1.1 -1.7 Corresponds with Chapter 1-2

1.1 Introduction -Our government is not based upon 1 theory, but a collection of theories and ideas that have been believed over time. We can trace some of those ideas to the Greeks and Romans. The Greeks - notably the Athenians - were among the first to recognize the power in people and their ability to chose the destiny of a group together through voting. It is from here that we get the word democracy we will talk about in Chapter 1-2. Athens was small, made up of a very small population compared to democracies today. As nations grew in size, the next theory of governments the US has links to is Rome. Rome was thousands of times the size of Athens and had multiple classes and ethnicities living within its boundaries. Rome allowed some citizens to choose those that would represent them in the choices their Roman government made. This was the republic - a representative style of government. The final evolutionary basis for the government we have today was based in the Enlightenment. Pulling from the theories and principles of Greeks, Romans, and the current control of monarchs through absolute or near absolute rule, these theorists in the Enlightenment brought together new ideas about political rule based in natural rights and the social contract.

American government is therefore a collection of all of these ideas. We are a democracy based in allowing people to vote for their representation in a republican theory (don’t confuse with the Republican Party!). But who really controls or leads our government? It’s too easy to say “the people.” Not all people vote, in fact relatively few vote, so our biggest question is then who DOES control the government we have created in the face of the reality that a good portion of our population does not consistently vote nor stay current on issues that affect us each and every day?

1.1A - Limited Government - The limits of our government is based in the Constitution that was created. Every action of our government has to based in the Constitution. If government cannot point the Constitution or a law based in it, then our government has overstepped its bounds, its limits upon us. The easiest way to see this is in the Bill of Rights. Free speech, free press, trial rights - these are all limits that the government cannot take from - or infringe upon. The basis of these rights is rooted in the natural rights of the enlightenment. Theorist John Locke best summarized them as the rights of life, liberty, and the property. Locke and others believed it was God who gave these to humans naturally and freely upon birth, not a monarch who provided them at their discretion. Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence utilized this in his “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” statement and the idea that humans have “inalienable rights” that are not control by a crown. People agree or contract together to create a government run by the people who will safeguard and protect these rights in what was known as the “social contract.” These people control and continue sustaining the government through popular sovereignty - the ability and right of the people to rule. This ability and right is best seen in their power to vote for representatives who lead the government in a representative or republicanism model of democracy.

1.1B Here is where the heart of this section begins. Participatory democracy (see also majoritarianism in our book) would hold that the people simply hold the power - their broad participation and feelings control and sustain this government. However we see on many levels that there is not broad participation, the majority does not alway control, and some believe the majority should not always control government! Pluralist democracy points to more control, not in majority feelings of individuals, but in the power of groups gathering their influence to impact political decisions. Interest groups are at the heart of pluralism. They pool their resources and commitment to impact our government’s decisions. Finally, elite democracy portrays the fact that educated elites created our government and they continue to sustain it. Delegate and trustee representation help us see this. A delegate looks at the polls and makes decisions upon “the will” of the majority of the people. However, a trustee role is that of a representative who says that they are not a “rubber stamp” approval of the majority, but were elected to do what THEY believe is in the best interest of the people using their minds and education. This decision may or may not be what the majority is desiring. Certainly, a representative can attempt the blend the two - seeing the majority view, allowing that to influence them at times as a delegate or not influencing them at times as a trustee.

See the article below from the Oakland Press:

Should a member of Congress put the interests or desires of his or her constituents ahead of the nation's?

"I will vote adamantly against the interests of my district if I actually think what I am doing is going to be helpful," former Rep. Eric Massa of New York said at a forum last year. "I will vote against their opinion if I actually believe it will help them."

"The U.S. Constitution establishes qualifications for representatives and senators, but it is silent about the roles and duties of an individual member of Congress," wrote R. Eric Petersen, a government analyst, in a report for the Congressional Research Service.

With no written requirements, each member is free to define his or her own job and set his or her own priorities, Petersen added.

"Political scientists and political philosophers have suggested that representatives can choose to behave as delegates or as trustees," writes University of Oklahoma political scientist Jonathan Mott.

"A delegate is a representative who casts votes that are consistent with the desires of the majority of the constituents he or she represents," Mott said. "A trustee, on the other hand, is a representative who casts votes based on what he or she thinks is best. Some members blend both approaches, behaving as a delegate in some instances and as a trustee in others."

"My philosophy is that my sole responsibility is to represent and fight for the people who elected me to serve them," said U.S. Rep. Gary Peters, D-Bloomfield Township.

"That means seeking out opinions and listening to local residents constantly," Peters said. "I try to listen to as many views and collect as much information as possible, thoroughly read legislation and then vote my conscience based on the answer to this question: Does the proposal improve the lives of people in our community?

"Representing the people you serve and voting your conscience are not mutually exclusive if your primary goal is to help solve problems people are facing," Peters said.

U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, said there are times he would vote counter to public opinion in his district if he felt it were justified.

For instance, if popular sentiment were to withdraw our troops from Iraq, Rogers said he would weigh "the best interests of the national security of the United States" in reaching a decision.

"We have information they don't have," Rogers said, concerning a congressman's knowledge of factors constituents don't know about.

1.1 C - As the above article illustrates we continue to see these principles play out today. Our electoral college has elected 2 presidents who did not win the majority of the votes since 2000. Most election cycles hover around 30-40% participation outside of presidential elections. Interest groups have enormous power in legislation. And finally, there continues to those who believe they are locked out of a voice in a government believing that their voice is not reflected by their representative’s vote and/or belief sets. We will continue to see these issues throughout the semester!

1.2 &1.3 -

We will begin to dive into some important documents that AP will expect us to know for the AP Exam. We will watch the creation of the Declaration of Independence. It was truly a document of the Enlightenment. Written by Thomas Jefferson it portrays not only the desires, but the necessity of the American people to break from England. Jefferson lists numerous natural rights he believes are being starved from the Americans. He also creates the notion that America will base itself in popular sovereignty saying when a form of government (monarchy) becomes destructive to natural rights it is the people’s right and duty to abolish it and institute a new government (based in popular sovereignty and not a monarchy). As you know, among his many grievances was the lack of a voice of the American people in their colonial government.The Constitution comes about a decade later and is seen as a fix to the failed Articles of Confederation and a need for a stronger federal government. We will spend much time on the Constitution’s construction and what it does and does not do for Americans. The Constitution was not a slam dunk to pass the needed 9 states for ratification. The Federalist Papers written by Jay, Madison, an Hamilton point to the need of this new Constitution and express the rationale for what they constructed. The Federalist #10 is an example of Constitutional support. In the Federalist #10, Madison points to a large united republic as superior to a decentralized confederation of states. Madison says

that a large diverse republic will check the powers of “factions” (i.e. political parties and interest groups) that were beginning to bloom in America. He believed this diversity would check each other - numerous religions, all types of merchants, thousands of landowners. Standing in the way of the Federalists were the Anti-Federalists. Far from the nastiness of their name given by the Federalists, these opponents to the Constitution pointed to their belief in a too powerful central government with limitless powers and the lack of guaranteed rights to safeguard the natural rights of life, liberty and property. These issues are stated in the Brutus #1.

You will find a link to all 4 of the above documents on the class website.

1.4As we will discuss, the Articles of Confederation was a hastily approved document that would prove the foundation for the first American Government after the Revolutionary War. Basic in its design, it did not account for all branches of government at the federal level but merely a federal legislative branch that had very limited powers. Its first problem was in its construction: It required all 13 states to agree to amend the document and it required 9 of the 13 to pass pieces of legislation. Early dissension among the states led to fewer than 9 states to send delegates. Without representatives from 9 states the body was hamstrung from passing new business. Secondly, it lacked the power to tax the states. This lack of taxation led to a practical bankruptcy of the new nation as soldiers went unpaid leaving any notion of

power in a federal government embarrassingly non-existent. Shays’ Rebellion illustrated our final problem from a military standpoint. Debtors overran the courts and state militias in the north of the new country. Though not a huge crisis in terms of toppling our new nation, it was enough to fuel numerous political leaders in the states to have a renewed vigor to revisit the Articles of Confederation in 1787.

1.51.5 A - 4 CompromisesNearly all pieces of legislation require some compromise to attain the necessary support for passage. The Constitution was no different in this regard. Four (4) important compromises shaped the new nation:1. The Connecticut Compromise - based in part on the VA and NJ Legislative Plans

2. The creation of the Electoral College -Despite the problems some see the Electoral College creates today, it was not nearly as contested of a debate as the creation of the legislative branch. Wanting to provide power to the states and not simply basing the executive voting upon the popular vote, the Electoral College was created. States were allocated electoral votes based upon their population. The more people the more electoral votes they received. When citizens vote, the are actually voting for how they want their state’s electoral votes cast by the state’s electoral voters. The Founders chose the person who received a majority of the electoral votes the victor and president. Originally, the runner-up was awarded the vice-presidency, but with potential problems of working together among these top 2, the system was changed in the 12th Amendment to have a separate electoral vote for president and vice-president to ensure that a president’s running mate vice-president would be chosen if the president won the “top of the ticket.” Today, we see numerous issues with Electoral College. It can elected a minority vote president without winning a majority of the overall votes (Bush ’00 and Trump ’16). Secondly, because 48 states conduct a winner-take-all method of allocating all of their electoral votes to their state’s winner, this can leave only a handful of competitive states for candidates to campaign in. Because numerous states lean strong to one party or the other (California - Democrats and Alabama - Republicans) candidates spend most of their time and resources today in those “battleground states” that are competitive and balanced with about the same number of Republicans and Democrats (Florida, Ohio, Nevada, and about 5-6 more). This can leave states feeling left out of their priorities and desires as a part of the election process if they are not a battleground state.

3. The 3/5 CompromiseBecause the number of people in a state matter to representation in the House of Representatives and the number electoral votes a state received, how to count the slaves a state mattered tremendously. Southern states strongly desired and expected that slaves would count as at least part of their population. As you can guess, the compromise allowed for the counting of slaves as 3/5 of a person. The compromise shows the day and age of the signing of the document, where slaves had no rights.

4. The Slave Trade Compromise - Importing SlavesThis compromise stated that slaves could continue to be imported from abroad for the next 20 years before importation could be outlawed and that any slaves imported into the US could be subjected to a new taxing power the federal government would have. From a practical standpoint, it pushed slave owners to purchase more slaves over that 20 year window where the slave trade could not be outlawed by Congress. It also gave incentives to slave owners to systematically breed their existing slaves to avoid any import taxes on new slaves they needed abroad. Finally, these existing slaves became much more lucrative in the face of this compromise, but it did provide for a potential window of change 20 years down the road, a change we know would not come until the Civil War.

1.5 B - Article V - Amending the ConstitutionThough 4 ways are presented in the Constitution, only 2 have ever been used in the 27 Amendments we have had passed since 1789.1. 2/3 Congress agree on proposal + 3/4 State Legislatures agree - 27/282. 2/3 Congress agree proposal + 3/4 States at a States Convention agree - 1/28

Never used:3. 2/3 States call a National Convention and support a proposal + 3/4 State Legislatures agree - 0/28

4. 2/3 States calling a National Convention support a proposal + 3/4 States at Convention agree on this proposal -0/28

1.5CWe will see numerous issues that continue to arise from the compromises today:1. Makeup of the House of Representatives - Being population-based and only

portions of a state called districts made how states House districts were constructed very important. This has created a huge issue in the partisan nature of these districts. We will look at the important issue of gerrymandering later this semester.

2. Electoral College Issues - See above!3. Amendment Issues - The extreme difficulty to change the Constitution gives the

Judicial Branch a large power, potentially unrecognized by the Founding Fathers, when it interprets the Constitution’s meaning. More on this later!

1.6-1.7Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances are at the heart of the

Constitution. Though not specifically said in the Constitution, the Articles within the Constitution embed these important provisions into this document. Separation of Powers (S of P) divides the federal powers among the three branches of federal government - the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Each branch has its own specific function - make, enforce/execute, or interpret law. Officers cannot work for

multiple branches at the same time. At the heart of S of P is the abuses of power and not allowing one person or a small group to amass too much of this power. Were the same person or group be able to arrest someone and try them in court providing a punishment, the Founders felt this was too much power in too few hands. We will look at the Federalist #51 specifically and at the foundation of this famous letter by Madison is the abuse of power.

Madison says in the Federalist #51, ….the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

What he means here is that we need a government that functions and works with the right amount of power in the right places to different groups of people. One of the ideas this foreshadows for later in the semester is the growth of all the branches of power over time. Our Congress has broad authority and administers powers not specific in the Constitution (i.e. implied powers), our executives have powers never mentioned in the Constitution (i.e. executive agreements), and our Judicial Branch’s most fundamental power of judicial review in no where to be found in the document.

We will also dive into the brilliance of the Checks and Balances (C&B). As the name implies they are checks between each of the branches powers to not allow each branch 100% complete autonomy in certain areas. A simple example is the passage of a bill to a law. The legislative makes law, BUT the C&B built into the process is the executive having veto power in that process. The executive gets to “weigh in,” signing it if they like it, or vetoing it if they do not. Created with the Constitution

are specific C&B like the veto power, but we will also look at some informal C&B that are very powerful, yet are not specific in the Constitution. Judicial Review is a great example. It’s the judicial branch’s check on both branches, but it is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. It comes from an important court case we will look at when we discuss the courts later in the semester.

1.8 - 1.11 Corresponds with Chapter 3

1.8 - IntroductionWe continue to see debates about the role and responsibilities for our federal and state governments. We will discuss vertical checks and balances as ways in which the federal and state governments can check each other like regular checks and balances check the powers of the 3 branches of federal government. Creating a federal republic was not the easy choice. As you now know, a confederacy was see too weak after the failure of the Articles of Confederation, yet Unitary was seen as taking too much power from the 13 existing states and the state power they had enjoyed and had learned to expect. Like creating an executive that did not have too much power, creating a federal republic was seen as a further way to safeguard too much power being in one place with certain powers for the federal government and certain powers for the state governments.

1.8A - Security and SurveillanceBalancing security and freedom will always be a difficult tightrope walk for governments to manage. As you saw from your political quiz, there are many issues within this realm that are tough to figure out. Though none of you remember 9/11, it is seared into the hearts and minds of generations older than you. It changed how we looked at security and brought us into a new reality about terrorism that had not reared its ugly head in such a horrific fashion throughout modern American history. Moving forward, our federal government walks the tight rope of trying to provide security without being too intrusive to our lives. Surveillance is difficult. It goes right to heart of our freedoms. Among the many issues outside of the complexity of racial and ethnic profiling is: -Who should be watched? -How should they be watched? -Who should give the permission to watch them? -What factors should they consider in this permission? -What should the public know about the process?We continue to work through these issues as a nation and they are important for us to engage in them.

1.8A - EducationWe will speak more about education with federalism because that is where the conversation best lies, but education continues to be a huge part of American liberty. It is an expectation and is seen as a right of Americans to have access to knowledge and educational opportunities paid for with public funds. Our federal government wants to play a role in education, but the level of that role differs among party lines and in the Constitution. Recall, we said our government powers are limited. The federal government only has the powers given to it by the Constitution. The 10th Amendment specifically calls upon powers NOT given to the federal government as reserved to the states. Since our beginnings, the federal government has not been seen as having large powers in this area, but the federal government continues to want to have a role. We will continue to see that role evolve with time.

1.9National policies are constrained the 3 branches and the states. National policy is a long difficult process with frustrating twists and turns for all those wanting change at the national level. Patience and compromise remain important characteristics in the process and that is the way the Founders desired it. Change….is considerably…… constrained!

There is a large list of ways - roadblocks - to change. If you think of our most recent focus on S of P and C&B you are in the right place. Here are some examples of roadblocks constraining change that we have discussed and will continue to discuss more:

Veto Power Power of the Purse Judicial Review The difficulty of the Amendment Process

1.10We will dive in deep to delegated, concurrent, and reserved powers. Remember what federalism is. Federalism is the division of power between the federal and state governments. There are numerous mechanisms that divide this power - clauses in the original Constitution, amendments added after, and most notable the US Supreme Court’s interpretation through numerous cases of this power division. To complicate even more….the Supreme Court has changed its mind at times over the history of country about this division of power! Yikes! Federalism is among the toughest topics of the semester, but we will do our best to understand it because WHO has the power is everything in politics and government.

Things to remember within federalism:

Delegated Powers - powers to the federal government-These powers can be expressed - also known as enumerated.

-These powers can also be implied powers in the Constitution to give federal power though they are not directly expressed. Implied powers get their basis from an expressed clause called the Necessary and Proper Clause. This clause was interpreted in McCulloch to create implied powers.

Concurrent Powers - powers shared federal and state governments.-Recall the taxing powers and the power to create and sustain courts.

Reserved Powers - powers kept by the states.-The 10th Amendment here is big with Reserved Powers.

Commerce Clause - It is expressed in the Constitution, but with the birth of implied powers from McCulloch, the federal government has come back to this clause again, and again, and again to base its power to do something. So much of what happens in our society is traced to “commerce” and that gives the federal government a huge broad authority. We saw it first in Gibbons v. Ogden and it exploded over time from there US v. Lopez is important because it is seen as one of the few cases to say that the federal government overstepped its Commerce Clause basis for power. Lopez says…federal government you can’t use this clause for anything and everything you want to do!

END BIG IDEA 1.