card in your bookstore. Visit www.cengagebrain.com for more information. CourseMate should be purchased only when assigned by your instructor as part of your course.

Free Companion Website for The Challenge of Democracy, Essentials, 9e Access chapter-specific interactive learning tools, including flash- cards, quizzes, and more in your companion website, accessed through CengageBrain.com.

xxxviii Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Acknowledgments All authors are indebted to others for inspiration and assistance in various forms; textbook authors are notoriously so. We again want to single out professor Paul Manna of the College of William and Mary, who has assisted us in many different ways. Patti Conley contributed to some earlier editions of The Challenge of Democ- racy, and her work continues to be of value. Farhad Aspy Fatakia provided invaluable assistance optimizing IDEAlog to work on mobile devices; Leah Melani Christian at the Pew Research Center supplied us with 2012 survey data; and Simon Winchester helped us understand the history of the 1883 Krakatoa volcanic eruption. Timely information technology suggestions and assistance came from Jeff Parsons of the Oyez Project, professor James Ferolo of Bradley University, and Dr. Francesco Stagno d’Alcontres of Cen- tro Linguistico d’Ateneo Messinese. We also wish to express our gratitude to professor Julieta Suárez Cao of the Instituto de Ciencia Politica of Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Hope Lozano- Bielat of Boston University, Farah Bushashia of Boston College, professor Jennifer Cyr in the School of Government and Public Policy at the University of Arizona, Andrew Gruen of Cambridge University, and reference librarian Tom Gaylord and applications specialist Matt Gruhn at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law for their helpful research assistance. We extend thanks as well to Joseph B. Maher, Esq., Deputy General Counsel, DHS; Brad Kieserman, Esq., Chief Counsel, FEMA; and professor Timothy R. Johnson, University of Minnesota.

We have been fortunate to obtain the help of many outstand- ing political scientists across the country who provided us with critical reviews of our work as it has progressed through twelve separate editions. We found their comments enormously helpful, and we thank them for taking valuable time away from their own teaching and research to write their detailed reports. More specifi- cally, our thanks go to the following instructors who reviewed the Ninth Edition:

Ruth Ann Alsobrook, Paris Junior College

Thomas Bowen, Gloucester County College

Van Davis, National Park Community College

Monte Freidig, Santa Rosa Junior College

Marilyn Gaar, Johnson County Community College

Kema Irogbe, Claflin College

Richard Kiefer, Waubonsee Community College

Melinda Kovacs, Sam Houston State University

Farzeen Nasri, Ventura College

Sara Parker, Chabot College

Preface xxxix

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

James Sheffield, University of Oklahoma

Christine Sixta, Francis Marion University

Beatrice Talpos, Wayne County Community

College District

Katrina Taylor, Northern Arizona University

Ronnie Tucker, Shippensburg University

Sondra Venable, University of New Orleans

Graham Wilson, Boston University

We would also like to thank the following instructors who reviewed the prior editions:

David Ahern, University of Dayton

Philip C. Aka, Chicago State University

James Anderson, Texas A&M University

Greg Andranovich, California State University,

Los Angeles

Theodore Arrington, University of North Carolina,

Charlotte

Denise Baer, Northeastern University

Richard Barke, Georgia Institute of Technology

Brian Bearry, University of Texas at Dallas

Linda L. M. Bennett, Wittenberg University

Stephen Earl Bennett, University of Cincinnati

Elizabeth Bergman, California State Polytechnic

University, Pomona

Thad Beyle, University of North Carolina, Chapel

Hill

Bruce Bimber, University of California, Santa

Barbara

Michael Binford, Georgia State University

Bonnie Browne, Texas A&M University

Jeffrey L. Brudney, Cleveland State University

Jane Bryant, John A. Logan College

J. Vincent Buck, California State University,

Fullerton

Gregory A. Caldeira, Ohio State University

David E. Camacho, Northern Arizona University

Robert Casier, Santa Barbara City College

James Chalmers, Wayne State University

John Chubb, Stanford University

Allan Cigler, University of Kansas

Stanley Clark, California State University,

Bakersfield

Ronald Claunch, Stephen F. Austin State University

Guy C. Clifford, Bridgewater State College

Gary Copeland, University of Oklahoma

Ruth A. Corbett, Chabot College

W. Douglas Costain, University of Colorado at

Boulder

Cornelius P. Cotter, University of Wisconsin,

Milwaukee

James L. Danielson, Minnesota State University,

Moorhead

Christine L. Day, University of New Orleans

David A. Deese, Boston College

Victor D’Lugin, University of Florida

Douglas C. Dow, University of Texas at Dallas

Art English, University of Arkansas

Matthew EshbaughSoha, University of North Texas

Tim Fackler, University of Texas, Austin

Dennis Falcon, Cerritos Community College

Henry Fearnley, College of Marin

Elizabeth Flores, Del Mar College

David Madlock, University of Memphis

Michael Maggiotto, University of South Carolina

Edward S. Malecki, California State University,

Los Angeles

Michael Margolis, University of Cincinnati–

McMicken College of Arts and Sciences

xl Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Thomas R. Marshall, University of Texas at

Arlington

Janet Martin, Bowdoin College

Steve J. Mazurana, University of Northern Colorado

Michael McConachie, Collin College

Wayne McIntosh, University of Maryland

David McLaughlin, Northwest Missouri State

University

Don Melton, Arapahoe Community College

Melissa Michelson, California State University,

East Bay

Dana Morales, Montgomery College

Jim Morrow, Tulsa Junior College

David Moskowitz, The University of North

Carolina, Charlotte

William Mugleston, Mountain View College

William Murin, University of Wisconsin–Parkside

David Nice, Washington State University

David A. Nordquest, Pennsylvania State

University, Erie

Bruce Odom, Trinity Valley Community College

Laura Katz Olson, Lehigh University

Bruce Oppenheimer, Vanderbilt University

Richard Pacelle, Indiana University

William J. Parente, University of Scranton

Tony Payan, University of Texas, El Paso

Robert Pecorella, St. John’s University

James Perkins, San Antonio College

Denny E. Pilant, Southwest Missouri State

University

Marc Pufong, Valdosta State University

Curtis Reithel, University of Wisconsin–La Crosse

Russell Renka, Southeast Missouri State University

Chester D. Rhoan, Chabot College

Michael J. Rich, Emory University

Richard S. Rich, Virginia Tech

Patricia S. Florestano, University of Maryland

Richard Foglesong, Rollins College

Steve Frank, St. Cloud State University

Mitchel Gerber, Hofstra University

Dana K. Glencross, Oklahoma City Community

College

Dorith Grant-Wisdom, Howard University

Paul Gronke, Duke University

Sara A. Grove, Shippensburg University

David J. Hadley, Wabash College

Willie Hamilton, Mt. San Jacinto College

Kenneth Hayes, University of Maine

Ronald Hedlund, University of Wisconsin–

Milwaukee

Richard Heil, Fort Hays State University

Beth Henschen, The Institute for Community and

Regional Development, Eastern Michigan

University

Marjorie Randon Hershey, Indiana University

Roberta Herzberg, Indiana University

Jack E. Holmes, Hope College

Peter Howse, American River College

Ronald J. Hrebenar, University of Utah

James B. Johnson, University of Nebraska at Omaha

William R. Keech, Carnegie Mellon University

Scott Keeter, Pew Center

Sarah W. Keidan, Oakland Community College

(Michigan)

Linda Camp Keith, Collin County Community

College

Beat Kernen, Southwest Missouri State University

Haroon Khan, Henderson State University

Dwight Kiel, Central Florida University

Nancy Pearson Kinney, Washtenaw Community

College

Vance Krites, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Preface xli

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

Clyde Kuhn, California State University,

Sacramento

Jack Lampe, Southwest Texas Junior College

William Lester, Jacksonville State University

Brad Lockerbie, University of Georgia

Joseph Losco, Ball State University

Philip Loy, Taylor University

Stan Luger, University of Northern Colorado

Ronald I. Rubin, Borough of Manhattan

Community College, CUNY

Gilbert K. St. Clair, University of New Mexico

Barbara Salmore, Drew University

Todd M. Schaefer, Central Washington University

Denise Scheberle, University of Wisconsin–Green Bay

Paul R. Schulman, Mills College

William A. Schultze, San Diego State University

Thomas Sevener, Santa Rosa Junior College

Kenneth S. Sherrill, Hunter College

Sanford R. Silverburg, Catawba College

Mark Silverstein, Boston University

Charles Sohner, El Camino College

Robert J. Spitzer, SUNY Cortland

Terry Spurlock, Trinity Valley Community College

Candy Stevens Smith, Texarkana College

Dale Story, University of Texas at Arlington

Nicholas Strinkowski, Clark College

Neal Tate, University of North Texas

James A. Thurber, The American University

Ronnie Tucker, Shippensburg University

John Tuman, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Bedford Umez, Lee College

David Uranga, Pasadena City College

Eric M. Uslaner, University of Maryland

Lawson Veasey, Jacksonville State University

Charles E. Walcott, Virginia Tech

Richard J. Waldman, University of Maryland

Thomas G. Walker, Emory University

Benjamin Walter, Vanderbilt University

Shirley Ann Warshaw, Gettysburg College

Gary D. Wekkin, University of Central Arkansas

Jonathan West, University of Miami

Zaphon Wilson, Armstrong Atlantic State University

John Winkle, University of Mississippi

Clifford Wirth, University of New Hampshire

Wayne Wolf, South Suburban College

Mikel Wyckoff, Northern Illinois University

Ann Wynia, North Hennepin Community College

Jerry L. Yeric, University of North Texas

Finally, we want to thank the many people at Wadsworth/ Cengage Learning who helped make this edition a reality. There’s not enough room here to list all the individuals who helped us with the previous editions, so we say a collective thank-you for the superb work you did on The Challenge of Democracy. Political science acquisitions editor Anita Devine could not have been more supportive, and we especially appreciate how tolerant she is of the constant stream of kvetching and moaning e-mails that we send her way. Betty Slack, our developmental editor, was a delight to work with. She had a light touch editing and shaping the changes we made in the manuscript. Our direct production con- tacts were extraordinarily efficient and helpful. A million thanks

xlii Preface

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

to Alison Eigel Zade, Andrea Clemente, and Alexa Orr, all of whom seemed to create order out of the chaos we created. Finally, thanks, too, to the sales representatives who do such a terrific job of bringing each new edition of The Challenge of Democracy to the attention of those who might use it.

K. J. J. B. J. G. D. S. K. H.

Dedication This dedication is a bit different than most as we want to recog- nize institutions rather than individuals. As we started talking about the Ninth Edition, we began reflecting on our own intro- ductions to political science. We were once undergraduates, taking classes in political science, and learning from great professors who motivated and inspired us. More broadly, we studied at wonderful schools that provided us with intellectual and stimulating environ- ments. We thank those institutions with humility and immense gratitude:

To Illinois State University, which steered me from industrial arts to political science, K. J.

To the University of California at Berkeley, which took a young boy and opened the world to him, J. B.

To Brooklyn College, with great role models in professors Samuel J. Konefsky and Robert Hoffman, J. G.

To Tufts University, where I discovered how one could use research to pursue political passions, D. S.

To the University of Kansas, where lobbyists and the Congress became objects of study rather than derision, K. H.

Preface xliii

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

1. To get started, navigate to: login.cengagebrain.com

2. Now you’ll need to enter your Aplia Course Key, which is provided by your instructor.

3. Confirm your course information, and click “Continue” to continue to your registration.

● If you’ve previously created a Cengage Learning Single Sign-On (SSO), sign in with your account information.

● If this is your first time using Aplia or any Cengage product, you’ll need to create a new account.

● If you have created a new account, you will immediately be able to enter your Course Key.

● If you sign into your existing account, enter the Course Key on the right side of your home page.

APLIA QUICKK STTARRTT GGGUIIDDEE

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

5. After clicking on the “Open” button, you will be directed to your Aplia course as shown below.

Announcements from Aplia and your instructor will appear here.

Assignments due this week and next will appear here.

If you want to see all of the assignments in your course, click on the “View All Assignments” link above.

You can access the digital chapters of your textbook here.

4. You can now access your Aplia course by clicking on the “Open” button next to the course. To pay for your Aplia course, click on the “See Payment Options” link under your course.

NEED HELLP?

WITH YOUR APLIA COURSE?

● Click on the Support link in your Aplia course, and submit a case. Once your case is submitted, you can engage in a live chat to address your support issue.

WITH YOUR CENGAGEBRAIN ACCOUNT?

● Check the FAQs in the Support area of your CengageBrain home.

● Login to support.cengage.com using your CengageBrain account to get connected to an expert.

● Call 866-994-2427 Monday through Friday from 8 AM to 6 PM EST.

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

1 and Learning OutcomesCHAPTER

TOPICS

Dilemmas of

Democracy

1.1 The Globalization of American Government

Define globalization and explain how globalization affects American politics and government.

1.2 The Purposes of Government

Identify the purposes that government serves and trace their historical roots.

1.3 A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Government

Describe how political scientists use concepts to structure events and promote understanding.

1.4 The American Governmental Process: Majoritarian

or Pluralist?

Compare and contrast the majoritarian and pluralist models of democracy.

1.5 Democracy and Globalization

Evaluate the challenges facing countries trying to move toward a democratic form of government.

2 Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

FPO A re there limits to what governmentcan require of its citizens? We know that governments can require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts. Thinking that seat belts save lives and reduce injuries, every state but New Hampshire has such a law. We also know that governments can require the purchase of automobile insurance. Believing that mandatory coverage reduces insurance costs for everyone, ev- ery state but New Hampshire has such a law.

These laws were upheld under state constitu- tions, which typically empower state legislatures to care broadly for their residents’ safety and wel- fare. The U.S. Constitution, however, grants very specific powers to Congress, and it does not grant a specific power to require the use of seat belts or the purchase of automobile insurance. Under its power to regulate interstate commerce, Congress passed a law requiring manufacturers to install seat belts and shoulder harnesses in all cars produced after January 1, 1968, but Con- gress did not require that drivers and passengers

actually use the newly mandated seat belts. Simi- larly, no national law requires the purchase of automobile insurance.

Can state governments require citizens to buy health insurance? Contending that manda- tory coverage reduces health insurance costs for everyone, Massachusetts did just that in 2006. Under Republican governor Mitt Romney, Massa- chusetts required a minimum level of coverage for nearly all residents, provided free insurance to the poor, and penalized residents who failed to buy the required insurance. It stands as the only state with such a law.

Can the national government require citizens to buy health insurance? Congress did just that in 2010. Under Democratic president Barack Obama, it passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which contains the contro- versial ‘‘mandate’’ requiring nearly all Americans to buy coverage or pay a penalty. As in Massa- chusetts, this mandate reflects the rationale that bringing both sick and healthy people into the

Ka th

ar in

a M

/ Sh

ut te

rs to

ck .c

om

3 Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

pool of those insured is essential, because premiums paid by the healthy offset the cost of covering the sick.

From the beginning, controversy swirled over the national law to purchase health insurance. Massachusetts could require the purchase under its state constitution, but could Congress do the same under the U.S. Constitution’s grant of congressional power ‘‘to regulate commerce’’? Opponents filed legal challenges in the courts. By November 2011, rulings were issued in five U.S. District Courts and five U.S. Courts of Appeals.1 Seven of the rulings upheld the man- date, but three struck it down.

In the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Judge Laurence Silberman upheld the mandate, saying, ‘‘It certainly is an encroachment on individual liberty, but it is no more so than a com- mand that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race.’’2

The issue was eventually decided by the Supreme Court in June 2012. The Court ruled that the mandate to purchase health insur- ance could not be upheld under Congress’s power to ‘‘regulate com- merce,’’ but it was constitutional under Congress’s power to tax. That is, Congress could penalize (tax) people who did not purchase health insurance.3

What the U.S. government can do constitutionally, politically, and practically to serve its citizens is the focus of our textbook. People will differ—as those in New Hampshire do from people in other states— in supporting laws about wearing seat belts and buying automobile insurance. People in other states seem more willing to surrender some degree of freedom to achieve a more orderly society with a more equi- table distribution of citizen benefits. This tradeoff among the values of freedom, order, and equality lies at the heart of our discussion.

We hope to improve your understanding of the world by analyz- ing the norms, or values, that people use to judge political events. We probe the relationship between individual freedoms and personal se- curity, and how government ensures security by establishing order through making and enforcing its laws. We also examine the relation- ship between individual freedom and social equality as reflected in government policies, which often confront underlying dilemmas such as these. Our purpose is not to preach what people ought to favor in making policy decisions; it is to teach what values are at stake.

Teaching without preaching is not easy; no one can com- pletely exclude personal values from political analysis. But our approach minimizes the problem by concentrating on the

4 Chapter 1 Dilemmas of Democracy

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

 

 

dilemmas that confront governments when they are forced to choose between important policies that threaten equally cherished values, such as freedom of speech and personal security.

An Introduction to American Politics

We the People

121212 edition

E S S E N TI A LS

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 1 11/29/18 11:37 AM

 

 

T h

e 11

6 th

C on

g re

ss , J

an u

ar y

3 , 2

0 19

– Ja

n u

ar y

3 , 2

0 2

1 U

n it

e d S

ta te

s H

o u se

o f

R e p re

se n ta

ti ve

s D

e m

o cr

a ts

: 2 3 3 R

e p u b lic

a n s:

1 9 9 U

n d e ci

d e d : 3 2 0 1 8 E

le ct

io n R

e su

lt s:

D e m

o cr

a ts

g a in

e d c

o n tr

o l o

f th

e H

o u se

*

D e m

o cr

a t

R e p u b lic

a n

U n d e ci

d e d

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 2 11/29/18 11:37 AM

 

 

N V

C A

O RW

A

M T

ID

U T

A Z

A K

H I

N M

T X

O K

K S

N E

M N

IA

M O A R

G A

S C

N C

A L

T NK

Y

O H

M E

M D

D EN J

N H

M A R

I C

T

V T

P A

N Y

V A

W V

F L

M S

L A

W I IL

IN

M I

S DN D

C O

W Y

U n it

e d S

ta te

s S e n a te

D em

oc ra

ts : 4 5 R

ep ub

lic an

s: 5

3 In

de pe

nd en

ts : 2 2 0 1 8 E

le ct

io n R

es u lt s:

R ep

ub lic

an s

re ta

in ed

c on

tr ol

o f th

e S

en at

e*

* D

a ta

a re

b a se

d o

n e

le ct

io n r e su

lt s

a s

o f N

ov e m

b e r

2 8 , 2 0 1 8 . S

ev e ra

l r a ce

s re

m a in

e d

u n d e ci

d e d p

e n d in

g re

co u n ts

a n d r

u n o ff e

le ct

io n s.

 

2 D

e m

o cr

a ts

2 R

e p u b lic

a n s

1 D

e m

o cr

a t

a n d 1

R e p u b lic

a n

1 I n d e p e n d e n t

a n d 1

D e m

o cr

a t

1 I n d e p e n d e n t

a n d 1

R e p u b lic

a n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 3 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 4 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

★ BENJAMIN GINSBERG THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVE RSIT Y

★ THEODORE J. LOWI L ATE OF CORNE LL UNIVE RSIT Y

★ MARGARET WEIR BROWN UNIVE RSIT Y

★ CAROLINE J. TOLBERT UNIVE RSIT Y OF LOWA

★ ANDREA L. CAMPBELL MAS SACHUSE T TS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

★ ROBERT J. SPITZER SUNY CORTL AND

An Introduction to American Politics

We the People

n W. W. N O R T O N & C O M PA N Y N E W Y O R K L O N D O N

121212 edition

E S S E N TI A LS

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 5 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

W. W. Norton & Company has been independent since its founding in 1923, when William Warder Norton and Mary D. Herter Norton first published lectures delivered at the People’s Institute, the adult education division of New York City’s Cooper Union. The firm soon expanded its program beyond the Institute, publishing books by celebrated academics from America and abroad. By mid-century, the two major pillars of Norton’s publishing program—trade books and college texts—were firmly established. In the 1950s, the Norton family transferred control of the company to its employees, and today—with a staff of four hundred and a com- parable number of trade, college, and professional titles published each year—W. W. Norton & Company stands as the largest and oldest publishing house owned wholly by its employees.

Copyright © 2019, 2017, 2015, 2013, 2011, 2009, 2006, 2002 by W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

All rights reserved Printed in Canada

Marketing Manager, Political Science: Erin Brown Art Director: Rubina Yeh Text Design: Jen Montgomery Photo Editor: Stephanie Romeo Photo Researcher: Elyse Rieder Director of College Permissions: Megan Schindel Permissions Associate: Elizabeth Trammell Information Graphics: Kiss Me I’m Polish LLC, New York Composition: Graphic World, Inc. Manufacturing: TransContinental

Editor: Peter Lesser Project Editor: Christine D’Antonio Assistant Editor: Anna Olcott Manuscript Editor: Lynne Cannon Managing Editor, College: Marian Johnson Managing Editor, College Digital Media: Kim Yi Production Manager, College: Ashley Horna Media Editor: Spencer Richardson-Jones Associate Media Editor: Michael Jaoui Media Editorial Assistant: Tricia Vuong Ebook Production Manager: Danielle Lehmann

Permission to use copyrighted material is included in the cr edits section of this book, which begins on page A83.

The Library of Congress has cataloged the full edition as follows:

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Ginsberg, Benjamin, author. Title: We the people : an introduction to American politics / Benjamin Ginsberg, The Johns Hopkins University, Theodore J. Lowi, Cornell University, Margaret Weir, Brown University, Caroline J. Tolbert, University of Iowa, Andrea L. Campbell, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Description: Twelfth Edition. | New York : W.W. Norton & Company, [2018] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018046033 | ISBN 9780393644326 (hardcover) Subjects: LCSH: United States–Politics and government–Textbooks. Classification: LCC JK276 .G55 2018 | DDC 320.473–dc23 L C r ecord av ailable at https://lccn.loc. gov/2018046033

ISBN 978-0-393-66464-5

W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10110 wwnorton.com

W. W. Norton & Company Ltd., 15 Carlisle Street, London W1D 3BS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 6 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

To: Teresa Spitzer Sandy, Cindy, and Alex Ginsberg David, Jackie, Eveline, and Ed Dowling Dave, Marcella, Logan, and Kennah Campbell

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 7 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 8 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

ix

Preface xxi Acknowledgments xxiii

PART I FOUNDATIONS

1 ★ Introduction: The Citizen and Government 2

Government 5 Different Forms of Government Are Defined by Power

and Freedom 5 Limits on Governments Encouraged Freedom 6 Expansion of Participation in America Changed the

Political Balance 7 The Goal of Politics Is Having a Say in What Happens 7

Citizenship Is Based on Political Knowledge and Participation 8

Political Efficacy Means People Can Make a Difference 9

The Identity of Americans Has Changed over Time 10 Immigration and Increasing Ethnic Diversity Have

Long Caused Intense Debate 10 Who Are Americans Today? 12

America Is Built on the Ideas of Liberty, Equality, and Democracy 16 Liberty Means Freedom 16

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Global Diversity 17

Equality Means Treating People Fairly 18 Democracy Means That What the People Want Matters 19

Government Affects Our Lives Every Day 20 Trust in Government Has Declined 21

American Political Culture: What Do We Want? 23 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Voted in 2016? 25

Key Terms 28 For Further Reading 29

Contents

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 9 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

x

2 ★ The Founding and the Constitution 30

The First Founding: Ideals, Interests, and Conflicts 33 Narrow Interests and Political Conflicts Shaped the First

Founding 34 British Taxes Hurt Colonial Economic Interests 34 Political Strife Radicalized the Colonists 35 The Declaration of Independence Explained Why the Colonists

Wanted to Break with Great Britain 36 The Articles of Confederation Created America’s First National

Government 37

The Failure of the Articles of Confederation Made the “Second Founding” Necessary 38

The Annapolis Convention Was Key to Calling a National Convention 39

Shays’s Rebellion Showed How Weak the Government Was 39 The Constitutional Convention Didn’t Start Out to Write

a New Constitution 40

The Constitution Created Both Bold Powers and Sharp Limits on Power 43

The Legislative Branch Was Designed to Be the Most Powerful 44 The Executive Branch Created a Brand New Office 46 The Judicial Branch Was a Check on Too Much Democracy 47 National Unity and Power Set the New Constitution Apart

from the Old Articles 48 The Constitution Establishes the Process for Amendment 48 The Constitution Sets Forth Rules for Its Own Ratification 48 The Constitution Limits the National Government’s Power 48

Ratification of the Constitution Was Difficult 51 Federalists and Antifederalists Fought Bitterly over the Wisdom

of the New Constitution 52

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Comparing Systems of Government 55

Both Federalists and Antifederalists Contributed to the Success of the New System 56

Changing the Constitution 56 Amendments: Many Are Called; Few Are Chosen 56 The Amendment Process Reflects “Higher Law” 57

The Constitution: What Do We Want? 60 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Gained the Right to Vote through

Amendments? 61

Key Terms 64 For Further Reading 65

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 10 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xi

3 ★ Federalism 66

Federalism Shapes American Politics 69 Federalism Comes from the Constitution 69

The Definition of Federalism Has Changed Radically over Time 73

Federalism under the “Traditional System” Gave Most Powers to the States 73

The Supreme Court Paved the Way for the End of the Early Federal System 75

FDR’s New Deal Remade the Government 77 Changing Court Interpretations of Federalism Helped the

New Deal While Preserving States’ Rights 78 Cooperative Federalism Pushes States to Achieve

National Goals 80 National Standards Have Been Advanced through

Federal Programs 81

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Cooperative Federalism: Competition or a Check on Power? 83

New Federalism Means More State Control 85 There Is No Simple Answer to Finding the Right National–State Balance 86

Federalism: What Do We Want? 90 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Participates in State and Local Politics? 91

Key Terms 94 For Further Reading 95

4 ★ Civil Liberties and Civil Rights 96

The Origin of the Bill of Rights Lies in Those Who Opposed the Constitution 99

The Fourteenth Amendment Nationalized the Bill of Rights through Incorporation 101

The First Amendment Guarantees Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press 103

Freedom of Religion 103 The First Amendment and Freedom of Speech and of the

Press Ensure the Free Exchange of Ideas 105 Political Speech Is Consistently Protected 106 Symbolic Speech, Speech Plus, Assembly, and Petition Are Highly Protected 106 Freedom of the Press Is Broad 108 Some Speech Has Only Limited Protection 109

The Second Amendment Now Protects an Individual’s Right to Own a Gun 112

Rights of the Criminally Accused Are Based on Due Process of Law 113 The Fourth Amendment Protects against Unlawful Searches and Seizures 114 The Fifth Amendment Covers Court-Related Rights 115

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 11 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xii

The Sixth Amendment’s Right to Counsel Is Crucial for a Fair Trial 117

The Eighth Amendment Bars Cruel and Unusual Punishment 118

The Right to Privacy Means the Right to Be Left Alone 119

Civil Rights Are Protections by the Government 120 Plessy v. Ferguson Established “Separate but Equal” 121 Lawsuits to Fight for Equality Came after World War II 122 The Civil Rights Struggle Escalated after Brown v. Board

of Education 123 The Civil Rights Acts Made Equal Protection a Reality 125 Affirmative Action Attempts to Right Past Wrongs 128

The Civil Rights Struggle Was Extended to Other Disadvantaged Groups 130

Americans Have Fought Gender Discrimination 130 Latinos and Asian Americans Fight for Rights 132 Native Americans Have Sovereignty but Still Lack Rights 134

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Civil Liberties around the World 135

Disabled Americans Won a Great Victory in 1990 136 LGBTQ Americans 136

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights: What Do We Want? 137 WHO PARTICIPATES? Religious Affiliation and Freedom of Religion 139

Key Terms 142 For Further Reading 143

PART II P OLITIC S

5 ★ Public Opinion 144

Public Opinion Represents Attitudes about Politics 147 Americans Share Common Political Values 148 America’s Dominant Political Ideologies Are Liberalism

and Conservatism 149 Americans Exhibit Low Trust in Government 152

Political Socialization Shapes Public Opinion 152

Political Knowledge Is Important in Shaping Public Opinion 157

The Media and Government Mold Opinion 160 The Government Leads Public Opinion 160 Private Groups Also Shape Public Opinion 161 The News Media’s Message Affects Public Opinion 161 Government Policies Also Respond to Public Opinion 162

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 12 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xiii

Measuring Public Opinion Is Crucial to Understanding What It Is 163 Public-Opinion Surveys Are Accurate If Done Properly 163

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Confidence in Democratic Institutions 164

Why Are Some Polls Wrong? 166

Public Opinion: What Do We Want? 169 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Expresses Their Political Opinions? 171

Key Terms 174 For Further Reading 175

6 ★ The Media 176

Media Have Always Mattered in a Democracy 179 Journalists Are News-Gathering Professionals 179 The Profit Motive Drives the News Business 180 More Media Outlets Are Owned by Fewer

Companies 180

The Media Today 182 Newspapers Still Set the Standard for News

Reporting 183 Broadcast Media Are Still Popular 184 Radio Has Adapted to Modern Habits 185 Digital Media Have Transformed Media Habits 186 Citizen Journalism Gives People News Power 189 Concerns about Online News 190

The Media Affect Power Relations in American Politics 191 The Media Influence Public Opinion through Agenda-Setting,

Framing, and Priming 191 Leaked Information Can Come from Government Officials

or Independent Sources 193 Adversarial Journalism Has Risen in Recent Years 194 Broadcast Media Are Regulated but Not Print Media 194

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE The Internet and Global Democracy 196

The Media: What Do We Want? 197 WHO PARTICIPATES? Civic Engagement in the Digital Age 199

Key Terms 202 For Further Reading 203

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 13 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xiv

7 ★ Political Parties, Participation, and Elections 204

Parties and Elections Have Been Vital to American Politics and Government 207

Political Parties Arose from the Electoral Process 207 Parties Recruit Candidates 208 Parties Organize Nominations 208 Parties Help Get Out the Vote 209 Parties Organize Power in Congress 210

America Is One of the Few Nations with a Two-Party System 210 Parties Have Internal Disagreements 217 Electoral Realignments Define Party Systems in American

History 217 American Third Parties Sometimes Change the Major Parties

and Election Outcomes 218 Group Affiliations Are Based on Voters’ Psychological Ties

to One of the Parties 220

Political Participation Takes Both Traditional and Digital Forms 220

Voting Is the Most Important Form of Traditional Participation 220 Digital Political Participation Is Surging 221 Voter Turnout in America Is Low 223 Why Do People Vote? 224

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Voter Turnout in Comparison 226

Voters Decide Based on Party, Issues, and Candidate 227 Party Loyalty Is Important 227 Issues Can Shape an Election 228 Candidate Characteristics Are More Important in the Media

Age 229

The Electoral Process Has Many Levels and Rules 229 The Electoral College Still Organizes Presidential Elections 231

The 2016 and 2018 Elections 232 The 2016 Elections 232 Understanding the 2016 Results 233 The 2018 Election: A Blue Wave Meets a Red Wall 235 The 2018 Election and America’s Future 236

Money Is Critical to Campaigns 237 Campaign Funds Come from Direct Appeals, the Rich, PACs, and

Parties 237

Political Parties, Elections, and Participation: What Do We Want? 240

WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Participated in the 2016 Presidential Election? 241

Key Terms 244 For Further Reading 245

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 14 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xv

8 ★ Interest Groups 246

Interest Groups Form to Advocate for Different Interests 249

What Interests Are Represented? 250

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Civil Society around the World 252

Some Interests Are Not Represented 253 Group Membership Has an Upper-Class Bias 253

The Organizational Components of Groups Include Money, Offices, and Members 254

The Internet Has Changed the Way Interest Groups Foster Participation 257

The Number of Groups Has Increased in Recent Decades 258 The Expansion of Government Has Spurred the Growth of Groups 259 Public Interest Groups Grew in the 1960s and ’70s 259

Interest Groups Use Different Strategies to Gain Influence 259 Direct Lobbying Combines Education, Persuasion, and Pressure 261 Cultivating Access Means Getting the Attention of Decision Makers 262 Using the Courts (Litigation) Can Be Highly Effective 263 Mobilizing Public Opinion Brings Wider Attention to an Issue 264 Groups Often Use Electoral Politics 266

Groups and Interests: What Do We Want? 267 WHO PARTICIPATES? How Much Do Major Groups Spend? 269

Key Terms 272 For Further Reading 273

PART III INS TIT U TIONS

9 ★ Congress 274

Congress Represents the American People 277 The House and Senate Offer Differences

in Representation 277 Representation Can Be Sociological or Agency 278 The Electoral Connection Hinges on Incumbency 281 Direct Patronage Means Bringing Home the Bacon 286

The Organization of Congress Is Shaped by Party 288 Party Leadership in the House and the Senate Organizes Power 289 The Committee System Is the Core of Congress 289 The Staff System Is the Power behind the Power 291

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 15 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xvi

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Women’s Parliamentary Representation Worldwide 292

Rules of Lawmaking Explain How a Bill Becomes a Law 293 The First Step Is Committee Deliberation 293 Debate Is Less Restricted in the Senate Than in the House 295 Conference Committees Reconcile House and Senate Versions

of Legislation 296 The President’s Veto Controls the Flow of Legislation 297

Several Factors Influence How Congress Decides 297 Constituents Matter 297 Interest Groups Influence Constituents and Congress 298 Party Leaders Rely on Party Discipline 299 Partisanship Has Thwarted the Ability of Congress to Decide 303

Much Congressional Energy Goes to Tasks Other Than Lawmaking 303

Congress Oversees How Legislation Is Implemented 304 Special Senate Powers Include Advice and Consent 305 Impeachment Is the Power to Remove Top Officials 305

Congress: What Do We Want? 306 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Elects Congress? 307

Key Terms 310 For Further Reading 313

10 ★ The Presidency 314

Presidential Power Is Rooted in the Constitution 317 Expressed Powers Come Directly from the Words

of the Constitution 318 Implied Powers Derive from Expressed Powers 323 Delegated Powers Come from Congress 324 Modern Presidents Have Claimed Inherent Powers 324

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Executive Branches in Comparison 325

Institutional Resources of Presidential Power Are Numerous 327

The Cabinet Is Often Distant from the President 327 The White House Staff Constitutes the President’s Eyes and

Ears 327 The Executive Office of the President Is a Visible Sign of the

Modern Strong Presidency 328 The Vice Presidency Has Become More Important since the

1970s 329 The First Spouse Has Become Important to Policy 330

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 16 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xvii

Party, Popular Mobilization, and Administration Make Presidents Stronger 331

Going Public Means Trying to Whip Up the People 332 The Administrative Strategy Increases Presidential Control 334 Presidential Power Has Limits 339

The Presidency: What Do We Want? 340 WHO PARTICIPATES? Who Voted for Donald Trump in 2016? 341

Key Terms 344 For Further Reading 345

11 ★ Bureaucracy 346

Bureaucracy Exists to Improve Efficiency 349 Bureaucrats Fulfill Important Roles 349 The Size of the Federal Service Has Actually

Declined 352 The Executive Branch Is Organized Hierarchically 352

Federal Bureaucracies Promote Welfare and Security 355

Federal Bureaucracies Promote Public Well-Being 356

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Bureaucracy in Comparison 357

Federal Agencies Provide for National Security 358 Federal Bureaucracies Help to Maintain a Strong National Economy 362

Several Forces Control Bureaucracy 363 The President as Chief Executive Can Direct Agencies 363 Congress Promotes Responsible Bureaucracy 365 Can the Bureaucracy Be Reformed? 366

Bureaucracy and Democracy: What Do We Want? 367 WHO PARTICIPATES? Waiting for a Veterans Affairs Health Care Appointment 369

Key Terms 372 For Further Reading 373

12 ★ The Federal Courts 374

The Legal System Settles Disputes 377 Court Cases Proceed under Criminal and Civil Law 377 Types of Courts Include Trial, Appellate, and Supreme 378

The Federal Courts Hear a Small Percentage of All Cases 381

The Lower Federal Courts Handle Most Cases 381 The Appellate Courts Hear 20 Percent of Lower-Court Cases 382 The Supreme Court Is the Court of Final Appeal 383 Judges Are Appointed by the President and Approved by the Senate 384

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 17 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xviii

The Power of the Supreme Court Is Judicial Review 385 Judicial Review Covers Acts of Congress 386

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Term Limits for High Court Justices 387

Judicial Review Applies to Presidential Actions 388 Judicial Review Also Applies to State Actions 389

Most Cases Reach the Supreme Court by Appeal 390 The Solicitor General, Law Clerks, and Interest Groups Also

Influence the Flow of Cases 392 The Supreme Court’s Procedures Mean Cases May Take

Months or Years 394

Supreme Court Decisions Are Influenced by Activism and Ideology 397

The Federal Courts: What Do We Want? 400 WHO PARTICIPATES? Influencing the Supreme Court? 401

Key Terms 404 For Further Reading 405

PART IV P OLICY

13 ★ Domestic Policy 406

The Tools for Making Policy Are Techniques of Control 409 Promotional Policies Get People to Do Things by Giving

Them Rewards 409 Regulatory Policies Are Rules Backed by Penalties 411 Redistributive Policies Affect Broad Classes of People 413 Should the Government Intervene in the Economy? 415

Social Policy and the Welfare System Buttress Equality 416 The History of the Government Welfare System Dates Only

to the 1930s 416 The Modern Welfare System Has Three Parts 417 Welfare Reform Has Dominated the Welfare Agenda in

Recent Years 421

The Cycle of Poverty Can Be Broken by Education, Health, and Housing Policies 423

Education Policies Provide Life Tools 423 Health Policies Mean Fewer Sick Days 425

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE U.S. Healthcare: High Cost, Poor Outcomes 427

Housing Policies Provide Residential Stability 431

Social Policy Spending Benefits the Middle Class More Than the Poor 432

Senior Citizens Receive over a Third of All Federal Dollars 433 The Middle and Upper Classes Benefit from Social Policies 434

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 18 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xix

The Working Poor Receive Fewer Benefits 434 Spending for the Nonworking Poor Is Declining 435 Minorities, Women, and Children Are Most Likely to Face Poverty 435

Domestic Policy: What Do We Want? 437 WHO PARTICIPATES? Growing Student Debt Burden 439

Key Terms 442 For Further Reading 443

14 ★ Foreign Policy 444

Foreign Policy Goals Are Related 447 Security Is Based on Military Strength 447 Economic Prosperity Helps All Nations 451 America Seeks a More Humane World 451

AMERICA SIDE BY SIDE Building Influence through International Connections 452

American Foreign Policy Is Shaped by Government and Nongovernment Actors 453

The President Leads Foreign Policy 454 The Bureaucracy Implements and Informs Policy Decisions 455 Congress’s Legal Authority Can Be Decisive 456 Interest Groups Pressure Foreign Policy Decision Makers 457

Tools of American Foreign Policy Include Diplomacy, Force, and Money 458 Diplomacy 459 The United Nations Is the World’s Congress 459 The International Monetary Structure Helps Provide Economic Stability 460 Economic Aid Has Two Sides 460 Collective Security Is Designed to Deter War 461 Military Force Is “Politics by Other Means” 462 Soft Power Uses Persuasion 463 Arbitration Resolves Disputes 463

Current Foreign Policy Issues Facing the United States 464 A Powerful China and a Resurgent Russia 464 Nuclear Proliferation in Iran and North Korea 466 Trade Policy 467 Global Environmental Policy 467

Foreign Policy and Democracy: What Do We Want? 468 WHO PARTICIPATES? Public Opinion on Security Issues 469

Key Terms 472 For Further Reading 473

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 19 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xx

Appendix

The Declaration of Independence A1

The Articles of Confederation A5

The Constitution of the United States of America A11

Amendments to the Constitution A21

The Federalist Papers A30

The Anti-Federalist Papers A38

Presidents and Vice Presidents A45

Endnotes A49 Answer Key A81 Credits A83 Glossary/Index A85

C O N T E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 20 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxi

This book has been and continues to be dedicated to dev eloping a satisfactor y response to the question more and more Americans are asking: Why should we be engaged with go vernment and politics? Through the first 11 editions, we sought to answ er this question b y making the text dir ectly relevant to the liv es of the students who would be r eading it. As a r esult, w e tried to make politics inter est- ing by demonstrating that students ’ interests are at stake and that they ther efore need to take a personal, ev en selfish, interest in the outcomes of go vernment. A t the same time, we realized that students needed guidance in how to become politically engaged. Beyond providing students with a core of political knowledge, we needed to show them how they could apply that knowledge as participants in the political process. The “Who Participates?” and “What You Can Do” sections in each chapter help achieve that goal.

As events from the last several years have reminded us, “what government does” inevitably raises questions about political par ticipation and political equality . The size and composition of the electorate, for example, affect who is elected to public office and what policy dir ections the go vernment will pursue. H ence, the issue of v oter ID laws became impor tant in the 2016 election, with some arguing that these laws r e- duce v oter fraud and others contending that they decr ease par ticipation b y poor and minority voters. Charges of Russian meddling in the 2016 election have raised questions about the integrity of the voting process. Fierce debates about the policies of the Trump administration have heightened students’ interest in politics. O ther recent events have underscored how Americans from different backgrounds experience politics. Arguments about immigration became contentious during the 2016 election as the nation once again debated the question of who is entitled to be an American a nd have a voice in determin- ing what the government does. And charges that the police often use ex cessive violence against members of minority gr oups have raised questions about whether the go vern- ment treats all Americans equally. Reflecting all of these trends, this new Twelfth Edition shows more than any other book on the market (1) how students are connected to gov- ernment, (2) why students should think critically about go vernment and politics, and (3) how Americans fr om different backgrounds experience and shape politics. To help us explore these themes, P rofessor Andrea Campbell has joined us as the most r ecent in a gr oup of distinguished coauthors. P rofessor Campbell’s scholarly wor k focuses on the ways in which go vernment and politics affect the lives of ordinary citizens. Among her contributions are new chapter introductions that focus on stories of individuals and how government has affected them. Many Americans, particularly the young, can have difficulty seeing the role of go vernment in their ev eryday liv es. I ndeed, that ’s a chief explanation of low voter participation among younger citizens. The new chapter openers profile various individuals and illustrate their interactions with government, from a rock

Preface

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 21 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxii

band that gets its controversial name approved by the Supreme Court (Chapter 4), to a young mother who realizes the tap water in her Flint, Michigan, home is poisoning her children after local officials switched the source (Chapter 11), to teenagers pr otesting the end of net neutrality and the internet as they hav e known it (Chapter 6). The goal of these stories is to show students in a vivid way how government and politics mean something to their daily lives.

Several other elements of the book also help show students why politics and govern- ment should matter to them. These include:

• A twenty-first-century perspective on demographic change moves beyond the book’s strong coverage of traditional civil rights content with expanded coverage of contemporary group politics.

• “Who Participates?” infographics at the end of every chapter show students how different groups of Americans participate in key aspects of politics and government. Each concludes with a “What You Can Do” section that provides students with specific, realistic steps they can take to act on what they’ve learned and get involved in politics.

• “America Side by Side” boxes in every chapter use data figures and tables to provide a comparative perspective. By comparing political institutions and behavior across countries, students gain a better understanding of how specific features of the American system shape politics.

• Up-to-date coverage, with more than 10 pages and numerous graphics on the 2016 and 2018 elections, including a five-page section devoted to analysis of these momentous elections in Chapter 8, as well as updated data, examples, and other information throughout the book.

• “What Do We Want” chapter conclusions step back and provide perspective on how the chapter content connects to fundamental questions about the American political system. The conclusions also reprise the important point made in the personal profiles that begin each chapter that government matters to the lives of individuals.

• This Twelfth Edition is accompanied by InQuizitive, Norton’s award-winning formative, adaptive online quizzing program. The InQuizitive course for We the People, Essentials Edition, guides students through questions organized around the text’s chapter learning objectives to ensure mastery of the core information and to help with assessment. More information and a demonstration are available at digital.wwnorton.com/wethepeople12ess.

We note with r egret the passing of Theodore Lowi as w ell as M argaret Weir’s decision to step do wn fr om the book. We miss them but continue to hear their v oices and to benefit from their wisdom in the pages of our book. We also continue to hope that our book will itself be accepted as a form of enlightened political action. This Twelfth Edition is another chance. It is an advancement toward our goal. We promise to keep trying.

P R E FA C E

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 22 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxiii

We ar e especially pleased to ackno wledge the many colleagues who had a dir ect and active role in criticism and preparation of the manuscript. Our thanks go to:

First Edition Reviewers

Sarah Binder, Brookings Institution Kathleen Gille, Office of Representative David

Bonior Rodney Hero, University of Colorado

at Boulder Robert Katzmann, Brookings Institution Kathleen Knight, University of Houston Robin Kolodny, Temple University Nancy Kral, Tomball College Robert C. Lieberman, Columbia University David A. Marcum, University of Wyoming Laura R. Winsky Mattei, State University

of New York at Buffalo Marilyn S. Mertens, Midwestern State

University Barbara Suhay, Henry Ford Community

College Carolyn Wong, Stanford University Julian Zelizer, State University of New York

at Albany

Second Edition Reviewers

Lydia Andrade, University of North Texas John Coleman, University of Wisconsin

at Madison Daphne Eastman, Odessa College Otto Feinstein, Wayne State University Elizabeth Flores, Delmar College James Gimpel, University of Maryland

at College Park Jill Glaathar, Southwest Missouri State

University Shaun Herness, University of Florida

William Lyons, University of Tennessee at Knoxville

Andrew Polsky, Hunter College, City University of New York

Grant Reeher, Syracuse University Richard Rich, Virginia Polytechnic Bartholomew Sparrow, University

of Texas at Austin

Third Edition Reviewers

Bruce R. Drury, Lamar University Andrew I. E. Ewoh, Prairie View A&M

University Amy Jasperson, University of Texas

at San Antonio Loch Johnson, University of Georgia Mark Kann, University of Southern California Robert L. Perry, University of Texas

of the Permian Basin Wayne Pryor, Brazosport College Elizabeth A. Rexford, Wharton County Junior

College Andrea Simpson, University of Washington Brian Smentkowski, Southeast Missouri State

University Nelson Wikstrom, Virginia Commonwealth

University

Fourth Edition Reviewers

M. E. Banks, Virginia Commonwealth University

Lynn Brink, North Lake College Mark Cichock, University of Texas

at Arlington

Acknowledgments

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 23 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxiv

Del Fields, St. Petersburg College Nancy Kinney, Washtenaw Community

College William Klein, St. Petersburg College Dana Morales, Montgomery College Christopher Muste, Louisiana State University Larry Norris, South Plains College David Rankin, State University of New York

at Fredonia Paul Roesler, St. Charles Community College J. Philip Rogers, San Antonio College Greg Shaw, Illinois Wesleyan University Tracy Skopek, Stephen F. Austin State

University Don Smith, University of North Texas Terri Wright, Cal State, Fullerton

Fifth Edition Reviewers

Annie Benifield, Tomball College Denise Dutton, Southwest Missouri State

University Rick Kurtz, Central Michigan University Kelly McDaniel, Three Rivers Community

College Eric Plutzer, Pennsylvania State University Daniel Smith, Northwest Missouri State

University Dara Strolovitch, University of Minnesota Dennis Toombs, San Jacinto College–North Stacy Ulbig, Southwest Missouri State

University

Sixth Edition Reviewers

Janet Adamski, University of Mary Hardin–Baylor

Greg Andrews, St. Petersburg College Louis Bolce, Baruch College Darin Combs, Tulsa Community College Sean Conroy, University of New Orleans Paul Cooke, Cy Fair College Vida Davoudi, Kingwood College Robert DiClerico, West Virginia University Corey Ditslear, University of North Texas Kathy Dolan, University of Wisconsin,

Milwaukee Randy Glean, Midwestern State University Nancy Kral, Tomball College Mark Logas, Valencia Community College

Scott MacDougall, Diablo Valley College David Mann, College of Charleston Christopher Muste, University of Montana Richard Pacelle, Georgia Southern University Sarah Poggione, Florida International

University Richard Rich, Virginia Tech Thomas Schmeling, Rhode Island College Scott Spitzer, California State

University–Fullerton Robert Wood, University of North Dakota

Seventh Edition Reviewers

Molly Andolina, DePaul University Nancy Bednar, Antelope Valley College Paul Blakelock, Kingwood College Amy Brandon, San Jacinto College Jim Cauthen, John Jay College Kevin Davis, North Central Texas College Louis DeSipio, University of California–Irvine Brandon Franke, Blinn College Steve Garrison, Midwestern State University Joseph Howard, University of Central Arkansas Aaron Knight, Houston Community

College Paul Labedz, Valencia Community College Elise Langan, John Jay College Mark Logas, Valencia Community College Eric Miller, Blinn College Anthony O’Regan, Los Angeles Valley College David Putz, Kingwood College Chis Soper, Pepperdine University Kevin Wagner, Florida Atlantic University Laura Wood, Tarrant County College

Eighth Edition Reviewers

Brian Arbour, John Jay College, CUNY Ellen Baik, University of Texas–Pan

American David Birch, Lone Star College–Tomball Bill Carroll, Sam Houston State University Ed Chervenak, University of New Orleans Gary Church, Mountain View College Adrian Stefan Clark, Del Mar College Annie Cole, Los Angeles City College Greg Combs, University of Texas at Dallas Cassandra Cookson, Lee College Brian Cravens, Blinn College

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 24 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxv

John Crosby, California State University–Chico

Scott Crosby, Valencia Community College Courtenay Daum, Colorado State

University, Fort Collins Peter Doas, University of Texas–Pan American John Domino, Sam Houston State University Doug Dow, University of Texas–Dallas Jeremy Duff, Midwestern State University Heather Evans, Sam Houston State University Hyacinth Ezeamii, Albany State University Bob Fitrakis, Columbus State Community

College Brian Fletcher, Truckee Meadows

Community College Paul Foote, Eastern Kentucky University Frank Garrahan, Austin Community College Jimmy Gleason, Purdue University Steven Greene, North Carolina State

University Jeannie Grussendorf, Georgia State University M. Ahad Hayaud-Din, Brookhaven College Alexander Hogan, Lone Star College–CyFair Glen Hunt, Austin Community College Mark Jendrysik, University of North Dakota Krista Jenkins, Fairleigh Dickinson

University Carlos Juárez, Hawaii Pacific University Melinda Kovács, Sam Houston State

University Boyd Lanier, Lamar University Jeff Lazarus, Georgia State University Jeffrey Lee, Blinn College Alan Lehmann, Blinn College Julie Lester, Macon State College Steven Lichtman, Shippensburg University Fred Lokken, Truckee Meadows

Community College Shari MacLachlan, Palm Beach

Community College Guy Martin, Winston-Salem State University Fred Monardi, College of Southern Nevada Vincent Moscardelli, University of

Connecticut Jason Mycoff, University of Delaware Sugumaran Narayanan, Midwestern State

University Anthony Nownes, University of Tennessee,

Knoxville Elizabeth Oldmixon, University of North Texas

John Osterman, San Jacinto College–Central Mark Peplowski, College of Southern Nevada Maria Victoria Perez-Rios, John Jay

College, CUNY Sara Rinfret, University of Wisconsin, Green

Bay Andre Robinson, Pulaski Technical College Susan Roomberg, University of Texas at San

Antonio Ryan Rynbrandt, Collin County Community

College Mario Salas, Northwest Vista College Michael Sanchez, San Antonio College Mary Schander, Pasadena City College Laura Schneider, Grand Valley State

University Subash Shah, Winston-Salem

State University Mark Shomaker, Blinn College Roy Slater, St. Petersburg College Debra St. John, Collin College Eric Whitaker, Western Washington

University Clay Wiegand, Cisco College Walter Wilson, University of Texas at

San Antonio Kevan Yenerall, Clarion University Rogerio Zapata, South Texas College

Ninth Edition Reviewers Amy Acord, Lone Star College–CyFair Milan Andrejevich, Ivy Tech Community

College Steve Anthony, Georgia State University Phillip Ardoin, Appalachian State

University Gregory Arey, Cape Fear Community College Joan Babcock, Northwest Vista College Evelyn Ballard, Houston Community College Robert Ballinger, South Texas College Mary Barnes-Tilley, Blinn College Robert Bartels, Evangel University Nancy Bednar, Antelope Valley College Annie Benifield, Lone Star College–Tomball Donna Bennett, Trinity Valley Community

College Amy Brandon, El Paso Community College Mark Brewer, The University of Maine Gary Brown, Lone Star College–Montgomery

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 25 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxvi

Joe Campbell, Johnson County Community College

Dewey Clayton, University of Louisville Jeff Colbert, Elon University Amanda Cook-Fesperman, Illinois Valley

Community College Kevin Corder, Western Michigan University Kevin Davis, North Central Texas College Paul Davis, Truckee Meadows Community

College Terri Davis, Lamar University Jennifer De Maio, California State

University, Northridge Christopher Durso, Valencia College Ryan Emenaker, College of the Redwoods Leslie Feldman, Hofstra University Glen Findley, Odessa College Michael Gattis, Gulf Coast State College Donna Godwin, Trinity Valley Community

College Precious Hall, Truckee Meadows

Community College Sally Hansen, Daytona State College Tiffany Harper, Collin College Todd Hartman, Appalachian State University Virginia Haysley, Lone Star College–Tomball David Head, John Tyler Community College Rick Henderson, Texas State University–San

Marcos Richard Herrera, Arizona State University Thaddaus Hill, Blinn College Steven Holmes, Bakersfield College Kevin Holton, South Texas College Robin Jacobson, University of Puget Sound Joseph Jozwiak, Texas A & M–Corpus Christi Casey Klofstad, University of Miami Samuel Lingrosso, Los Angeles Valley College Mark Logas, Valencia College Christopher Marshall, South Texas College Larry McElvain, South Texas College Elizabeth McLane, Wharton County Junior

College Eddie Meaders, University of North Texas Rob Mellen, Mississippi State University Jalal Nejad, Northwest Vista College Adam Newmark, Appalachian State University Stephen Nicholson, University of

California, Merced Cissie Owen, Lamar University Suzanne Preston, St. Petersburg College David Putz, Lone Star College–Kingwood

Auksuole Rubavichute, Mountain View College

Ronnee Schreiber, San Diego State University Ronald Schurin, University of Connecticut Jason Seitz, Georgia Perimeter College Jennifer Seitz, Georgia Perimeter College Shannon Sinegal,The University of New

Orleans John Sides, George Washington University Thomas Sowers, Lamar University Jim Startin, University of Texas at San Antonio Robert Sterken, University of Texas at Tyler Bobby Summers, Harper College John Theis, Lone Star College–Kingwood John Todd, University of North Texas Delaina Toothman, The University of Maine David Trussell, Cisco College Ronald Vardy, University of Houston Linda Veazey, Midwestern State University John Vento, Antelope Valley Community

College Clif Wilkinson, Georgia College John Wood, Rose State College Michael Young, Trinity Valley Community

College Tyler Young, Collin College

Tenth Edition Reviewers

Stephen P. Amberg, University of Texas at San Antonio

Juan F. Arzola, College of the Sequoias Thomas J. Baldino, Wilkes University Christina Bejarano, University of Kansas Paul T. Bellinger, Jr., University of Missouri Melanie J. Blumberg, California University of

Pennsylvania Matthew T. Bradley, Indiana University

Kokomo Jeffrey W. Christiansen, Seminole State

College McKinzie Craig, Marietta College Christopher Cronin, Methodist University Jenna Duke, Lehigh Carbon Community

College Francisco Durand, University of Texas at San

Antonio Carrie Eaves, Elon University Paul M. Flor, El Camino College Compton

Center Adam Fuller, Youngstown State University

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 26 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxvii

Christi Gramling, Charleston Southern University

Sally Hansen, Daytona State College Mary Jane Hatton, Hawai’i Pacific University David Helpap, University of

Wisconsin–Green Bay Theresa L. Hutchins, Georgia Highlands College Cryshanna A. Jackson Leftwich, Youngstown

State University Ashlyn Kuersten, Western Michigan University Kara Lindaman, Winona State University Timothy Lynch, University of

Wisconsin–Milwaukee Larry McElvain, South Texas College Corinna R. McKoy, Ventura College Eddie L. Meaders, University of North Texas Don D. Mirjanian, College of Southern

Nevada R. Shea Mize, Georgia Highlands College Nicholas Morgan, Collin College Matthew Murray, Dutchess Community

College Harold “Trey” Orndorff III, Daytona State

College Randall Parish, University of North Georgia Michelle Pautz, University of Dayton Michael Pickering, University of New Orleans Donald Ranish, Antelope Valley College Glenn W. Richardson, Jr., Kutztown

University of Pennsylvania Jason Robles, Colorado State University Ionas Aurelian Rus, University of Cincinnati–

Blue Ash Robert Sahr, Oregon State University Kelly B. Shaw, Iowa State University Captain Michael Slattery, Campbell University Michael Smith, Sam Houston State University Maryam T. Stevenson, University of

Indianapolis Elizabeth Trentanelli, Gulf Coast State

College Ronald W. Vardy, University of Houston Timothy Weaver, University of Louisville Christina Wolbrecht, University of Notre

Dame

Eleventh Edition Reviewers

Maria J. Albo, University of North Georgia Andrea Aleman, University of Texas at San

Antonio

Juan Arzola, College of the Sequoias Ross K. Baker, Rutgers University Lauren Balasco, Pittsburg State University Daniel Birdsong, University of Dayton Phil Branyon, University of North Georgia Camille D. Burge, Villanova University Matthew DeSantis, Guilford Technical

Community College Sheryl Edwards, University of

Michigan–Dearborn Lauren Elliott-Dorans, University of

Toledo Heather Evans, Sam Houston State

University William Feagin, Jr., Wharton County Junior

College Glen Findley, Odessa College Heather Frederick, Slipper Rock University Jason Ghibesi, Ocean County College Patrick Gilbert, Lone Star–Tomball Rebecca Herzog, American River College Steven Horn, Everett Community College Demetra Kasimis, California State

University, Long Beach Eric T. Kasper, University of Wisconsin–Eau

Claire Jill Kirkham, Brigham Young University–

Idaho Mary Linder, Grayson County College Johnson Louie, California State University,

Stanislaus Phil McCall, Portland State University Patrick Novotny, Georgia Southern

University Carolyn Myers, Southwestern Illinois

College–Belleville Gerhard Peters, Citrus College Michael A. Powell, Frederick Community

College Robert Proctor, Santa Rosa Junior College Allen K. Settle, California Polytechnic State

University Laurie Sprankle, Community College of

Allegheny County Ryan Lee Teten, University of Louisiana

at Lafayette Justin Vaughn, Boise State University John Vento, Antelope Valley College Aaron Weinschenk, University of

Wisconsin–Green Bay Tyler Young, Collin College

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 27 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

xxviii

Twelfth Edition Reviewers

Craig Albert, Augusta University Alexa Bankert, University of Georgia Nathan Barrick, University of South Florida Jeff Birdsong, Northeastern Oklahoma A&M

College Sara Butler, College of the Desert Cory Colby, Lone Star College Anthony Daniels, University of Toledo Dennis Falcon, Cerritos College Kathleen Ferraiolo, James Madison University Patrick Gilbert, Lone Star College, Tomball Matthew Green, Catholic University

of America Matt Guardino, Providence College Barbara Headrick, Minnesota State University,

Moorhead Justin Hoggard, Three Rivers Community

College John Patrick Ifedi, Howard University Cryshanna Jackson Leftwich, Youngstown

State University Douglas Kriner, Boston University Thom Kuehls, Weber State University

Jennifer Lawless, American University LaDella Levy, College of Southern Nevada Timothy Lim, California State University, Los

Angeles Sam Lingrosso, Los Angeles Valley College Mandy May, College of Southern Maryland Suzanne Mettler, Cornell University Michael Miller, Barnard College Joseph Njoroge, Abraham Baldwin

Agricultural College Michael Petri, Santa Ana College Christopher Poulios, Nassau Community

College Andrew Rudalevige, Bowdoin College Amanda Sanford, Louisiana Tech University Elizabeth Saunders, George Washington

University Kathleen Searles, Louisiana State University Matthew Snyder, Delgado Community College Steven Sylvester, Utah Valley University Linda Trautman, Ohio University Lancaster Donald Williams, Western New England

University Peter Yacobucci, Buffalo State College

We ar e also grateful to M elissa M ichelson, of M enlo College, who contributed to the “ Who P articipates?” infographics for this edition; H olley H ansen, of O klahoma State University, who contributed to the “America Side by Side” boxes.

Perhaps abo ve all, w e thank those at W. W. N orton. F or its first five editions, editor Steve Dunn helped us shape the book in countless ways. Lisa McKay contrib- uted smart ideas and a keen editorial eye to the Tenth Edition. Ann Shin carried on the Norton tradition of splendid editorial wor k on the S ixth through Ninth and E leventh Editions. Peter Lesser br ought intelligence and dedication to the dev elopment of this Twelfth E dition. F or our I nQuizitive course and other instr uctor r esources, S pencer Richardson-Jones has been an energetic and visionar y editor. Ashley H orna, M ichael Jaoui, Tricia Vuong, and Anna Olcott also kept the production of the Eleventh Edition and its accompanying resources coherent and in focus. Lynne Cannon copyedited the manuscript, and our superb project editor Christine D’Antonio devoted countless hours to keeping on top of myriad details. We thank Elyse Rieder for finding new photos and our photo editor Stephanie Romeo for managing the image program. Finally, we thank Roby Harrington, the head of Norton’s college department.

Benjamin Ginsberg Caroline J. Tolbert Andrea L. Campbell

October 2018

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 28 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

An Introduction to American Politics

We the People

121212 edition

E S S E N TI A LS

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch00_fm_i-1.indd 1 11/29/18 11:38 AM

 

 

010101 chapter

Introduction: The Citizen and Government WHAT GOVERNMENT DOES AND WHY IT MATTERS Meet two of the nation’s youngest elected officials. Saira Blair became the young-

est member of West Virginia’s House of Delegates when she won election as

an 18-year-old college freshman. The day after her victory party in November

2014, she was back in class at West Virginia University. In May 2017, Prairie

View A&M senior Kendric D. Jones similarly achieved electoral victory, becom-

ing the youngest city council member in the state of Texas. What got Blair

and Jones involved in politics? Both had sources of political inspiration. Blair

followed in the footsteps of her father, a West Virginia state senator, who she

had accompanied to political events since childhood. Jones was inspired by

the long history of activism at Prairie View, which was founded in 1876 during

Reconstruction by some of the first African American members of the Texas

state legislature. A further spur to action was President Obama’s call in his

2017 farewell address to “grab a clipboard, get some signatures, and run for

office yourself.” Both also had strong commitments to issues. Blair believes

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 2 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

3

Introduction: The Citizen and Government

While Americans share a belief in the values of liberty, equality, and democracy, debates rage about how to live up to those values. To advocate for their beliefs, Republican Saira Blair (left) and Democrat Kendric Jones (right)—both college students—ran for office and won. What is the citizen’s role in America’s democratic system?

in limited government, lower taxes, and Second Amendment gun rights. Jones

has a long history of working in the community, serving in student government,

and founding a mentoring program for middle-school boys.

Both Blair and Jones also believe deeply in political participation, espe-

cially that of young people. As Jones said, “The students of Prairie View A&M

University’s voices have not been heard. Since I have been here, the city has

been stagnant and has not made any progression—outside of the university.

I feel as though a young, innovative mind can push this city forward.” After

participating in a mock government program in high school, Blair saw that

young people were just as capable as lawmakers decades older: “When I saw

how capable the students were of creating . . . legislation and really getting

work done, it really made me realize that we really didn’t need to wait.”1

Blair and Jones’s experiences show that citizens are at the center of

democratic government. They ran for office because they care about public

issues and want to have a hand in shaping policy outcomes. What are you

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 3 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

passionate about? How does government affect your everyday life and that

of your family, friends, and community? And how are differences in political

views resolved in politics? Americans hold certain values dear, including lib-

erty, equality, and democracy. In fact, if you asked Blair and Jones, they would

almost certainly agree that these are critical values to uphold. However, Blair

and Jones might emphasize one more than the other. And they might have

major disagreements about what those values mean and what the government

should do to shape and uphold them. What are your values? Do you see them

reflected in government today? What do you want government to do?

★ Define government and forms of government (pp. 5–7)

★ Describe the role of the citizen in politics (pp. 8–9)

★ Show how the social composition of the American population has changed over time (pp. 10–16)

★ Analyze whether the U.S. system of government upholds American political values (pp. 16–20)

★ Explore Americans’ attitudes toward government (pp. 20–23)

CHAP TER GOAL S

4 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 4 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

Government Government refers to the formal in- stitutions and pr ocedures thr ough which a territor y and its people ar e ruled. To govern is to r ule. A govern-

ment may be as simple as a to wn meeting in which community members make policy and determine budgets together or as complex as the vast establishments found in many large countries today, with their extensive procedures, laws, and bureaucracies. In the history of civilization, governments have not been difficult to establish. There have been thousands of them. The hard part is establishing a govern- ment that lasts. Even more difficult is developing a stable government that promotes liberty, equality, and democracy.

DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT ARE DEFINED BY POWER AND FREEDOM

Governments vary in their structure, in their size, and in the way they operate. Two questions are of special importance in determining how governments differ: Who governs? And how much government control is permitted?

In some nations, government power is held by a single individual, such as a king or dictator, or by a small gr oup of powerful individuals, such as militar y leaders or wealthy landowners. Such a system of government normally pays little attention to popular preferences; it tends to hold power by violence or the threat of violence and is referred to as an authoritarian system, meaning that the go vernment recognizes no formal limit but may nev ertheless be r estrained by the po wer of other social insti – tutions. A system of go vernment in which the degr ee of control is even greater is a totalitarian system, where the government recognizes no formal limits on its power and seeks to absorb or eliminate other social institutions that might challenge it. Nazi G ermany under A dolf H itler and the S oviet Union under J oseph S talin ar e classic examples of totalitarian rule.

In contrast, a democracy is a political system that permits citiz ens to play a significant part in the governmental process, where they are vested with the power to r ule themselv es, usually thr ough the election of key public officials. Under such a system, constitutional government is the norm, in that formal and effective limits are placed on the powers of the government. At times, an author- itarian government might bend to popular wishes, and democratic go vernments do not automatically follo w the wishes of the majority . The point, however, is that these contrasting systems of go vernment ar e based on v ery different assumptions and practices.

Americans have the good for tune to liv e in a nation in which limits ar e placed on what governments can do and how they can do it. By one measure, just 40 per- cent of the global population (those living in 86 countries) enjoy sufficient levels of political and personal freedom to be classified as living in a constitutional democracy.2 And constitutional democracies w ere unhear d of befor e the modern era. P rior to

Define government and forms of government

5G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 5 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, go vernments seldom sought (and rar ely received) the support of their ordinary subjects.3

Beginning in the sev enteenth centur y, in a handful of Western nations, two important changes began to take place in the character and conduct of go vern- ment. F irst, go vernments began to ackno wledge formal limits on their po wer. Second, a small number of governments began to provide the ordinary citizen with a formal v oice in public affairs—through the v ote. O bviously, the desirability of limits on go vernment and the expansion of popular influence were at the hear t of the Ameri can R evolution in 1776. “N o taxation without r epresentation” was hotly debated fr om the beginning of the R evolution through the adoption of the modern Constitution in 1789. But even before the Revolution, a tradition of limi- ting government and expanding citiz en par ticipation in the political pr ocess had developed throughout western Europe. Thus, to understand how the r elationship between rulers and the ruled was transformed, we must broaden our focus to take into account events in Europe as well as in America. We will divide the transforma- tion into its two separate parts. The first is the effort to put limits on government. The second is the effort to expand the influence of the people through access to government and politics.

LIMITS ON GOVERNMENTS ENCOURAGED FREEDOM

The key force behind the imposition of limits on government power was a new social class, the bourgeoisie. Bourgeoisie is a F rench wor d for “ freeman of the city,” or bourg. Being part of the bourgeoisie later became associated with being “middle class” and with involvement in commerce or industry. In order to gain a share of control of government, joining or even displacing the kings, aristocrats, and gentry who had dominated government for centuries, the bourgeoisie sought to change existing institutions—especially parliaments—into instruments of real political par ticipation. Parliaments had existed for centuries but w ere generally controlled b y the aristocrats. The bourgeoisie embraced parliaments as means by which they could ex ert the w eight of their superior numbers and gr ow- ing economic adv antage against their aristocratic riv als. A t the same time, the bourgeoisie sought to r estrain the capacity of go vernments to thr eaten these economic and political inter ests b y placing formal or constitutional limits on governmental power.

Although motivated primarily b y the need to pr otect and defend their o wn in- terests, the bourgeoisie adv anced many of the principles that became the central underpinnings of individual liber ty for all citiz ens—freedom of speech, fr eedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, and freedom from arbitrary search and seizure. It is important to note here that the bourgeoisie generally did not fav or democracy as we know it. They were advocates of electoral and r epresentative institutions, but they fav ored pr operty r equirements and other r estrictions so as to limit political participation to the middle and upper classes. Yet once these institutions of politics and the protection of the right to engage in politics were established, it was difficult to limit them to the bourgeoisie.

6 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 6 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

EXPANSION OF PARTICIPATION IN AMERICA CHANGED THE POLITICAL BAL ANCE

In America, the expansion of participation to ever-larger segments of society, seen mostly in the expansion of voting rights, occurred because competing segments of the bour- geoisie sought to gain political advantage by reaching out and mobilizing the support of working- and lower-class groups that craved the opportunity to take part in politics. To be sure, excluded groups often agitated for gr eater participation. But seldom was such agitation, by itself, enough to secure the right to participate. Usually, expansion of voting rights resulted from a combination of pressure from below and help from above.

This pattern of suffrage expansion by gr oups hoping to deriv e some political advantage has been typical in American history. After the Civil War, one of the chief reasons that the Republican Party moved to enfranchise newly freed slaves was to use the support of the former slav es to maintain R epublican control over the defeated southern states. S imilarly, in the early tw entieth centur y, upper -middle-class Pro- gressives advocated women’s suffrage because they believed that women w ere likely to support the reforms espoused by the Progressive movement.

THE GOAL OF POLITICS IS HAVING A SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS

Expansion of par ticipation means that mor e and more people have a legal right to take part in politics. Politics is an impor tant term. In its broadest sense, it r efers to conflicts over the character, membership, and policies of any organization to which people belong. As Harold Lasswell, a famous political scientist, once put it, politics is the str uggle over “who gets what, when, ho w.”4 Although politics is a phenom – enon that can be found in any organization, our concern in this book is narrower. Here, politics will be used to refer only to conflicts and struggles over the leadership, structure, and policies of governments. The goal of politics, as we define it, is to have a share or a say in the composition of the government’s leadership, how the govern- ment is organized, or what its policies are going to be. Having a share is called power or influence.

Participation in politics can take many forms, including blogging and posting opinion pieces online, v oting, sending emails to go vernment officials, lobbying legis lators on behalf of particular programs, and participating in protest marches and even violent demonstrations. A system of government in which the populace selects representatives, who play a significant role in governmental decision mak- ing, is usually called a representative democracy, or republic. A system that permits citizens to vote directly on laws and policies is often called a direct democracy. At the national level, America is a representative democracy in which citizens select government officials but do not vote on legislation. Some states and cities, how- ever, have provisions for dir ect legislation thr ough ballot initiativ e and popular referendum. In 2017, for example, v oters in M aine approved by state wide vote to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act after the governor had vetoed expansion multiple times.5

7G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 7 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

Citizenship Is Based on Political Knowledge and Participation

Citizen par ticipation is the hallmar k of the democratic form of go vern- ment. “G overnment b y the people ” depends on liv ely citiz en inv olve-

ment in public discussion, debate, and activity designed to impr ove the w elfare of one’s community. The very legitimacy of democratic government depends on political par ticipation, which takes a v ariety of forms, fr om the conv entional— voting, contacting elected officials, working on campaigns, making political dona – tions, attending political meetings—to the unconv entional—protesting, bo ycott- ing, and signing petitions.

One key ingr edient for political par ticipation is political knowledge and informa – tion. Democracy functions best when citizens are informed and have the knowledge needed to participate in political debate. Indeed, our definition of citizenship derives from the ideal put forth by the ancient Greeks: enlightened political engagement.6

Citizens need political knowledge, which includes knowing the rules and strate- gies that govern political institutions and the principles on which they are based, to figure out how best to act in their own interests. For example, during the debate in 2017 about whether to repeal the Obama health care reform, one-third of Americans

Protests are a form of direct action citizens can take to influence policy outcomes. The Black Lives Matter movement used peaceful protests and marches to educate fellow citizens and lawmakers on the impact of police brutality on the African American community.

Describe the role of the citizen in politics

8 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 8 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

did not know that “Obamacare” and the “Affordable Care Act” are the same thing.7 That meant that some Americans who had enrolled in “Obamacare” did not realize their access to health insurance would be affected if the ACA were repealed. Citizens need knowledge in order to assess their interests and to know when to act on them.

Effective participation requires knowledge. (It should come as no surprise, then, that people who have less knowledge of politics vote at lower rates than those with more kno wledge.) Kno wledge is the first prerequisite for achieving an incr eased sense of political efficacy.

As mor e and mor e of our social, wor kplace, and educational activities hav e migrated online, so too hav e oppor tunities for political kno wledge and par ticipa- tion, creating a ne w concept of “ digital citizenship.” Digital citizenship is the abil – ity to par ticipate in society online, and it is incr easingly impor tant in politics. A 2015 sur vey found that o ver the pr evious year, 65 per cent of Americans had used the internet—including visiting local, state, or federal go vernment w ebsites—to find data or information about government.8 Digital citizens are more likely to be interested in politics and to discuss politics with friends, family, and coworkers than individuals who do not use online political information. They are also more likely to vote and par ticipate in other ways in elections. I ndividuals without internet access or the skills to par ticipate in politics and the economy online ar e being left fur ther behind. E xclusion fr om par ticipation online is r eferred to as the “ digital divide.” Lower-income and less educated Americans, racial and ethnic minorities, those living in rural areas, and the elderly are all less likely to have internet access.

POLITICAL EFFICACY MEANS PEOPLE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE

Another important trend in American views about government has been a declining sense of political efficacy, the belief that ordinary citizens can affect what government does. In 2015, 74 per cent of Americans said that elected officials do not care what people like them think; in 1960, only 25 per cent felt so shut out of go vernment.9 Accompanying this sense that or dinary people cannot be hear d is a gr owing belief that government is not run for the benefit of all the people. In 2015, 76 percent of the public disagreed with the idea that the “government is really run for the benefit of all the people.”10 These views are widely shared across the age spectrum.

This widely felt loss of political efficacy is bad news for American democracy. Why bother to participate if you believe it makes no difference? Yet the belief that you can be effective is the first step needed to influence government. Research shows that the relationship between efficacy and participation is two-way: a feeling that one can make a difference leads to participation, but in addition, joining in can increase one’s feeling of efficacy. Not every effort of ordinary citizens to influence government will succeed, but without any such efforts, go vernment decisions will be made b y a smaller and smaller circle of po werful people. S uch loss of br oad popular influence over govern- ment actions undermines the key feature of American democracy: government by the people. Most people do not want to be politically activ e every day of their liv es, but it is essential to American political ideals that all citizens be informed and able to act.

9c I T I z e N S H I P I S B A S e D O N P O l I T I c A l K N O W l e D G e A N D P A R T I c I PAT I O N

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 9 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

The Identity of Americans Has Changed over Time

While American democracy aims to give the people a v oice in go vern- ment, the meaning of “we the people” has changed o ver time. Who are Americans? Ov er the course of

Ameri can histor y, politicians, r eligious leaders, pr ominent scholars, and or dinary Americans hav e puzzled o ver and fought about the answ er to this fundamental question. It is not surprising that such a simple question could pr ovoke so much conflict: the American population has increased over eighty-fold, from 3.9 million in 1790, the year of the first official census, to 327 million in 2018.11 As the American population has grown, it has become more diverse in nearly every dimen- sion imaginable.12

At the time of the F ounding, when the U nited S tates consisted of 13 states arrayed along the Eastern seaboard, 81 percent of Americans counted by the census traced their roots to Europe, mostly England and northern Europe; nearly one in five were of African origin, the v ast majority of whom w ere slaves.13 There was also an unknown number of N ative Americans, not counted b y the census because the government did not consider them Americans.14

Fast-forward to 1900. The country, now stretched out across the continent, had a sharply altered racial and ethnic composition. Waves of immigrants, mainly from Europe, had boosted the population to 76 million. The black population stood at 12 per cent. R esidents who traced their origins to Latin America or Asia each accounted for less than 1 per cent of the entir e population. 15 Although principally of European origin, the American population had become much more ethnically diverse as immigrants, first from G ermany, then fr om Ireland, and finally from southern and eastern Europe, made their way to the United States. The foreign-born population of the United States reached its height at 14.7 percent in 1910.16

IMMIGRATION AND INCREASING ETHNIC DIVERSITY HAVE LONG CAUSED INTENSE DEBATE

As the population gr ew mor e div erse, anxiety about Americans ’ ethnic identity mounted, and much as today, politicians and scholars argued about whether the country could absorb such large numbers of immigrants. The debate encompassed such issues as whether immigrants’ political and social values were compatible with American democracy, whether they would learn E nglish, and what diseases they might bring into the United States.

Immigrants’ r eligious affiliations also ar oused concern. The first immigrants to the United States were overwhelmingly Protestant, many of them fleeing religious persecution. The arrival of G ermans and I rish in the mid -1800s meant incr easing numbers of Catholics, and the large -scale immigration of the early tw entieth cen- tury threatened to r educe the per centage of Protestants significantly: many eastern

Show how the social composition of the American population has changed over time

10 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 10 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

European immigrants pouring into the countr y w ere J ewish, while the southern Europeans were mostly Catholic. A more religiously diverse country challenged the implicit Protestantism embedded in many aspects of American public life.

After World War I, Congress responded to the fears swirling around immigration with new laws that sharply limited the number of immigrants who could enter the country each year. Congress also established a new National Origins Quota System based on the nation’s population in 1890 before the wave of immigrants from eastern and southern E urope arriv ed.17 The new system set up a hierar chy of admissions: northern E uropean countries r eceived gener ous quotas for ne w immigrants, whereas eastern and southern E uropean countries w ere granted v ery small quotas. These restrictions ratcheted do wn the numbers of immigrants so that b y 1970 the foreign-born population in the United States reached an all-time low of 5 percent.

Official efforts to use racial and ethnic criteria to restrict the American population were not ne w. The very first census, as we have seen, did not count N ative Ameri- cans; in fact, Native Americans were not granted the right to vote until 1924. Most people of African descent w ere not officially citizens until 1868, when the F our- teenth Amendment to the Constitution conferred citizenship on the freed slaves.

In 1790 the federal go vernment had sought to limit the nonwhite population with a law stipulating that only fr ee whites could become naturaliz ed citizens. Not until 1870 did Congr ess lift the ban on the naturalization of nonwhites. R estric- tions applied to Asians as w ell. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 outlaw ed the entry of Chinese laborers to the United States, and additional barriers enacted after World War I meant that vir tually no Asians enter ed the countr y as immigrants until 1943, when China became our ally in World War II and these provisions were

In the 1900s many immigrants entered the United States through New York’s Ellis Island, where they were checked for disease before being admitted.

11T H e I D e N T I T y O f A M e R I c A N S H A S c H A N G e D OV e R T I M e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 11 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

lifted. People of Hispanic origin do not fit simply into the American system of racial classification. In 1930, for example, the census counted people of Mexican origin as nonwhite, but it r eversed this decision a decade later . Not until 1970 did the cen – sus officially begin counting persons of Hispanic origin, noting that they could be any race. 18 As this histor y suggests, American citiz enship has always been tied to “whiteness” even as the meaning of “white” shifted over time.

WHO ARE AMERICANS TODAY?

Race and Ethnicity B y 2000 immigration had pr ofoundly transformed the nation’s racial and ethnic pr ofile once again. The primary cause was Congr ess’s decision in 1965 to lift the tight immigration r estrictions of the 1920s, a decision that r esulted, among other things, in the gr owth of the Latino population (see Figure 1.1). Census figures for 2016 sho w that the total H ispanic pr oportion of the population, who can be of any race, is now 17.8 percent, while the black, or African American, population is 12.7 percent of the total population. Asians make up 5.4 per cent of the population. N on-Hispanic white Americans account for 61 percent of the population—their lowest share ever. Moreover, about 3.2 percent of the population now identifies itself as of “two or mor e races.”19 Although it is only a small per centage of the population, the multiracial categor y points to ward a future in which the lines separating the traditional labels of racial identification may be blurring.

In 2016, 13.5 per cent of the population was born outside the U nited S tates, a figure comparable to the rates of for eign-born at the turn of the pr evious cen – tury. About half of the foreign-born population came from Latin America and the Caribbean, with just o ver one -third fr om Central America (including M exico). Those born in Asia constituted the next largest group, making up 31 per cent of for eign-born r esidents. B y 2016 just 10.9 per cent of those born outside the United States came fr om Europe.20 These figures represent only legally authoriz ed immigrants, while estimates put the number of undocumented immigrants at 11.4 million, the majority of whom are from Mexico and Central America.21

Religion The new patterns of immigration combined with a number of other factors to alter the r eligious affiliations of Americans. In 1900, 80 per cent of the population was Protestant; b y 2016 only 44 per cent of Americans identi- fied themselves as Protestants.22 Catholics made up 20 per cent of the population, and Jews accounted for 2 per cent. A small Muslim population had also gr own, to nearly 1 percent of the population. One of the most important changes in religious affiliation during the latter half of the twentieth centur y was the per centage of people who professed no organized religion. In 2016, 23 percent of the population was not affiliated with an organized church. These changes suggest an important shift in American r eligious identity: although the U nited States thinks of itself as a “Judeo-Christian” nation—and indeed was 95 per cent Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish from 1900 to 1968—by 2016 the numbers had fallen to under 70 percent of the adult population.23

12 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 12 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

Age As America gr ew and its population expanded and div ersified, the country’s age profile shifted with it. In 1900 only 4 percent of the population was over 65. As life expectancy increased, the number of older Americans grew with it: by 2016 nearly 15.2 percent of the population was over 65. The number of children under the age of 18 also changed; in 1900 this gr oup comprised 40.5 per cent of the American population; b y 2016 it had fallen to 22.8 per cent of the population. 24 An aging

FIGURE 1.1

Immigration by Continent of Origin* Where did most immigrants come from at the start of the twentieth century? How does that compare with immigration in the twenty-first century?

*Less than 1 percent not shown.

SOURCE: Department of Homeland Security 2016 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics Table 2, November 2017, www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2016 (accessed 2/16/18). Figure shows those who have obtained “lawful permanent resident status” by continent of origin.

10

0 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

PERCENTAGE OF IMMIGRANTS*

EuropeAsiaAmericas

AfricaOceaniaNot speci�ed

13T H e I D e N T I T y O f A M e R I c A N S H A S c H A N G e D OV e R T I M e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 13 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

population poses challenges to the U nited States. As the elderly population grows and the working-age population shrinks, ques- tions arise about ho w we will fund pr ograms for the elderly such as Social Security.

Geography Ov er the nation ’s histor y, Americans hav e changed in other ways as well, moving from mostly rural settings and small to wns to large urban ar eas. B efore 1920 less than half the population liv ed in urban ar eas; today 82 per cent of Ameri – cans do.25 Critics charge that the American political system, cr eated when America was a largely rural society, underrepresents urban areas. The constitutional provision allocat – ing each state two senators, for example, overrepresents sparsely populated rural states and underr epresents urban states, wher e the population is far mor e concentrated. The American population has also shifted regionally. In the past 50 years, especially, many Americans hav e left the Northeast and Midwest and moved to the South and Southwest. As congressional seats have been reapportioned to reflect the population shift, many pr oblems that par ticularly plague the Midwest and Northeast, such as the decline of manufacturing jobs, receive less attention in national politics.

Socioeconomic Status Americans hav e fallen into div erse economic gr oups throughout American histor y. F or much of American histor y most people w ere relatively poor working people, many of them farmers. A small wealthy elite, how- ever, grew larger in the 1890s, in a period called “ the gilded age.” By 1928 nearly 25 percent of the total annual income went to the top 1 percent of earners; the top 10 percent took home 46 per cent of total annual income. After the N ew Deal in the 1930s, a large middle class took shape, and the shar e going to those at the top dropped sharply. By 1976 the top 1 percent took home only 9 percent of the national annual income. S ince then, ho wever, economic inequality has once again wide- ned as a tiny gr oup of super -rich has emerged. B y 2015 the top 1 per cent earned 20.3 per cent of annual income, and the top 10 per cent took home almost 50 percent of the total national income.26 At the same time, the incomes of the broad middle class hav e largely stagnated (see F igure 1.2). 27 And 12.7 per cent of the population r emains belo w the official poverty line. As the middle class has

Immigration remains a controversial issue in the United States. While many believe we should do more to protect our borders, others call for comprehensive immigration reform, including an easier pathway to citizenship.

14 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 14 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

frayed around the edges, the numbers of poor and near poor have swelled to nearly one-third of the population.28

Population and Politics The shifting contours of the American people have regu- larly raised challenging questions about our politics and go verning arrangements. Population growth has spurr ed politically charged debates about ho w the popula – tion should be appor tioned among congressional districts and ho w they should be drawn. These conflicts have major implications for the representation of different regions of the countr y—for the balance of r epresentation between urban and r ural areas. The representation of v arious demographic and political gr oups may also be affected, as there is substantial evidence of growing geographic sorting of citizens by education, income, marriage rates, and party voting.29 In addition, immigration and the cultural and r eligious changes it entails pr ovoked heated debates 100 y ears ago and still do today. The different languages and customs that immigrants bring to the

FIGURE 1.2

Income in the United States This figure shows that while the income of most Americans has risen only slightly since 1975, the income of the richest Americans (the top 5 percent) has increased dramatically. What are some of the ways that this shift might matter for American politics? Does the growing economic gap between the richest groups and most other Americans conflict with the political value of equality?

*Dollar values are given in constant 2016 dollars, which are adjusted for inflation so that we can compare a person’s income in 1975 with a person’s income today.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, “Income and Poverty in the United States: 2016,” Table A-2, www.census.gov/ content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/demo/P60-259.pdf (accessed 4/16/18).

Lowest fifth

Fourth fifth

Second fifth

Highest fifth

Third fifth

Top 5 percent

HOUSEHOLD INCOME (IN DOLLARS)*

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2015201020052000

$400,000

350,000

300,000

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

15T H e I D e N T I T y O f A M e R I c A N S H A S c H A N G e D OV e R T I M e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 15 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

United States trigger fears among some that the countr y is changing in ways that may undermine American v alues and alter fundamental identities. Yet a changing population has been one of the constants of American history.

America Is Built on the Ideas of Liberty, Equality, and Democracy

A fe w fundamental v alues underlie the American system. These values are reflected in such Founding docu – ments as the D eclaration of I nde- pendence, the Constitution, and

the Bill of Rights. The three v alues on which the American system of go vern- ment is based ar e liberty, equality, and democracy. Most Americans find it easy to affirm all three values in principle. I n practice, ho wever, matters ar e not always so clear. Americans, moreover, are sometimes willing to subordinate liberty to security and have frequently tolerated significant departures from the principles of equality and democracy.

LIBERTY MEANS FREEDOM

No idea is mor e central to American values than liber ty. The Declaration of Independence defined three inalienable rights: “Life, Liber ty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The preamble to the Constitution likewise identified the need to secure “the Blessings of Liberty” as one of the key r easons for which the Constitution was drawn up. For Americans, liberty means freedom from government control as well as economic freedom. Both are closely linked to the idea of limited government, meaning that powers are defined and limited by a constitution.

The Constitution’s first 10 amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, above all preserve individual personal liber ties and rights. I n fact, liber ty has come to mean many of the fr eedoms guaranteed in the B ill of Rights: freedom of speech and writing, the right to assemble fr eely, and the right to practice r eligious beliefs without interference from the government. Over the course of American history, the scope of personal liber ties has expanded as laws hav e become more tolerant and as individuals have successfully used the cour ts to challenge restrictions on their indi- vidual freedoms. Far fewer restrictions exist today on the press, political speech, and individual moral behavior than in the early y ears of the nation. E ven so, conflicts persist over how personal liber ties should be extended and when personal liber ties violate community norms.

In addition to personal fr eedom, the American concept of liber ty means economic freedom. Since the Founding, economic freedom has been linked to capitalism, free markets, and the pr otection of priv ate pr operty. Free competition, the unfetter ed movement of goods, and the right to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor are all essential aspects of economic freedom and American capitalism. 30 In the first century of the Republic, support for capitalism often meant support for the doctrine of laissez-faire

Analyze whether the U.S. system of government upholds American political values

16 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 16 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

Global Diversity How does the racial and ethnic diversity of the United States compare to that of other countries around the world, and why are some countries more diverse than others?

As a “nation of immigrants,” the United States is more diverse than many Western countries, but some former colonies are even more diverse than the United States. Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa were colonized by empires whose governments often drew borders that encompassed multiple ethnic groups in the region. State- building and nationalism are new to these regions, meaning that local identities often remain stronger than national ones.

In contrast, many western european and Asian countries have histories of past conflict and strong state-building efforts, resulting

in less diversity either by eliminating rival groups or forcibly assimilating them. Japan’s geographic isolation has created a racially homogeneous society, which was reinforced by the government’s use of isolationism as a means to consolidate power.a Modern policies limiting immigration continue these historic trends. france has historically pursued both political and cultural assimilation, using its schools to socialize its citizens into a com- mon identity. Recent immigration, however, has highlighted potential problems with this policy.b

How might the degree of diversity shape political values in specific countries? What types of values and policies would we expect to see in countries with a high degree of diversity versus those with less diversity?

Most diverse

No data available

RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY

Most homogeneous

aBenedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 2006), 94–99. bJohn R. Bowen, Why the French Don’t Like Headscarves: Islam, the State, and Public Space (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007).

SOURCE: Alberto Alesina, Arnaud Devleeschauwer, William Easterly, Sergio Kurlat, and Romain Wacziarg, “Fractionalization,” Journal of Economic Growth, 8 (2003): 155–94.

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 17 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

(literally, “let do ” in F rench), an economic system in which the means of pr oduc- tion and distribution ar e privately owned and operated for pr ofit with minimal or no government inter ference. Laissez-faire capitalism allowed very little r oom for the national government to regulate trade or restrict the use of private property, even in the public interest. Americans still strongly support capitalism and economic liberty, but they no w also endorse some r estrictions on economic fr eedoms to pr otect the public. Today, federal and state go vernments deploy a wide array of r egulations in the name of public protection. These include health and safety laws, environmental rules, and workplace regulations.

Not surprisingly, fierce disagreements often erupt over what the proper scope of government regulation should be. What some people regard as protecting the pub- lic, others see as an infringement of their o wn freedom to run their businesses and use their property as they see fit.

EQUALITY MEANS TREATING PEOPLE FAIRLY

The Declaration of I ndependence declar es as its first “self-evident” tr uth that “ all men ar e cr eated equal.” As central as it is to the American political cr eed, ho w- ever, equality has been a less well-defined ideal than liberty because people interpret “equality” in different ways. Most Americans share the ideal of equality of opportunity wherein all people should have the freedom to use whatever talents and wealth they have to reach their fullest potential. Yet it is har d for Americans to r each an agree- ment on what constitutes equality of oppor tunity. Must a gr oup’s past inequalities

Economic freedom lies at the heart of many conflicts in American life. While supporters of the Tea Party movement protest against economic regulation and higher taxes and support smaller government, many Americans feel it is the government’s responsibility to regulate economic activity to benefit the majority of Americans.

18 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 18 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

be remedied in order to ensure equal opportunity in the present? Should inequalities in the legal, political, and economic spheres be given the same weight? In contrast to liberty, which requires limits on the role of government, equality implies an obliga- tion of the government to the people.31

Americans do make clear distinctions betw een political equality and social or economic equality . Political equality r efers to the right to par ticipate in poli – tics equally, based on the principle of “ one person, one v ote.” Beginning from a very restricted definition of political community, which originally included only propertied white men, the United States has moved much closer to an ideal of political equality. Broad suppor t for this ideal has helped expand the American political community and extend the right to par ticipate to all. Although consi- derable conflict remains o ver whether the political system makes it har der for some people to par ticipate and easier for others, and about whether the r ole of money in politics has drowned out the public voice, Americans agree that all citizens should hav e an equal oppor tunity to par ticipate and that go vernment should enforce that right.

In part because Americans believe that individuals are free to work as hard as they choose, they hav e always been less concerned about social or economic inequality . Many Americans r egard economic differences as the consequence of individual choices, vir tues, or failur es. B ecause of this, Americans tend to be less suppor tive than most Europeans of government action to ensure economic equality. Since the recession of 2008, ho wever, income inequality has risen on the political agenda. In 2015 two -thirds of Americans said the distribution of w ealth and money is not fair and should be mor e evenly distributed; in 2017, 63 per cent of Americans said upper-income people pay too little in tax es, and 67 per cent said corporations pay too little.32

DEMOCRACY MEANS THAT WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT MATTERS

The essence of democracy is the participation of the people in choosing their r ulers and the people ’s ability to influence what those rulers do . I n a democracy, political po wer ultimately comes fr om the people. The principle of democracy in which political authority r ests ultimately in the hands of the people is kno wn as popular sovereignty. I n the U nited S tates, popular so ver- eignty and political equality make politicians accountable to the people. I deally, democracy envisions an engaged citiz enry pr epared to ex ercise its po wer o ver rulers. As w e noted earlier , the U nited S tates is a r epresentative democracy , meaning that the people do not rule directly but instead exercise power through elected representatives. Forms of participation in a democracy vary greatly, but v oting is a key element of the r epresentative democracy that the American Founders established.

American democracy r ests on the principle of majority rule with minority rights, the democratic principle that a go vernment follows the preferences of the major- ity of v oters but pr otects the inter ests of the minority . Majority r ule means that

19A M e R I c A I S B U I lT O N T H e I D e A S O f l I B e R T y, e q U A l I T y, A N D D e M O c R A c y

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 19 11/28/18 4:24 PM

 

 

the wishes of the majority determine what government does. The House of Representatives—a large body elected dir ectly b y the people—was designed in particular to ensur e majority r ule. But the F ounders feared that popular majori – ties could turn government into a “tyranny of the majority” in which individual liberties would be violated. Concern for individual rights has thus been a par t of American democracy fr om the beginning. The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and enforced through the courts provide an important check on the power of the majority.

Government Affects Our Lives Every Day Since the U nited S tates was estab – lished as a nation, Americans hav e been r eluctant to grant go vernment too much power, and they have often

been suspicious of politicians. But over the course of the nation’s history, Americans have also turned to government for assistance in times of need and hav e str ongly supported the go vernment in periods of war . In 1933 the po wer of the go vern- ment began to expand to meet the crises cr eated b y the stock mar ket crash of 1929, the G reat D epression, and the r un on banks. Congr ess passed legislation that brought the government into the businesses of home mor tgages, farm mort- gages, credit, and relief of personal distress. More recently, when the economy fell

The federal government maintains a large number of websites that provide useful information to citizens on such topics as loans for education, civil service job applications, the inflation rate, and how the weather will affect farming. These sites are just one way in which the government serves its citizens.

Explore Americans’ attitudes toward government

20 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 20 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

into a r ecession in 2008 and 2009, the federal go vernment took action to shor e up the financial system, oversee the r estructuring of the ailing auto companies, and inject hundr eds of billions of dollars into the faltering economy . Today, the national government is an enormous institution with programs and policies reach- ing into ev ery corner of American life. I t oversees the nation’s economy, it is the nation’s largest employer, it provides citizens with a host of services, it controls the world’s most formidable militar y establishment, and it r egulates a wide range of social and commercial activities.

Much of what citizens have come to depend on and take for granted—as, somehow, par t of the natural envir onment—is in fact cr eated b y go vernment. Take the example of a typical college student’s day, throughout which that student relies on a host of ser vices and activities organiz ed b y national, state, and local government agencies. The extent of this dependence on government is illustrated by Table 1.1.

TRUST IN GOVERNMENT HAS DECLINED

Ironically, ev en as popular dependence on government has gr own, the American public’s vie w of go vernment has turned mor e sour . P ublic tr ust in go vernment has declined, and Americans ar e now more likely to feel that they can do little to influence the government’s actions. Different groups vary somewhat in their levels of tr ust: African Americans and Latinos express more confidence in the federal go vernment than do whites. But even among the most supportive groups, mor e than half do not tr ust the government.33 These developments are impor tant because politically en- gaged citiz ens and public confidence in government are vital for the health of a democracy . I n the early 1960s three-quarters of Americans said they trusted go vernment most of the time or always. B y 2017 only 18 per cent of Americans expr essed such tr ust in government.34 Trust hit a high point after the S eptember 11, 2001, terr or- ist attacks, but fell to pre-attack levels within three years, and the tr end con- tinued its do wnward path. D istrust of government greatly influenced the pr esidential primar y elections in 2015 and 2016, when a number of “outsider” candidates—most notably

While levels of participation in politics are relatively low for young Americans, the presidential primary campaigns of 2008 and 2016 saw the highest levels of youth turnout—to volunteer and to vote—in decades. What factors might have energized young people to become involved in these campaigns?

21G OV e R N M e N T A f f e c T S O U R l I V e S e V e R y D Ay

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 21 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

TIME SCHEDULE

7:00 a.m. Wake up. Standard time set by the national government.

7:10 a.m. Shower. Water courtesy of local government, either a public entity or a regulated private company. Brush your teeth with toothpaste whose cavity-fighting claims have been verified by a federal agency.

7:30 a.m. Have a bowl of cereal with milk for breakfast. “Nutrition facts” on food labels are a federal requirement, pasteurization of milk required by state law, recycling the empty cereal box and milk carton enabled by state or local laws.

8:30 a.m. Drive or take public transportation to campus. Air bags and seat belts required by federal and state laws. Roads and bridges paid for by state and local governments, speed and traffic laws set by state and local governments, public transportation subsidized by all levels of government.

8:45 a.m. Arrive on campus of large public university. Buildings are 70 percent financed by state taxpayers.

9:00 a.m. first class: chemistry 101. Tuition partially paid by a federal loan (more than half the cost of university instruction is paid for by taxpayers), chemistry lab paid for with grants from the National Science foundation (a federal agency).

Noon eat lunch. college cafeteria financed by state dormitory authority on land grant from federal Department of Agriculture.

2:00 p.m. Second class: American Government 101 (your favorite class!). you may be taking this class because it is required by the state legislature or because it fulfills a university requirement.

4:00 p.m. Third class: computer Science 101. free computers, software, and internet access courtesy of state subsidies plus grants and discounts from IBM and Microsoft, the costs of which are deducted from their corporate income taxes; internet built in part by federal government.

6:00 p.m. eat hamburger for dinner. Meat inspected by federal agencies.

7:00 p.m. Work at part-time job at the campus library. Minimum wage set by federal, state, or local government; books and journals in library paid for by state taxpayers.

8:15 p.m. check the status of your application for a federal student loan (fAfSA) on the Department of education’s website at studentaid.ed.gov.

10:00 p.m. Go home. Street lighting paid for by county and city governments, police patrols by city government.

10:15 p.m. Watch TV. Networks regulated by federal government, cable public- access channels required by city law. Weather forecast provided to broadcasters by a federal agency.

TABLE 1.1

The Presence of Government in the Daily Life of a Student at “State University”

22 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 22 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

Donald Trump and B ernie Sanders, who w ere critical of go vernment and eager to depart from business as usual in Washington—attracted wide support.

Does it matter if Americans tr ust their go vernment? F or the most par t, the answer is yes. Most Americans rely on government for a wide range of ser vices and laws that they simply take for granted. B ut long-term distr ust in go vernment can result in public r efusal to pay the tax es necessary to suppor t such widely appr oved public activities. Lo w lev els of confidence may also make it difficult for govern- ment to attract talented and effective workers to public service.35 The weakening of government as a r esult of pr olonged lev els of distr ust may ultimately harm the capacity of the U nited States to defend its national inter est in the world economy and may jeopardize its national security. Likewise, a weak government can do little to assist citiz ens who need help in w eathering periods of sharp economic or technological change.

American Political Culture WHAT DO WE WANT? Americans express mixed views about government. Almost everyone complains about

government, and general trust in government has declined significantly. Despite mount-

ing distrust, when asked about particular government activities or programs, a majority

of Americans generally support the activities that government undertakes. These con-

flicting views reflect the tensions in American political culture: there is no perfect

balance between liberty, equality, and democracy. In recent years, finding the right mix

of government actions to achieve these different goals has become especially trouble-

some. Some charge that government initiatives designed to promote equality infringe

on individual liberty, while others point to the need for government to take action in

the face of growing inequality. Sharp political debate over competing goals alienates

many citizens, who react by withdrawing from politics. yet, in contrast to totalitarian

and authoritarian forms of government, democracy rests on the principle of popular

sovereignty. No true democracy can function properly without knowledgeable and

engaged citizens. The stories of Saira Blair and Kendric Jones at the beginning of this

chapter show that people often turn frustration with government into political action.

But running for office is only one way to participate in politics. The “Who Participates?”

feature on page 25 shows who voted in the 2016 presidential election.

The remarkable diversity of the American people represents a great strength for

American democracy as well as a formidable challenge. The shifting religious, racial,

ethnic, and immigration statuses of Americans throughout history have always pro-

voked fears about whether American values could withstand such dramatic shifts.

The changing face of America also sparks hopes for an America that embodies its

fundamental values more fully.

23A M e R I c A N P O l I T I c A l c U lT U R e : W H AT D O W e W A N T ?

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 23 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

Demographic changes will continue to raise tough new questions. for example,

as the American population grows older, programs for the elderly will take up an

increasing share of the federal budget. yet, to be successful, a nation must invest

in its young people. And, as any college student knows, the cost of college has risen

in recent years. Many students drop out as they discover that the cost of college is

too high. Or they graduate and find themselves saddled with loans that will take

decades to pay back. yet, in a world of ever-sharper economic competition, higher

education has become increasingly important for individuals seeking economic secu-

rity. Moreover, an educated population is critical to the future prosperity of the country

as a whole. Are there ways to support the elderly and the young at the same time? Is it

fair to cut back assistance to the elderly, who have worked a lifetime for their benefits?

If we decrease assistance to the elderly, will they stay in the labor market and make

the job hunt for young people even more difficult? As these trade-offs suggest, there

are no easy answers to these demographic changes.

24 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U c T I O N : T H e c I T I z e N A N D G OV e R N M e N T

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 24 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

WHAT YOU CAN DOWHAT YOU CAN DOWHAT YOU CAN DO

Who Voted in 2016?

80%

College graduate Postgraduate study

Some high school Some collegeHigh school graduate

Age

Race / Ethnicity

Income Sex

Education*

18−29 30−44 45−64 65+

46% 59% 67%

71%

<$50,000

55%

$50,000−$99,999

69%

$100,000+

78%

White BlackHispanic Asian

Male

59%

Female

63%

65% 59% 48% 49%

35% 63% 74%52%

*Highest level attained SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey November 2016, census.gov (accessed 11/20/17).

WHO PAR TICIPATES?

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 25 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

 

Practice Quiz

1. What is the difference between a totalitarian government and an authoritarian government? (p. 5) a) Authoritarian governments require

popular participation while totalitar- ian governments do not.

b) Totalitarian governments are generally based on religion, while authoritarian governments are not.

c) Authoritarian governments are often restrained by the power of social institutions, while totalitarian governments are not.

d) Totalitarian governments acknowledge strict limits on their power, while authoritarian governments do not.

e) There is no difference between these two kinds of government.

2. In a constitutional government (p. 5) a) the government recognizes no

formal limits on its power. b) presidential elections are held

every four years. c) governmental power is held by a

single individual. d) formal and effective limits

are placed on the powers of government.

e) the government follows the wishes of the majority.

Register to vote. See page 242.

Cast your vote on Election Day. Consider encouraging others to vote too. Research shows that people are more likely to turn out to vote if a friend or family member asks them to.

Vote

Find out what’s on the ballot in upcoming elections in your state and district by entering your address at www.vote411.org (a website from the League of Women Voters).

WHAT YOU CAN DOWHAT YOU CAN DOWHAT YOU CAN DO

26 S T U D y G U I D e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 26 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

 

3. A state that permits its citizens to vote directly on laws and policies is practicing a form of (p. 7) a) representative democracy b) direct democracy c) pluralism d) laissez-faire capitalism e) republicanism

4. Political efficacy is the belief that (p. 9) a) government operates efficiently. b) government has grown too large. c) government cannot be trusted. d) ordinary citizens can influence what

government does. e) government is wasteful and corrupt.

5. What is digital citizenship? (p. 9) a) a new government initiative to

expand online voter registration b) the ability to vote online c) an online certification program

that allows immigrants to become American citizens

d) the ability to participate in society online

e) a new government initiative to pro- vide daily legislative updates online

6. The percentage of foreign-born individuals living in the United States (pp. 11–12) a) has increased significantly since

reaching its low point in 1970. b) has decreased significantly since

reaching its high point in 1970. c) has remained the same since 1970. d) has never been less than the per-

centage of native-born individuals living in the United States.

e) has not been studied since 1970.

7. In 2016, latinos were approximately what percent of the American public? (p. 13) a) 67 percent b) 52 percent c) 31 percent d) 18 percent e) 6 percent

8. Which of the following statements best describes the changes in America’s age profile since 1900? (p. 13) a) The percentage of adults over the

age of 65 has declined dramatically.

b) The percentage of adults over the age of 65 has increased dramatically.

c) The percentage of adults over the age of 65 has remained constant.

d) The percentage of children under the age of 18 has increased dramatically.

e) The percentage of children under the age of 18 has remained constant.

9. What percent of Americans live in urban areas today? (p. 14) a) less than 10 percent b) about 20 percent c) about 40 percent d) about 60 percent e) about 80 percent

10. Which of the following statements best describes the history of income inequality in the United States? (p. 14) a) The top 1 percent has never

earned more than 10 percent of the nation’s annual income.

b) The top 1 percent has never earned less than 10 percent of the nation’s annual income.

c) Income inequality has remained fairly constant since the late 1970s.

d) Income inequality has increased considerably since the late 1970s.

e) Income inequality has decreased considerably since the late 1970s.

11. The phrase “life, liberty and the pur- suit of Happiness” appears in (p. 16) a) the preamble to the constitution. b) the Bill of Rights. c) the Declaration of Independence. d) the Magna carta. e) the Gettysburg Address.

12. An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned and operated for profit with minimal or no government interference is referred to as (p. 18) a) socialism. b) communism. c) laissez-faire capitalism. d) corporatism. e) feudalism.

27S T U D y G U I D e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 27 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

 

13. The principle of political equality can be best summed up as (p. 19) a) “equality of results.” b) “equality of opportunity.” c) “one person, one vote.” d) “equality between the sexes.” e) “leave everyone alone.”

14. Americans’ trust in their government (p. 21) a) has risen steadily since the

1960s. b) has remained relatively constant

since the 1960s. c) increased between 1960 and

2008 but has declined since.

d) increased after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks but has declined since.

e) declined after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks but has increased since.

Key Terms

authoritarian government (p. 5) a system of rule in which the government recognizes no formal limit but may nevertheless be restrained by the power of other social institutions

citizenship (p. 8) informed and active membership in a political community

constitutional government (p. 5) a system of rule in which formal and effective limits are placed on the powers of the government

democracy (p. 5) a system of rule that permits citizens to play a significant part in the governmental process, usually through the election of key public officials

direct democracy (p. 7) a system of rule that permits citizens to vote directly on laws and policies

equality of opportunity (p. 18) a widely shared American ideal that all people should have the freedom to use whatever talents and wealth they have to reach their fullest potential

government (p. 5) institutions and proce- dures through which a territory and its people are ruled

laissez-faire capitalism (p. 18) an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned and operated for profit with minimal or no government interference

liberty (p. 16) freedom from government control

limited government (p. 16) a principle of constitutional government; a government whose powers are defined and limited by a constitution

majority rule/minority rights (p. 19) the democratic principle that a government follows the preferences of the majority of voters but protects the interests of the minority

political efficacy (p. 9) the ability to influence government and politics

political equality (p. 19) the right to participate in politics equally, based on the principle of “one person, one vote”

political knowledge (p. 8) possessing information about the formal institutions of government, political actors, and political issues

28 S T U D y G U I D e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 28 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

 

politics (p. 7) conflict over the leadership, structure, and policies of governments

popular sovereignty (p. 19) a principle of democracy in which political authority rests ultimately in the hands of the people

power (p. 7) influence over a government’s leadership, organization, or policies

Dahl, Robert. How Democratic Is the American Constitution? New Haven, cT: yale University Press, 2002.

Dalton, Russell. The Good Citizen: How a Younger Generation Is Reshaping American Politics. 2nd ed. Washington, Dc: cq Press, 2015.

Delli carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, cT: yale University Press, 1996.

Hochschild, Jennifer l. Facing Up to the American Dream: Race, Class, and the Soul of the Nation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995.

lasswell, Harold. Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. New york: Meridian Books, 1958.

Mccarty, Nolan, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008.

Mettler, Suzanne. The Submerged State: How Invisible Government Policies Undermine American Democracy. chicago: University of chicago Press, 2011.

Nye, Joseph S., Jr., Philip D. zelikow, and David c. King, eds. Why People Don’t Trust Government. cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.

Page, Benjamin I., and lawrence R. Jacobs. Class War? What Americans Really Think about Economic Inequality. chicago: University of chicago Press, 2009.

Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. Translated by Phillips Bradley. New york: Knopf, Vintage Books, 1945. first published 1835.

representative democracy (republic) (p. 7) a system of government in which the populace selects representatives, who play a significant role in governmental decision making

totalitarian government (p. 5) a system of rule in which the government recognizes no formal limits on its power and seeks to absorb or eliminate other social institutions that might challenge it

For Further Reading

29S T U D y G U I D e

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch01_002-029.indd 29 11/28/18 4:25 PM

 

 

020202 chapter

The Founding and the Constitution WHAT GOVERNMENT DOES AND WHY IT MATTERS One of the worries of the framers of the U.S. Constitution was the concentration

of government powers and the possible infringement on individual liberties.

One solution was to divide the executive, legislative, and judicial powers of

government across different institutions with separate powers, each checking

the other. Governmental power was further divided between the national and

state governments. Sometimes this constitutional system and its effect on

average Americans comes vividly to life.

Jim Obergefell was a real estate agent and IT consultant in Cincinnati, Ohio,

in 1992 when he met and fell in love with John Arthur.1 Although their relation-

ship would last for decades, they were unable to marry. In 1996, Congress

passed and President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a

federal law defining marriage as between one man and one woman. States

could still permit same-sex marriage, but the marriages would not be recognized

for fede ral purposes such as filing taxes or earning Social Security survivor bene-

fits. The law also permitted states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 30 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

The Founding and the Constitution

From America’s founding to today, debates over the role of the United States government in citizens’ lives have persisted. After the historic decision to rule same-sex marriage a right guaranteed by the Constitution, Jim Obergefell holds a photo of his late husband on the steps of the Supreme Court to celebrate his bittersweet victory.

31

performed in other states. Then the state of Ohio enacted its own DOMA in

2004, prohibiting same-sex marriage and refusing to recognize those per-

formed elsewhere.

Thus Obergefell and Arthur were unable to marry due to the actions of two

branches of the federal government—the executive and legislative—and their

state. The issue became more acute when Arthur was diagnosed with ALS, or

Lou Gehrig’s disease—a progressive, debilitating disease. Obergefell served

as Arthur’s primary caregiver, and the couple traveled to Maryland in 2013

and wed on the airport tarmac. Then they filed a lawsuit with the state of Ohio

for Obergefell to be recognized as the surviving spouse on Arthur’s imminent

death certificate. Arthur passed away three months later.

The case made it to the Supreme Court. In 2015 the Court ruled in Obergefell

v. Hodges that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex

couples by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.2 Thus the Court secured a civil right that

the executive and legislative branches and a number of states had denied.

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 31 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

The U.S. Constitution lays out the purpose of government: to promote justice,

to maintain peace at home, to defend the nation from foreign foes, to provide for

the welfare of the citizenry, and, above all, to secure the “blessings of liberty” for

Americans. It also spells out a plan for achieving these objectives, including provi-

sions for the exercise of legislative, executive, and judicial powers and a recipe

for the division of powers among the federal government’s branches and between

the national and state governments. Jim Obergefell’s quest to marry the love of

his life intersected with all three branches and both levels of government.

His story also shows that although many Americans believe strongly in the

long-standing values of liberty, equality, and democracy, how those values are

defined and implemented by the political institutions that the Constitution

created are a source of considerable controversy. The framers believed that a

good constitution created a government with the capacity to act forcefully. But

they also believed that government should be compelled to take a variety of

interests and viewpoints into account when it formulates policies. Sometimes

the deliberation and compromise encouraged by the constitutional arrange-

ments of “separated institutions sharing powers” can result in policymaking

that is slow or even gridlocked.3 Public policy is always a product of political

bargaining. But so was the Constitution itself. As this chapter will show, the

Constitution reflects high principle as well as political self-interest and defines

the relationship between American citizens and their government.

★ Describe the events that led to the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation (pp. 33–38)

★ Analyze the reasons many Americans thought a new Constitution was needed, and assess the obstacles to a new Constitution (pp. 38–43)

★ Explain how the Constitution attempted to improve America’s governance, and outline the major institutions established by the Constitution (pp. 43–51)

★ Present the controversies involved in the struggle for ratification (pp. 51–56)

★ Trace how the Constitution has changed over time through the amendment process (pp. 56–60)

CHAP TER GOAL S

32 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 32 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

The First Founding: Ideals, Interests, and Conflicts

The government created by the coun- try’s Founders was the product of British legal and political traditions, colonial experience, and ne w ideas about governance that gained currency

in the centur y befor e America br oke with B ritain. While America’s leaders w ere first and foremost practical politicians, they also read political philosophy and were influenced by the impor tant thinkers of their day , including H obbes, Locke, and Montesquieu.

The seventeenth-century British philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) was no adv ocate of democratic go vernment, but he wr ote persuasiv ely in Leviathan about the necessity of a government authority as an antidote to human existence in a government-less state of natur e, where life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” He also believ ed that go vernments should hav e limits on the po wers they exercised and that political systems ar e based on the idea of “ contract theor y”— that the people of a countr y voluntarily give up some fr eedom in ex change for an ordered society. The monarchs who rule that society derive their legitimacy from this contract, not from a God-given right to rule.

Another British political thinker, John Locke (1632–1704), advanced the prin- ciples of republican government by arguing not only that monar chical power was not absolute, but that such po wer was dangerous and should therefore be limited. In a break with Hobbes, Locke argued that the people retain rights despite the social contract they make with the monar ch. P reserving safety in society is not enough; people’s lives, liberty, and property also require protection. Further, Locke wrote in his Second Treatise of Civil Government that the people of a countr y have a right to overthrow a government they believe to be unjust or tyrannical. This key idea shaped the thinking of the Founders, including Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the Declaration of Independence, who said that the document was “pure Locke.” Locke adv anced the impor tant ideas of limited go vernment and consent of the governed.

Baron de la Brède et de Montesquieu (1689–1755) was a French political thinker who advocated the idea that po wer needed to be balanced b y power as a bulwar k against tyranny. The way in which this could be achieved was through the separation of governing powers. This idea was already in practice in B ritain, where legislative and ex ecutive po wers w ere divided betw een Parliament and the monar ch. I n The Spirit of the Laws , Montesquieu argued for the separation and elev ation of judicial power, which in Britain was still held b y the monarch. Montesquieu did not argue for a pur e separation of po wers; rather , basic functions would be separated, but there would also be some o verlap of functions. These ideas were central in shaping the thr ee-branch system of go vernment that America ’s F ounders outlined in the Constitution of 1787.

Describe the events that led to the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation

33T H E F I r S T F O U n D I n G : I D E A L S , I n T E r E S T S , A n D C O n F L I C T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 33 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

NARROW INTERESTS AND POLITICAL CONFLICTS SHAPED THE FIRST FOUNDING

The American Revolution and the U.S. Constitution were outgrowths of a struggle among competing economic and political for ces within the colonies. F ive sectors of society had inter ests that w ere important in colonial politics: (1) N ew England merchants; (2) southern planters; (3) “royalists”—holders of royal lands, offices, and patents (licenses to engage in a pr ofession or business activity); (4) shopkeepers, artisans, and labor ers; and (5) small farmers. Throughout the eighteenth centur y, these groups were in conflict over issues of taxation, trade, and commer ce. For the most part, ho wever, the southern planters, the New England mer chants, and the royal office and patent holders—groups that together made up the colonial elite— were able to maintain a political alliance that held in check the mor e radical forces representing shopkeepers, labor ers, and small farmers. After 1760, ho wever, b y seriously threatening the inter ests of New England merchants and southern plant – ers, British tax and trade policies split the colonial elite, permitting radical forces to expand their political influence, and set in motion a chain of events that culminated in the American Revolution.4

BRITISH TAXES HURT COLONIAL ECONOMIC INTERESTS

During the first half of the eighteenth century, Britain ruled its American colonies with a light hand. Evidence of British rule was hardly to be found outside the largest towns, and the enterprising colonists had found ways of ev ading most of the tax es levied by the distant B ritish government. Beginning in the 1760s, however, debts and other financial problems faced by the British government forced it to search for new revenue sources. This search rather quickly led to the Crown’s North American colonies, which, on the whole, paid remarkably little in taxes to their parent country. Much of Britain’s debt arose from the expenses it had incurr ed in defense of the colonies during the recent French and Indian War (1756–63), as well as from the continuing protection that British forces were giving the colonists fr om Indian attacks and that the British navy was providing for colonial shipping. Thus, during the 1760s, Great Britain sought to impose new, though relatively modest, taxes on the colonists.

Like most go vernments of the period, the B ritish r egime had limited ways in which to collect revenues. In the mid-eighteenth century, governments relied mainly on tariffs, duties, and other taxes on commerce; and it was to such taxes, including the Stamp Act, that the British turned during the 1760s.

The Stamp A ct and other tax es on commer ce, such as the S ugar A ct of 1764, which tax ed sugar , molasses, and other commodities, most heavily affected the two groups in colonial society whose commercial interests and activities were most extensive—the New England merchants and the southern planters. U nited under the famous slogan “No taxation without representation,” the merchants and plant- ers sought to organize opposition to these new taxes. In the course of the struggle against British tax measures, the planters and mer chants broke with their r oyalist

34 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 34 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

allies and turned to their former adv ersaries—the shopkeepers, labor ers, ar tisans, and small farmers—for help. With the assistance of these groups, the merchants and planters organiz ed demonstrations and a bo ycott of B ritish goods that ultimately forced the Crown to rescind most of its hated new taxes.

From the perspective of the merchants and planters, this was a victorious con- clusion to their struggle with the parent country. They were anxious to end the un- rest they had helped to arouse, and they supported the British government’s efforts to restore order. Indeed, most r espectable Bostonians suppor ted the actions of the British soldiers involved in the Boston M assacre (1770), when those soldiers killed five colonists while attempting to repel an angry mob moving against a government building. In their subsequent trial, the soldiers were defended by John Adams, a pillar of Boston society and a future president of the United States. Adams asserted that the soldiers’ actions were entirely justified, provoked as they were by “a motley rabble of saucy boys, negroes and mulattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish Jack tars.” All but two of the soldiers were acquitted.5

Yet political strife persisted. The more radical for ces r epresenting shopkeepers, artisans, laborers, and small farmers, who had been mobilized and energized by the struggle over taxes, continued to agitate for political and social change. These radi- cals, whose leaders included S amuel Adams, a cousin of J ohn Adams, asserted that British power supported an unjust political and social structure within the colonies and began to advocate an end to British rule.6

POLITICAL STRIFE RADICALIZED THE COLONISTS

The political strife within the colonies was the background for the events of 1773–74. I n 1773 the B ritish go vernment granted the politically po werful but ailing East I ndia Company a monopoly on the expor t of tea fr om Britain, elimi – nating a lucrative form of trade for colonial mer chants. To add insult to injur y, the East India Company sought to sell the tea directly in the colonies instead of working through the colonial mer chants. Tea was an extr emely impor tant commodity in the 1770s, and these B ritish actions posed a serious thr eat to the N ew E ngland merchants. Together with their southern allies, the mer chants once again called upon the radicals for support. The most dramatic result was the Boston Tea Party of 1773, when anti-British radicals, led b y Samuel Adams (some of them “ disguised” as Mohawk Indians), boarded three vessels anchored in Boston Harbor and threw the entire cargo of 342 chests of tea into the harbor.

This event was of decisiv e importance in American histor y. The merchants had hoped to for ce the B ritish go vernment to r escind the Tea A ct, but they did not support any demands beyond this one. They certainly did not seek independence from Britain. Samuel Adams and the other radicals, however, hoped to provoke the British government to take actions that would alienate its colonial suppor ters and pave the way for a rebellion. This was precisely the purpose of the Boston Tea Party, and it succeeded. B y dumping the East I ndia Company’s tea into Boston H arbor, Adams and his follo wers goaded the B ritish into enacting a number of harsh reprisals that closed the por t of Boston to commer ce, changed the pr ovincial

35T H E F I r S T F O U n D I n G : I D E A L S , I n T E r E S T S , A n D C O n F L I C T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 35 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

government of M assachusetts, pr ovided for the r emoval of accused persons to Britain for trial, and, most impor tant, r estricted mo vement to the West—further alienating the southern planters, who depended upon access to ne w western lands. These acts of retaliation confirmed the worst criticisms of British r ule and helped radicalize Americans. Radicals such as Samuel Adams had been agitating for mor e violent measures against the B ritish. But ultimately it was B ritain’s political repres- sion that fanned support for independence.

Thus, the Boston Tea Party set in motion a cy cle of pr ovocation and r etaliation that in 1774 r esulted in the conv ening of the F irst Continental Congr ess—an assembly of delegates from all parts of the colonies that called for a total bo ycott of British goods and, under the pr odding of the radicals, began to consider the possi – bility of independence fr om B ritish r ule. The eventual r esult was the D eclaration of Independence.

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE EXPLAINED WHY THE COLONISTS WANTED TO BREAK WITH GREAT BRITAIN

In 1776, mor e than a y ear after open war fare had commenced in M assachusetts, the S econd Continental Congr ess appointed a committee consisting of Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, B enjamin F ranklin of P ennsylvania, R oger S herman of Connecticut, John A dams of M assachusetts, and R obert Livingston of N ew York to draft a statement of American independence fr om British rule. The Declaration

The British helped radicalize colonists through policy decisions in the years before the Revolution. For example, Britain gave the East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade in the American colonies, which colonists feared would hurt colonial merchants’ business.

36 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 36 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

of I ndependence, written b y J efferson and adopted b y the S econd Conti – nental Congr ess, was an extraor dinary philosophical and political document. Philosophically, the D eclaration was remarkable for its assertion that certain rights, called “ unalienable rights ”— including life, liber ty, and the pursuit of happiness—could not be abridged by governments. In the world of 1776, a world in which some kings still claimed to rule by divine right, this was a dramatic statement.

Politically, the D eclaration was r e- markable because it focused on griev – ances, aspirations, and principles that might unify the v arious colonial groups that w ere other wise divided economi – cally, philosophically , and b y r egion. The Declaration was an attempt to identify and ar ticulate a histor y and set of principles that might help to forge national unity.7 It also explained to the rest of the world why American colo – nists w ere attempting to br eak away from Great Britain.

THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION CREATED AMERICA’S FIRST NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

Having declar ed their independence, the colonies needed to establish a go vern- mental structure. In November 1777 the Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation, the U nited States’ first written constitution. Although it was not ratified by all the states until 1781, it was the countr y’s operative constitution until the final months of 1788.

The Articles of Confederation were concerned primarily with limiting the powers of the central go vernment. The central government, first of all, was based entirely in a Congress. Since it was not intended to be a po werful government, it was giv en no executive branch. Execution of its laws was to be left to the individual states. S econd, the Congr ess had little po wer. Its members w ere not much mor e than delegates or messengers from the state legislatures. They were chosen by the state legislatures, their salaries were paid out of the state treasuries, and they were subject to immediate recall by state authorities. In addition, each state, regardless of its size, had only a single vote.

The Congress was giv en the po wer to declar e war and make peace, to make treaties and alliances, to coin or borr ow money, and to r egulate trade with the

The purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to explain to the world why the colonists had rebelled against the British and sought self-government. Every year, Americans celebrate the signing of the Declaration on the Fourth of July.

37T H E F I r S T F O U n D I n G : I D E A L S , I n T E r E S T S , A n D C O n F L I C T S

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 37 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

Native Americans. It could also appoint the senior officers of the U.S. Army. But it could not levy taxes or regulate commerce among the states. Moreover, the army officers it appointed had no army to serve in because the nation ’s armed forces were composed of the state militias. And in or der to amend the Ar ticles, all 13 states had to agree—a virtual impossibility. Probably the most unfortunate part of the Articles of Confederation was that the central go vernment could not prevent one state from discriminating against other states in the quest for foreign commerce.

The relationship between the Congress and the states under the Articles of Con- federation was one in which the states r etained vir tually all go vernmental powers. It was properly called a confederation (a system of government in which states retain sovereign authority ex cept for the po wers expressly delegated to the national go v- ernment) because, as pr ovided under Ar ticle II, “ each state r etains its so vereignty, freedom and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” Not only was ther e no executive, there also was no judicial authority and no other means of enforcing the Congress’s will. If there was to be any enforcement at all, the states would do it for the Congress.8

The Failure of the Articles of Confederation Made the “Second Founding” Necessary

The Declaration of Independence and the Ar ticles of Confederation were not sufficient to hold the new nation together as an independent and effective nation-state. From almost the moment of armistice

with the B ritish in 1783, mo ves were afoot to r eform and str engthen the Ar ticles of Confederation.

Competition among the states for foreign commerce posed a special prob- lem to the ne w countr y because it allo wed the E uropean po wers to play the states against one another , which not only made America seem w eak and vul – nerable abroad but also cr eated confusion on both sides of the A tlantic. At one point during the winter of 1786–87, J ohn Adams of M assachusetts, a leader in the independence str uggle, was sent to negotiate a ne w treaty with the B ritish, one that would co ver disputes left o ver fr om the war . The British go vernment responded that, because the U nited S tates under the Ar ticles of Confedera – tion was unable to enfor ce existing tr eaties, it would negotiate with each of the 13 states separately.

At the same time, w ell-to-do Americans—in par ticular the N ew E ngland merchants and southern planters—w ere tr oubled b y the influence that “radical” forces ex ercised in the Continental Congr ess and in the go vernments of sev er- al of the states. As a r esult of the R evolution, one key segment of the colonial

Analyze the reasons many Americans thought a new Constitution was needed, and assess the obstacles to a new Constitution

38 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 38 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

elite—the royal land office, and patent holders—was stripped of its economic and political privileges. And while the pre-Revolutionary elite were weakened, the pre- Revolutionary radicals w ere better organiz ed than ev er and no w contr olled such states as Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, wher e they pursued economic and political policies that str uck terr or into the hear ts of the pr e-Revolutionary political establishment. O f course, the central go vernment under the Ar ticles of Confederation was powerless to intervene.

THE ANNAPOLIS CONVENTION WAS KEY TO CALLING A NATIONAL CONVENTION

The continuation of international weakness and domestic economic turmoil led many Americans to consider whether their ne wly adopted form of go vern- ment might not alr eady r equire r evision. I n the fall of 1786, many state lead – ers accepted an invitation fr om the Virginia legislatur e for a confer ence of representatives of all the states, to be held in Annapolis, Maryland. Delegates from only five states actually attended, so nothing substantiv e could be accom – plished. Still, this conference was the first step toward what is now known as the second founding. The one positive thing that came out of the Annapolis convention was a car efully wor ded r esolution calling on the Congr ess to send commissioners to P hiladelphia at a later time “ to devise such fur ther provisions as shall appear to them necessar y to r ender the Constitution of the F ederal Government adequate to the exigencies of the U nion.”9 B ut the r esolution did not necessarily imply any desire to do more than improve and reform the Articles of Confederation.

The government under the Ar ticles did enact some impor tant measur es, including the Land O rdinance of 1785 and the N orthwest Ordinance of 1787. The Land Ordinance established the principles of land surveying and landowner- ship that go verned America ’s w estward expansion, and under the N orthwest Ordinance the states agreed to surrender their western land claims, which opened the way for the admission of ne w states to the U nion. Still, the y oung nation’s political and economic position deteriorated during the 1780s, and something had to be done.

SHAYS’S REBELLION SHOWED HOW WEAK THE GOVERNMENT WAS

It is quite possible that the Constitutional Conv ention of 1787 in P hiladelphia would never have taken place at all except for a single event that occurred during the winter following the Annapolis convention: Shays’s Rebellion.

Daniel Shays, a former army captain, led a mob of farmers in a r ebellion against the government of M assachusetts, which had levied heavy tax es against them. The purpose of the rebellion was to prevent foreclosures on farmers’ debt-ridden land by keeping the county courts of western Massachusetts from sitting until after the next election. A militia force, organized by the Governor of Massachusetts and privately

39FA I L U r E O F T H E A r T I C L E S M A D E T H E “ S E C O n D F O U n D I n G ” n E C E S S A r Y

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 39 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

funded by a group of prominent merchants, dispersed the mob, but for several days in February 1787, Shays and his followers terrified the state government b y attempting to captur e the federal arsenal at S pring- field, provoking an appeal to the Congr ess to help restore order. Within a few days, the state government regained contr ol and captur ed 14 of the r ebels. (All were eventually pardoned.) Later that year, a ne wly elected Massachusetts legislature granted some of the farmers’ demands.

George Washington summed up the effects of this incident: “I am mor tified beyond expr ession that in the moment of our acknowledged independence we should b y our conduct v erify the pr edictions of our transatlantic foe, and r ender ourselves ridiculous and contemptible in the eyes of all Europe.”10

The Congress under the Confederation had been unable to act decisively in a time of crisis. This provided critics of the Ar ticles of Confederation with precisely the evidence they needed to push the Annapolis r esolution thr ough the Congr ess. Thus, the states w ere asked to send r epresentatives to Philadelphia to discuss constitutional r evision. Delegates were eventually sent by every state except Rhode Island.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION DIDN’T START OUT TO WRITE A NEW CONSTITUTION

The delegates who convened in Philadelphia in May 1787 had political strife, inter- national embarrassment, national weakness, and local rebellion fixed in their minds. Recognizing that these issues were symptoms of fundamental flaws in the Articles of Confederation, the delegates soon abandoned the plan to r evise the Articles and committed themselves to a second founding—a second, and ultimately successful, attempt to cr eate a legitimate and effective national system of government. This effort would occupy the convention for the next five months.

A Marriage of Interest and Principle For y ears, scholars hav e disagr eed about the motives of the F ounders in P hiladelphia. Among the most contr oversial views of the framers ’ motiv es is the “ economic interpr etation” put for ward b y historian Charles Beard and his disciples.11 According to Beard’s account, America’s Founders were a collection of securities speculators and pr operty owners whose only aim was personal enrichment. F rom this perspectiv e, the Constitution’s lofty principles ar e little more than sophisticated masks behind which the most v enal interests sought to enrich themselves.

In 1787, Daniel Shays led a makeshift army against the federal arsenal at Springfield to protest heavy taxes levied by the Massachusetts legislature. The rebellion proved the Articles of Confederation were too weak to protect the fledgling nation.

40 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 40 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

The opposing view is that the framers of the Constitution were concerned with philosophical and ethical principles. Indeed, the framers did tr y to devise a system of government consistent with the dominant philosophical and moral principles of the day. But, in fact, these two views belong together; the Founders’ interests were rein- forced by their principles. The convention that drafted the American Constitution was chiefly organized b y the N ew E ngland mer chants and southern planters. Although the delegates r epresenting these gr oups did not all hope to pr ofit personally from an increase in the value of their securities, as Beard would have it, they did hope to benefit in the br oadest political and economic sense b y breaking the po wer of their radical foes and establishing a system of go vernment more compatible with their long-term economic and political interests. Thus, the framers sought to create a new government capable of promoting commerce and protecting property from radical state legislatures and populist forces hostile to the interests of the commercial and propertied classes.

The Great Compromise The proponents of a new government fired their opening shot on M ay 29, 1787, when E dmund Randolph of Virginia offered a r esolution that proposed corrections and enlargements in the Ar ticles of Confederation. The proposal, reflecting the strong influence of James Madison, was no simple motion; rather, it provided for an entirely new government.

The portion of Randolph ’s motion that became most contr oversial was called the Virginia Plan. This plan provided for a system of r epresentation in the national legislature based upon the population of each state or the proportion of each state’s revenue contribution to the national government or both. (Randolph also pro- posed a second chamber of the legislature, to be elected by the members of the first chamber.) Since the states v aried enormously in siz e and w ealth, the Virginia Plan was heavily biased in favor of the large states.

While the convention was debating the Virginia Plan, opposition to it began to mount as more delegates arrived in Philadelphia. William Paterson of New Jersey introduced a ne w r esolution kno wn as the New Jersey Plan, which called for equal state r epresentation in the national legislatur e r egardless of population. I ts main proponents were delegates from the less populous states, including D elaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, and N ew York, who asser ted that the mor e populous states, such as Virginia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and Georgia, would dominate the ne w go vernment if r epresentation w ere determined b y population. The smaller states argued that each state should be equally represented in the ne w regime regardless of the state’s population.

The issue of representation was one that thr eatened to wr eck the entir e consti- tutional enterprise. D elegates conferred, factions maneuv ered, and tempers flared. James Wilson of P ennsylvania told the small-state delegates that if they wanted to disr upt the union, they should go ahead. The separation, he said, could “never happen on better gr ounds.” S mall-state delegates w ere equally blunt. G unning Bedford of Delaware declared that the small states might, if for ced, look elsewhere for friends. “The large states,” he said, “dare not dissolve the confederation. I f they do the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor and good faith, who will take them by the hand and do them justice.” These sentiments were widely shared.

41FA I L U r E O F T H E A r T I C L E S M A D E T H E “ S E C O n D F O U n D I n G ” n E C E S S A r Y

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 41 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

The union, as Luther Martin of Maryland put it, was “ on the verge of dissolution, scarcely held together by the strength of a hair.”12

The outcome of this debate was the Connecticut Compromise, also kno wn as the Great Compromise. Under the terms of this compromise, in the first chamber of Congress, the House of Representatives, the representatives would be apportioned according to the population in each state. This, of course, was what delegates from the large states had sought. But in the second chamber , the Senate, each state would hav e equal representa- tion regardless of its population; this provision addressed the concerns of the small states. This compromise was not immediately satisfactory to all the delegates. Indeed, two of the most vocal members of the small-state faction, J ohn Lansing and R obert Yates of N ew York, were so incensed by the concession that their colleagues had made to the large-state forces that they stormed out of the convention. In the end, however, most of the delegates preferred compromise to the breakup of the Union, and the plan was accepted.

The Question of Slavery: The Three-Fifths Compromise Many of the conflicts that emerged during the Constitutional Conv ention were reflections of the funda- mental differences between the slave and the nonslave states—differences that pitted the southern planters against New England merchants. This was one example of the conflict that would later almost destroy the Republic.

More than 90 percent of the country’s slaves resided in five states—Georgia, Maryland, North Car olina, S outh Car olina, and Virginia—where they accounted for 30 per cent of the total population. I n some places, slaves outnumbered nonslaves by as many as 10 to 1. F or the Constitution to embody any principle of national supr emacy, some basic decisions would have to be made about the place of slav ery in the general scheme. James Madison observed, “It seemed now to be pr etty well understood that the r eal difference of interests lay, not between the large and small but betw een the northern and southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences formed the line of discrimination.”13

The issue of slavery was the most difficult one faced by the framers, and it nearly destroyed the Union. Although some delegates believed slavery to be morally wrong, an evil and oppr essive institution that made a mocker y of the ideals and v alues espoused in the Constitution, morality was not the issue that caused the framers to support or oppose the Three-Fifths Compromise. Whatever they thought of the institution of slav ery, most delegates fr om the nor thern states opposed counting slaves in the distribution of congr essional seats. James Wilson of Pennsylvania, for example, argued that if slav es w ere citiz ens, they should be tr eated and counted like other citizens. If, on the other hand, they were property, then why should not other forms of property be counted toward the apportionment of representatives? But southern delegates made it clear that if the northerners refused to give in, they would nev er agr ee to the ne w go vernment. William R. D avie of N orth Car olina heatedly asserted that the people of North Carolina would never enter the Union if slaves were not counted as part of the basis for representation. Without such agree- ment, he asserted ominously, “the business was at an end.” Even southerners such as Edmund Randolph of Virginia, who conceded that slavery was immoral, insisted on including slaves in the allocation of congr essional seats. E ventually the N orth and South compromised on the issue of slavery and representation. Indeed, northerners

42 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 42 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

even agreed to permit a continuation of the odious slave trade until 1808 in order to keep the South in the Union. Eventually, the disparate interests of the North and the South could no longer be reconciled, and a bloody civil war was the result.

Northerners and southerners ev entually r eached agr eement thr ough the Three- Fifths Compromise. The seats in the House of R epresentatives would be appor tioned according to a “population” in which only thr ee-fifths of slaves would be counted. The slaves would not be allo wed to v ote, of course; but the number of r epresenta- tives would be apportioned accordingly.

The Constitution Created Both Bold Powers and Sharp Limits on Power

The political significance of the Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise was to r einforce the unity of the mer cantile and planter forces that sought to cr eate a ne w government. The Great Compromise reassured those in both gr oups who

Despite the Founders’ emphasis on liberty, the new Constitution allowed slavery. In this 1792 painting, Liberty Displaying the Arts and Sciences, the books, instruments, and classical columns at the left contrast with the kneeling slaves at the right—illustrating the divide between America’s rhetoric of liberty and equality and the realities of slavery.

Explain how the Constitution attempted to improve America’s governance, and outline the major institutions established by the Constitution

43C O n S T I T U T I O n C r E AT E D B O L D P O W E r S A n D S H A r P L I M I T S O n P O W E r

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 43 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

feared that this ne w governmental framework would r educe the impor tance of their own local or regional influence. The Three-Fifths Compromise temporarily defused the riv alry betw een the mer chants and planters. Their unity secured, members of the alliance suppor ting the establishment of a ne w government moved to fashion a constitutional framework consistent with their economic and political interests.

In particular, the framers sought a new government that, first, would be strong enough to pr omote commerce and pr otect property from radical state legislatur es such as Rhode I sland’s. This became the constitutional basis for national control over commerce and finance and for the establishment of national judicial supremacy and the effort to construct a strong presidency. (See Table 2.1 for a comparison of the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution.) S econd, the framers sought to prevent what they saw as the threat posed by the “excessive democracy” of the state and national go vernments under the Ar ticles of Confederation. This led to such constitutional principles as a bicameral legislature (a legislativ e assembly composed of two chambers or houses), checks and balances (mechanisms thr ough which each branch of go vernment is able to par ticipate in and influence the activities of the other branches), stagger ed terms in office with longer terms for senators, and indirect election (selection of the pr esident not b y v oters dir ectly but b y an electoral college; senators also were chosen indirectly, by state legislatures). Third, the framers, lacking the power to force the states or the public at large to accept the ne w form of go vernment, sought to identify principles that would help to secure suppor t. This became the basis of the constitutional provision for dir ect popular election of r epresentatives and, subsequently , for the addition of the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, ratified in 1791; they ensure certain rights and liber ties to the people). F inally, the framers wanted to be certain that the go vernment they cr eated did not pose an ev en greater threat to its citizens’ liberties and property rights than did the radical state legislatur es they feared and despised. To prevent the new government from abusing its power, the framers incorporated principles such as the separation of powers (the division of go vernmental po wer among sev eral institutions that must cooperate in de cision-making) and federalism (a system of go vernment in which po wer is divided, b y a constitution, betw een a central go vernment and r egional govern- ments) into the Constitution.

THE LEGISL ATIVE BRANCH WAS DESIGNED TO BE THE MOST POWERFUL

In Article I, Sections 1–7, the Constitution provides for a Congress consisting of two chambers: a House of Representatives and a Senate. Members of the House of Representatives were given two-year terms in office and were to be elected dir ectly by the people. M embers of the S enate w ere to be appointed b y the state legisla – tures (this was changed in 1913 by the Seventeenth Amendment, which instituted direct election of senators) for six-y ear terms. These terms were stagger ed so that the appointments of one-thir d of the senators would expir e ev ery two y ears. The Constitution assigned somewhat different tasks to the House and Senate. Although the approval of each body was required for the enactment of a law, the Senate alone

44 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 44 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

was given the po wer to ratify tr eaties and appr ove presidential appointments. The House, on the other hand, was given the sole power to originate revenue bills.

The structure of the legislativ e branch r eflected the framers’ major goals. The House of Representatives was designed to be directly responsible to the people in order to encourage popular consent for the ne w Constitution and to help enhance the po wer of the ne w go vernment. A t the same time, to guar d against “ excessive democracy,” the Constitution checks the po wer of the H ouse of R epresentatives

MAJOR PROVISIONS ARTICLES CONSTITUTION

Executive branch none President of the United States

Judiciary no federal court system. Judiciary exists only at state level.

Federal judiciary headed by the Supreme Court

Legislature Unicameral legislature with equal representation for each state. Delegates to the Congress of the Confederation were appointed by the states.

Bicameral legislature consisting of Senate and House of representatives. Each state is represented by two senators, while apportionment in the House is based on state population. Senators are chosen by the state legislatures (changed to popular election in 1913) and House members by popular election.

Fiscal and economic powers

The national government is dependent upon the states to collect taxes. The states are free to coin their own money, print paper money, and sign commercial treaties with foreign governments.

Congress given the power to levy taxes, coin money, and regulate commerce. States prohibited from coining money or entering into treaties with other nations.

Military The national government is dependent upon state militias and cannot form an army during peacetime.

The national government is authorized to maintain an army and navy.

Legal supremacy State constitutions and state law are supreme.

national Constitution and national law are supreme.

Constitutional amendment

Must be agreed upon by all states.

Must be agreed upon by three- fourths of the states.

TABLE 2.1

Comparing the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution

45C O n S T I T U T I O n C r E AT E D B O L D P O W E r S A n D S H A r P L I M I T S O n P O W E r

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 45 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

with that of the S enate, whose members w ere to be appointed b y the states for long terms rather than elected directly by the people. The purpose of this provision, accord- ing to Alexander Hamilton, was to avoid “an unqualified complaisance to every sud- den breeze of passion, or to ev ery transient impulse which the people may r eceive.”14 Staggered terms of ser vice in the Senate, moreover, were intended to make that body even more resistant to popular pr essure. Since only one-thir d of the senators would be selected at any giv en time, the composition of the institution would be pr otected from changes in popular preferences transmitted by the state legislatures. This would prevent what James Madison called “mutability in the public councils arising fr om a rapid succession of new members.”15 Thus, the structure of the legislative branch was designed to contribute to go vernmental power, to pr omote popular consent for the new government, and at the same time to place limits on the popular political currents that many of the framers saw as a radical threat to the economic and social order.

The issues of power and consent w ere important throughout the Constitution. Section 8 of Ar ticle I specifically listed the powers of Congr ess, which include the authority to collect taxes, borrow money, regulate commerce, declare war, and main- tain an army and navy. By granting Congress these powers, the framers indicated very clearly that they intended the new government to be far more powerful than its pre- decessor. At the same time, by defining the new government’s most important pow- ers as belonging to Congress, the framers sought to promote popular acceptance of this critical change by reassuring citizens that their views would be fully represented whenever the government exercised its new powers.

As a fur ther guarantee to the people that the ne w go vernment would pose no threat to them, the Constitution seems to say that any po wers not listed ar e not granted at all. Specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution are expressed powers. But the framers intended to cr eate an activ e and po werful government, so they also included the necessar y and proper clause, sometimes kno wn as the elastic clause, which declar ed that Congr ess could write laws needed to carr y out its expressed powers. This clause indicated that the expressed powers could be broadly interpreted as a source of strength for the national government, not a limitation on it. In response to the charge that they intended to give the national government too much po wer, the framers adopted language in the Tenth Amendment stipulating that powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the federal go vernment were reserved to the states or to the people. As we will see in Chapter 3, the resulting tension between the elastic clause and the Tenth Amendment has been at the hear t of constitutional struggles between federal and state powers.

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH CREATED A BRAND NEW OFFICE

The Articles of Confederation had not pr ovided for an ex ecutive branch, and the framers vie wed this as a sour ce of w eakness, so the Constitution pr ovides for the establishment of the pr esidency in Ar ticle II. As H amilton commented, the pr esi- dential ar ticle aimed to ward “ energy in the E xecutive.” I t did so in an effort to overcome the natural tendency to ward stalemate that was built into the bicameral

46 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 46 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

legislature as w ell as into the separation of po wers among the thr ee branches. The Constitution affords the president a measure of independence from the people and from the other branches of government—particularly the Congress.

In line with the framers ’ goal of incr eased po wer to the national go vernment, the pr esident is granted the unconditional po wer to r eceive ambassadors fr om other countries—this amounts to the po wer to “ recognize” other countries—as w ell as the power to negotiate treaties, although their acceptance requires the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. The president is also given the unconditional right to grant r eprieves and pardons, except in cases of impeachment, and the powers to appoint major departmental personnel, to convene Congress in special session, and to veto congressional enactments. The veto power is formidable, but it is not absolute, since Congr ess can override it by a two-thirds vote, reflecting the framers’ concern with checks and balances.

The framers hoped to create a pr esidency that would make the federal go vern- ment rather than the states the agency capable of timely and decisive action to deal with public issues and pr oblems. At the same time, ho wever, the framers sought to help the presidency withstand excessively democratic pressures by creating a system of indirect rather than direct election through an electoral college.

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH WAS A CHECK ON TOO MUCH DEMOCRACY

In establishing the judicial branch in Article III, the Constitution reflects the fram- ers’ pr eoccupation with nationalizing go vernmental po wer and checking radical democratic impulses while pr eventing the ne w national government from interfer- ing with liberty and property.

Under the provisions of Article III, the framers created a court that was to be literally a supr eme cour t of the U nited S tates and not mer ely the highest cour t of the na – tional government. The most important expression of this intention was granting the Supreme Court the power to resolve any conflicts that might emerge between federal and state laws. In particular, the Supreme Court is given the right to determine whether a power is exclusive to the national government, concurrent with the states, or exclusive to the states. In addition, the Supreme Court is assigned jurisdiction over controversies between citizens of different states. The long-term significance of this provision was that as the country developed a national economy, it came to rely increasingly on the federal judiciary, rather than on the state courts, for the resolution of disputes.

Federal judges ar e giv en lifetime appointments in or der to pr otect them fr om popular politics and fr om inter ference by the other branches. This, however, does not mean that the judiciar y remains totally impar tial to political considerations or to the other branches, for the president is to appoint the judges and the Senate to approve the appointments. Congr ess also has the po wer to cr eate inferior (lo wer) courts, change the jurisdiction of the federal cour ts, add or subtract federal judges, and even change the size of the Supreme Court.

No explicit mention is made in the Constitution of judicial review, the po wer of the cour ts to r eview and, if necessar y, declare actions of the legislativ e and ex ecu- tive branches inv alid or unconstitutional. The Supreme Cour t asser ted this po wer

47C O n S T I T U T I O n C r E AT E D B O L D P O W E r S A n D S H A r P L I M I T S O n P O W E r

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 47 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

in Marbury v. M adison (1803). 16 I ts assumption of this po wer, as w e shall see in Chapter 12, was based not on the Constitution itself but on the politics of later decades and the membership of the Court.

NATIONAL UNITY AND POWER SET THE NEW CONSTITUTION APART FROM THE OLD ARTICLES

Various provisions in the Constitution addr ess the framers ’ concern with national unity and po wer, including Ar ticle IV ’s provisions for comity (r eciprocity) among states and among citizens of all states. Each state is pr ohibited from discriminating against the citizens of other states in favor of its own citizens, and the Supreme Court is charged with deciding in each case whether a state has discriminated against goods or people fr om another state. The Constitution restricts the po wer of the states in favor of ensuring enough po wer to the national go vernment to giv e the countr y a free-flowing national economy.

The framers’ concern with national supremacy was also expressed in Article VI, in the supremacy clause, which pr ovides that national laws and tr eaties “shall be the supreme Law of the Land” and superior to all laws adopted by any state or any subdivi- sion. This means that states are expected to respect all laws made under the “Authority of the United States.” The supremacy clause also binds the officials of all state and local governments as well as the federal government to take an oath of office to support the national Constitution. This means that every action taken by the U.S. Congress has to be applied within each state as though the action were in fact state law.

THE CONSTITUTION ESTABLISHES THE PROCESS FOR AMENDMENT

The Constitution establishes procedures for its o wn revision in Ar ticle V. Its provi- sions are so difficult that the document has been successfully amended only 17 times since 1791, when the first 10 amendments were adopted. Thousands of other amend- ments have been proposed in Congress, but fewer than 40 of them hav e even come close to fulfilling the Constitution’s requirement of a two-thirds vote in Congress.

THE CONSTITUTION SETS FORTH RULES FOR ITS OWN RATIFICATION

The rules for the ratification of the Constitution are set for th in Ar ticle VII. Nine of the 13 states have to ratify, or agree to, the terms in order for the Constitution to be formally adopted.

THE CONSTITUTION LIMITS THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT’S POWER

As we have indicated, although the framers sought to create a powerful national government, they also wanted to guar d against possible misuse of that po wer. To that end, the framers incorporated two key principles into the Constitution: the

48 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 48 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

separation of po wers and federalism. A thir d set of limitations, the B ill of Rights, was added to the Constitution in the form of 10 amendments pr oposed b y the first Congress and ratified by the states in 1791. Most of the framers had thought a Bill of Rights to be unnecessar y but accepted the idea during the debates o ver the Constitution’s ratification.

The Separation of Powers No principle of politics was more widely shared at the time of the 1787 F ounding than the principle that po wer must be used to balance power. As mentioned earlier in the chapter , M ontesquieu believ ed that this balance was an indispensable defense against tyranny . H is writings, especially his major work, The Spirit of the Laws , “were taken as political gospel ” at the P hiladel- phia convention.17 Although the principle of the separation of po wers is not expli – citly stated in the Constitution, the entir e structure of the national go vernment is built precisely on Article I (the legislature), Article II (the executive), and Article III (the judiciary; see Figure 2.1).

However, separation of powers is nothing but mere words on parchment without a method to maintain that separation. The method became known by the popular label

FIGURE 2.1

The Separation of Powers

Enforces laws

Commander in chief of armed forces

Makes foreign treaties

Proposes laws

Appoints Supreme Court justices and federal

court judges

Pardons those convicted in federal court

Passes federal laws

Controls federal appropriations

Approves treaties and presidential

appointments

Regulates interstate commerce

Establishes lower court system

Decides constitutionality of laws

Reviews lower court decisions

Decides cases involving disputes between states

EXECUTIVELEGISLATIVE JUDICIAL

49C O n S T I T U T I O n C r E AT E D B O L D P O W E r S A n D S H A r P L I M I T S O n P O W E r

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 49 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

“checks and balances” (see Figure 2.2). Each branch is giv en not only its own powers but also some po wer over the other two branches. Among the most familiar checks and balances are the president’s veto as a po wer over Congress and Congress’s power over the president through its control of appointments to high executive posts and to the judiciary. Congress also has power over the president with its control of appropri- ations (the spending of go vernment money) and the right of appr oval of treaties (by the Senate). The judiciary has the power of judicial review over the other two branches.

Another impor tant featur e of the separation of po wers is the principle of giving each of the branches a distinctly different constituency. Theorists such as Montesquieu called this a “ mixed regime,” with the pr esident chosen indir ectly by electors, the House by popular vote, the Senate (originally) by state legislature, and the judiciar y by presidential appointment. B y these means, the occupants of each branch would tend to dev elop very different outlooks on ho w to go vern, different definitions of the public interest, and different alliances with private interests.

Federalism Compared to the confederation principle of the Ar ticles of Confede – ration, federalism was a step to ward greater centralization of po wer. The delegates

FIGURE 2.2

Checks and Balances

EXECUTIVE

LEGISLATIVE

JUDICIAL

Legislative over Judicial Can change size of federal court

system and the number of Supreme Court justices

Can propose constitutional amendments

Can reject Supreme Court nominees

Can impeach and remove federal judges

Legislative over Executive Can override presidential veto

Can impeach and remove president

Can reject president’s appointments and refuse to ratify treaties

Can conduct investigations into president’s actions

Can refuse to pass laws or to provide funding that president

requests

Judicial over Executive Can declare executive actions

unconstitutional

Power to issue warrants

Chief justice presides over impeachment of president

Judicial over Legislative

Can declare laws unconstitutional

Chief justice presides over Senate during hearing to impeach

the president

Executive over Legislative Can veto acts of Congress

Can call Congress into a special session

Carries out, and thereby interprets, laws passed by Congress

Vice president casts tie-breaking vote in the Senate

Executive over Judicial Nominates Supreme Court

justices

Nominates federal judges

Can pardon those convicted in federal court

Can refuse to enforce Court decisions

50 C H A P T E R 2 T H E F O U n D I n G A n D T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 50 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

agreed that they needed to place mor e po wer at the national lev el, without com – pletely undermining the po wer of the state go vernments. Thus, they devised a sys- tem of two sovereigns—the states and the nation—with the hope that competition between the two would be an effective limitation on the power of both.

The Bill of Rights Late in the Philadelphia convention of 1787, a motion was made to include a list of citizens’ rights in the Constitution. After a brief debate in which hardly a wor d was said in its fav or and only one speech was made against it, the motion was almost unanimously defeated. M ost delegates sincer ely believ ed that since the federal go vernment was alr eady limited to its expr essed po wers, fur ther protection of citiz ens was not needed. The delegates argued that the states should adopt bills of rights because their gr eater po wers needed gr eater limitations. B ut almost immediately after the Constitution was ratified, there was a mo vement to adopt a national bill of rights. This is why the Bill of Rights, adopted in 1791, comprises the first 10 amendments to the Constitution rather than being part of the body of it. ( We will hav e a good deal mor e to say about the B ill of Rights in Chapter 4.)

Ratification of the Constitution Was Difficult

The first hurdle facing the pr oposed Constitution was ratification by state conventions of delegates elected b y the people of each state. This struggle

for ratification was carried out in 13 separate campaigns. Each involved different people, moved at a different pace, and was influenced by local and national con- siderations. Two sides faced off throughout the states, however; the two sides called themselves Federalists and Antifederalists (see Table 2.2).

The Federalists (who mor e accurately should hav e called themselv es “N ational- ists” but who took their name to appear to follo w in the R evolutionary tradition) supported the constitution proposed at the American Constitutional Convention of 1787 and preferred a strong national government. The Antifederalists favored strong state governments and a w eak national go vernment and opposed the document produced at the Constitutional Convention. They preferred a federal system of gov- ernment that was decentraliz ed; they took their name b y default, in r eaction to their better-organiz ed opponents. The Federalists w ere united in their suppor t of the Constitution, while the Antifederalists were divided over possible alternatives to the Constitution.

During the str uggle o ver ratification of the Constitution, Americans argued about great political principles. How much power should the national go vernment be giv en? What safeguar ds would most likely pr event the abuse of po wer? What institutional arrangements could best ensure adequate representation for all Ameri- cans? Was tyranny to be feared more from the many or from the few?

Present the controversies involved in the struggle for ratification

51r AT I F I C AT I O n O F T H E C O n S T I T U T I O n W A S D I F F I C U LT

wtp12e_ess_ptr_ch02_030-065.indd 51 11/28/18 5:28 PM

 

 

FEDERALISTS AND ANTIFEDERALISTS FOUGHT BITTERLY OVER THE WISDOM OF THE NEW CONSTITUTION

During the ratification struggle, thousands of essays, speeches, pamphlets, and let- ters were written in support of and in opposition to the proposed Constitution. The best-known pieces suppor ting ratification of the Constitution were the 85 essays written, under the name of “P ublius,” b y Alexander H amilton, J ames M adison, and John Jay between the fall of 1787 and the spring of 1788—known today as the Federalist Papers. They not only defended the principles of the Constitution but also sought to dispel fears of a strong national authority. The Antifederalists published essays of their own, arguing that the new Constitution betrayed the Revolution and was a step toward monarchy. Among the best of the Antifederalist wor ks were the essays, usually attributed to N ew York Supreme Cour t justice R obert Yates, that were written under the name of “Brutus” and published in the New York Journal at the same time the Federalist Papers appeared. The Antifederalist view was also ably presented in the pamphlets and letters written b y a former delegate to the Con – tinental Congress and futur e U.S. senator , Richard Henry Lee of Virginia, using the pen name “The Federal Farmer.” These essays highlight the major differences of opinion betw een F ederalists and Antifederalists. F ederalists appealed to basic principles of government in support of their nationalist vision. Antifederalists cited equally fundamental precepts to support their vision of a looser confederacy of small republics. Three areas of disagreement were representation, majority tyranny, and governmental power.

FEDERALISTS ANTIFEDERALISTS