Rakove — “The Politics Of Constitution Making” due Sept. 7th. For those unable to purchase the course pak yet, you can grab it here.
What are the primary principles of the Virginia and New Jersey Plans? What were the two sides debating these plans?
How does Madison radically shift the nature of debate at the convention? What does Madison think the fundamental differences between states are?
What are the two major compromises reached at the Constitutional Convention?
According to Rakove, which compromise is more important to the long term political development of the U.S.? Put another way, which compromise does Rakove view as more “democratic?”
Class,
Here’s a digital copy of the syllabus. If you lose your copy you can use it as a replacement.
We’ll spend some time defining the terms at the end of the Clawson/Oxley reading. However, for your reaction paper I think a discussion of democratic theory that incorporates the Federalist Papers will prove more interesting. With that in mind, here are some questions for you to consider as you read and write:
Would you characterize U.S. democracy as classical democracy, pluralist system, or democratic elitism?
How does the theory espoused by Madison compare with that of Rousseau, Pericles, and Schumpter?
Classical democracy asks a lot of its citizens. Did Madison think Americans were up to the task? The Federalist Papers are a defense of the Constitution, an institution that structures our political participation. What role did Madison think the masses would play?
Are the Madison’s factions the interest groups of contemporary pluralist theory? Does pluralism create equitable outcomes or does it favor certain groups? How can we, as a representative democracy, adequately express the “will of the people.” Should we even attempt to?
Those are a lot of disparate ideas but should provide a good starting point. Remember to compose your paper as an essay. You don’t need to engage all (or any) of these questions but these are the key points we should think about before our discussion next week. We’ll discuss the Clawson/Oxley chapter on Tuesday and tie it to the Federalist Papers on Thursday.
Class,
Here’s a digital copy of your syllabus. If you lose the copy handed out yesterday download this version.
Due Sept. 2nd.
These questions are just a guide. You don’t have to address all (or any) of them. Remember to identify the chief claim(s) the author makes in their piece. You are to read all the documents, even the one(s) you were not assigned to write on.
For those of you reading Morone consider these questions:
If you weren’t able to purchase the course reader yet, You can find the Morone reading in two parts, as part 2 replaces some poorly scanned portions of part 1. Part 1. Part 2.
1) Is the United States a Christian country?
2) Does the Social Gospel still exist today? What about Neo-Puritanism? How are they different?
3) What role should religion play in politics?
4) What does Morone think the role of religion is in American politics?
For those reading the Declaration of Independence and Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments:
If you don’t have the text yet you can find the Declaration of Independence here and the Seneca Falls Declarations here.
1) Who are the founder writing to in the Declaration of Independence? What about Elizabeth Cady Staton and signers of the Seneca Falls Declarations?
2) What are the nature of the grievances in each document?
3) Why/how did the authors of the Seneca Falls Declarations compare the oppression of women in the mid-nineteenth century to the oppression faced by American colonists? Why frame their claims in that language?
4) Are these persuasive documents?
Class,
Thanks for forgiving my hacking cough and general wooziness. As promised you can find a copy of the syllabus here. If you lose the copy passed out today this is the place to find a replacement.
The Declaration of Independence is Appendix 2 (pg. 733) of your text book. If you don’t have the text yet you can find it here.
For the Declaration of Independence consider the following:
What does the document promise to citizens once they break free of colonial rule? How would you describe the grievances listed? In your opinion does our modern republic reflect the intent of the document?–Why/Why not?
You can find the Morone reading in two parts, as part 2 replaces some poorly scanned portions of part 1. Part 1. Part 2.
For Morone consider:
1) Is the United States a Christian country?
2) Does the Social Gospel still exist today? What about Neo-Puritanism? How are they different?
3) What role should religion play in politics?
4) What does Morone think the role of religion is in American politics?
Ross Douthat argues in yesterday’s New York Times that now is the time for third party and independent candidates to seek office. Read it and think about if you think his approach would be more successful than the strategy used by the Christian Coalition in Robert Sullivan’s, “An Army of the Faithful.” I think Douthat is complete wrong for many of the following reasons we’ve discussed in class:
first past the post elections (even most states have this)
single member districts
the inherent organizational & campaign advantages state parties can offer candidates
the ability of parties, particularly on the state and local level to adapt blunting any impact independents might make
a complete misunderstanding/neglect of V.O. Key’s Party-In-Government function.
It may be hard to know where to start reading about health care reform. I’ve tried to put together some links for those who want to learn more. This story from the Washington Post looks at what options were on the table in June. You can read the paper’s full coverage here.
The New York times offers a comprehensive FAQ that clearly explains what issues are being debated. The page also has various links to their coverage of the health care reform process.
The three central tenets of most reform plans include offering insurance to those who currently lack it, controlling escalating health care costs, and preventing insurers from dumping policy holders with pre-existing conditions. This New Yorker article examines why costs are so high by taking us to McAllen, TX, the most expensive place for health care in the U.S. Today’s Washington Post looks at rescission, the practice where insurers take away coverage from the sick.
Jacob Hacker (a prominent and very smart political scientist) explains to Salon why a public option is critical to health reform. Paul Krugman does the same in the Times.
David Goldhill, writing in The Atlantic, argues that none of the proposed reforms will solve our health system’s most pressing problems: skyrocketing cost and inadequate/inept care. Health delivery is so screwed up because its not a market at all–demand is insatiable, there are barriers to entry, and no sense of market scale. To solve these problems Goldhill argues reforms need to be patient/citizen based not focused on doctors, insurers, or hospitals.
