Note: since I screwed up the due date in the subject line, this will be due on the 26th despite what it says below and in the syllabus.
Hi, everyone! Please note that:
1. I'm posting lecture notes #1 (from previous exam) and #2 (for the upcoming exam) to the blog in separate entries.
2. Exam #2 takes place next Wednesday, February 26. It will cover all of the material in lecture notes #2 (Interest groups and Parties), as well as some of the material in lecture notes #3 (to be distributed on Monday and also available then on the blog), specifically the material on political participation (voter turnout, etc.) in the states.
3. I will also distribute and post a review sheet for the exam on Monday (February 24). Note that the format will be exactly the same as for exam #1.
4. Note also that deadlines are upcoming for both the meeting observation paper and the journal). Take advantage of these gift points!
5. Finally, if you don't understand why you didn't do as well as you'd hoped on exam #1, you should see me (during office hours, after class, or work out another time). If you haven't gotten, exam #1 back yet, they will be available after class again tomorrow (Wednesday, February 19). However, if you haven't gotten it back yet, that means you've missed the last two classes.
Now on to this week's assignment (don't answer until after Wednesday's lecture on parties). It focuses on the difficulties facing third parties (sometimes called minor parties) in elections in the states. We'll concentrate in particular on the state legislature. In most states (West Virginia is a very partial exception), the state is divided into districts of equal population, each of which elects one representative. Whoever gets the most votes in a district wins that seat in the legislature. There is no prize for coming in second or third. Anyone who voted for any candidate but the winner gets no representation.
This provision is the key to why third parties have a difficult time. Voters perceive (and major party candidates encourage voters to perceive) that a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote, so they instead for the major party candidate whose views are closest to their own ("the lesser of two evils"). Thus, even when a third party candidate garners some early support, that support usually melts away as election day approaches.
While third party candidates face other obstacles, including the inability to attract campaign contributions, the lack of media coverage, and often being barred from candidate debates, all of those things stem from the single member plurality system. Further, there are other problems with single member plurality. For instance, having each legislator represent a particular geographic area means that representatives focus on that area and not the common good (perhaps resulting in useless government projects). Also, the drawing of the legislative lines, often done by the legislature, can be controversial and is often done to advantage the party in power at the time (the drawing of lines to favor one group over another is called gerrymandering). And, a system that encourages two parties means that each party will try to appeal to people from as much of the ideological spectrum as possible (it may not always seem that way, but, for instance, it explains Mitt Romney's move toward the center during the last months of the presidential campaign). This means that parties don't take strong stands. Finally, with just two parties winning seats, one party will always have a majority in any particular legislative body, meaning that it will control most of the power and not have to compromise with anyone else.
Many countries use a different system of representation called proportional representation. If that system were used in the US, a state with 100 seats in one house of the legislature would not be divided into districts. Rather, people in the state would vote for the party that they preferred, and seats in the legislature would be awarded in proportion to the number of votes for each party. So, if a party got 20% of the votes, it would get 20 seats in the legislative body. A party getting only 5% of the votes would still get 5 seats in the legislature. This encourages votes for third parties. They have a chance to gain representation in the legislature, show citizens what they can do, and then perhaps improve their representation the next time around. This system also removes incentives to exclude minor parties from debates and news coverage, and it encourages donors to support the candidate of their choice, regardless of whether they can win. Proportional representation also means that gerrymandering isn't a problem (there are no district lines to mess with), legislators represent everyone rather than a particular district so they don't focus on things like bringing an unnecessary new bridge to their district (and getting the whole state to pay for it), and it encourages parties to take clear stands on issues. It also results in a situation where, in most cases, no one party has a majority in the legislature, so they have to form coalitions with other parties in order to govern.
Proportional representation does have its disadvantages as well. Sometimes, geographic representation prevents an area with a minority of interests (maybe coal country) from being ignored by the rest of the state. There is no assurance that party tickets will include people from the poorest areas, so they may not get representation either. In some cases, proportional representation also encourages single interest parties, which may just be disruptive to governance. Finally, the coalitions that form are often highly unstable and dysfunctional. At least in a single member plurality system, you're likely to know who is in charge.
Here is a paper on single member plurality, proportional representation, and other related electoral systems.
http://www.lwvutah.org/Studies/Election%20Study%20final%20for%20web-site.pdf
It is from the League of Women Voters. It's got lots of detail and probably leans toward something other than single member plurality (so it's a bit biased). Your assignment is to read the paper, read my comments above, look for other arguments and evidence (there's a ton out there), and then respond. Specifically, should the US move away from single member plurality legislative elections? If so, what type of system should be employed (consider proportional representation and the other systems discussed in the League of Women Voters paper)? One big issue that you'll want to consider is whether a system that encourages minor parties (like proportional representation) is a good thing or a bad thing. Be sure to use reasons and evidence in your response. Again, better responses address those of classmates (politely, of course), make original points, and bring in outside material. Comments are due by 2:00 pm on Monday, February 24.
Good luck!--NB
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Blog Assignment #3 Due February 12
This week's question has to do with fiscal federalism, the relationship where the national government collects tax money and then returns it to state and local governments in the form of grants. I want you to focus on some key points. First, fiscal federalism is a major source of money for state and local governments, accounting for about 25% of their revenue. Second, the national government attaches strings to some of that revenue, known as "conditions of aid". These serve to get around the 10th Amendment and allow the national government to gain more power.
You'll recall that the 10th Amendment (part of the Bill of Rights) said that if a power wasn't given to the national government by the Constitution (and if the Constitution didn't say that the states CAN'T do it), that power went to the states. Now the McCulloch v. Maryland decision weakened the 10th Amendment (through the Implied Powers Doctrine, or Necessary and Proper Clause), but even after that, there are still things that the national government can't require states to do. The national government has worked around this through fiscal federalism.
The way it works is the national government passes a law that says if states don't do some particular thing, they will lose a certain percentage of their federal funding for some particular purpose. Examples include using the threat of losing highway grant money to get states to: raise the drinking age to 21, lower the speed limit to 55 (no longer in effect), or lower the cutoff for DUI from .10% to .08%. These were laws predominantly passed by Democrats (though the speed limit law was more Easterners vs. Westerners, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed the law effectively raising the drinking age) who argued that they were simply providing the states with incentives to provide good public policy. Republicans (and others) opposing those laws said they were simply an example of the national government bullying the states into doing things they couldn't require them to do.
The ideological debate shifted, though, with the passage of the "No Child Left Behind" Act, a major
initiative of President George W. Bush. Part of that act specified that states and school districts would lose some of their education funding if they didn't meet certain targets on student testing. Suddenly, some Republicans who had claimed other initiatives were bullying found that this one was OK. And some Democrats who had supported the other initiatives became born-again supporters of states' rights. One could argue hypocrisy on both sides.
Here are two short pieces on the controversy surrounding the drinking age law. Please read them before you comment.
http://www.legalflip.com/Article.aspx?id=20&pageid=91
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole
You can find a great deal more out there on conditions of aid if you are creative, including some scholarly articles. You should address the question of whether you believe the national government should use conditions of aid to influence the states. If so, what limitations, if any, should be placed on this procedure? You should NOT address the question of what you think the drinking age should be. Please feel free to debate with one another, so long as you keep your discussion respectful. You may also refer to class lectures and discussions. Comments should be posted by 2:00 pm on Wednesday, February 12, and, again, you can earn between 1/2 point and 3 points toward the blog portion of your grade.--NB
You'll recall that the 10th Amendment (part of the Bill of Rights) said that if a power wasn't given to the national government by the Constitution (and if the Constitution didn't say that the states CAN'T do it), that power went to the states. Now the McCulloch v. Maryland decision weakened the 10th Amendment (through the Implied Powers Doctrine, or Necessary and Proper Clause), but even after that, there are still things that the national government can't require states to do. The national government has worked around this through fiscal federalism.
The way it works is the national government passes a law that says if states don't do some particular thing, they will lose a certain percentage of their federal funding for some particular purpose. Examples include using the threat of losing highway grant money to get states to: raise the drinking age to 21, lower the speed limit to 55 (no longer in effect), or lower the cutoff for DUI from .10% to .08%. These were laws predominantly passed by Democrats (though the speed limit law was more Easterners vs. Westerners, and Republican President Ronald Reagan signed the law effectively raising the drinking age) who argued that they were simply providing the states with incentives to provide good public policy. Republicans (and others) opposing those laws said they were simply an example of the national government bullying the states into doing things they couldn't require them to do.
The ideological debate shifted, though, with the passage of the "No Child Left Behind" Act, a major
initiative of President George W. Bush. Part of that act specified that states and school districts would lose some of their education funding if they didn't meet certain targets on student testing. Suddenly, some Republicans who had claimed other initiatives were bullying found that this one was OK. And some Democrats who had supported the other initiatives became born-again supporters of states' rights. One could argue hypocrisy on both sides.
Here are two short pieces on the controversy surrounding the drinking age law. Please read them before you comment.
http://www.legalflip.com/Article.aspx?id=20&pageid=91
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole
You can find a great deal more out there on conditions of aid if you are creative, including some scholarly articles. You should address the question of whether you believe the national government should use conditions of aid to influence the states. If so, what limitations, if any, should be placed on this procedure? You should NOT address the question of what you think the drinking age should be. Please feel free to debate with one another, so long as you keep your discussion respectful. You may also refer to class lectures and discussions. Comments should be posted by 2:00 pm on Wednesday, February 12, and, again, you can earn between 1/2 point and 3 points toward the blog portion of your grade.--NB
Monday, February 3, 2014
Exam Postponed due to Closure
Hi, everyone! Of course, since classes are cancelled, the exam is postponed until Wednesday, February 5. I will keep the comments section on the Review blog post open, and I will continue to answer questions there and via email (berchnorto@msn.com) until Tuesday evening at 9 pm. Please email if you have any concerns. Stay warm!--NB
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Exam #1 Review
POLS
220
BERCH
SPRING
14
Review
for Exam #1
Exam
#1 takes place during class time on Monday, February 3. You simply need to bring pen and photo
ID. The exam will consist of 5 sections;
4 of these will be short essays, and the other will be 5 true-false
questions. Each section is worth 5
points, and you must do a total of 3 sections (either 3 short essays, or two
short essays and all of the true-false).
DO THREE SECTIONS, BUT ONLY THREE SECTIONS.
To prepare for the exam, you should read through the blog assignments, In terms of material covered in class, you should be familiar with the first set of lecture notes. Specifically, from class, you should be familiar with:
Why we compare states.
To prepare for the exam, you should read through the blog assignments, In terms of material covered in class, you should be familiar with the first set of lecture notes. Specifically, from class, you should be familiar with:
Why we compare states.
The
three types of political culture.
The
origins of the federal system.
The
major events in the development of federalism over time.
The
different types of fiscal federalism.
The
importance of conditions of aid.
The
changes to fiscal federalism under Ronald Reagan.
Why
some states get more federal aid than do others.
The
interaction between Dillon's Rule and Home Rule
Why some states give more power to local government than do others.
Why some states give more power to local government than do others.
The
role of regional bodies.
I will have my usual office hours on the day of the exam, in case you want to ask questions. You can also email them to me at the email address on the syllabus, until 9 pm on February 2. Finally, you may post questions to the blog under this topic. I’ll answer any questions posted on the blog by 8 pm on February 2. Good luck!--NB
I will have my usual office hours on the day of the exam, in case you want to ask questions. You can also email them to me at the email address on the syllabus, until 9 pm on February 2. Finally, you may post questions to the blog under this topic. I’ll answer any questions posted on the blog by 8 pm on February 2. Good luck!--NB
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
First Exam Postponed Until February 3
Hi, everyone! I messed up in two ways:
1. I didn't realize I'd scheduled exam #1 for next Wednesday until someone pointed it out today after class.
2. I compounded that error by consulting the syllabus and informing that student that the exam wasn't until February 12 (I was looking at the syllabus for my other class).
Together with the time missed for last week's holiday, I am postponing the exam until Monday, February 3. I'll talk more about it in class on Monday, and there will be a review and a review sheet on Wednesday, January 29. Sorry for any inconvenience.--NB
1. I didn't realize I'd scheduled exam #1 for next Wednesday until someone pointed it out today after class.
2. I compounded that error by consulting the syllabus and informing that student that the exam wasn't until February 12 (I was looking at the syllabus for my other class).
Together with the time missed for last week's holiday, I am postponing the exam until Monday, February 3. I'll talk more about it in class on Monday, and there will be a review and a review sheet on Wednesday, January 29. Sorry for any inconvenience.--NB
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Blog Assignment #2 Due January 27
Hi, everyone! Congratulations to all of you who posted to the comments section on the introductory blog post. Each of you gets two points toward your final grade. Some of you posted multiple times, perhaps because you went to the blog and didn't see your post.
For this first "real" assignment, you should address a simple question: should departments (let's say journalism, but if you're in another major, you're welcome to use that) require students to take POLS 220? Be sure to consider the benefits of studying state and local government, but also the tradeoff between this requirement and some other course that you might not take because you have to take POLS 220. Is there another course outside your major that your major should require instead of POLS 220? If so, why? In answering the question, feel free to use my lecture from last week, your own considered views, and, especially, any outside sources you wish to bring in. You get half a point simply for signing in to the comments section. You can earn up to 3 points (pretty rare) for this week's assignment by providing more substance. Better answers will be well-developed (though they need not be long), will consider the comments of your colleagues (it's OK to disagree with one another; just don't be disagreeable!; and it's OK to respond to comments after others make them. Better answers may also bring up outside sources (feel free to leave a link).
Good luck on this assignment; it's due by 2:00 pm on Monday, January 27. If you have problems with it, please email at berchnorto@msn.com Good luck!--Neil Berch
For this first "real" assignment, you should address a simple question: should departments (let's say journalism, but if you're in another major, you're welcome to use that) require students to take POLS 220? Be sure to consider the benefits of studying state and local government, but also the tradeoff between this requirement and some other course that you might not take because you have to take POLS 220. Is there another course outside your major that your major should require instead of POLS 220? If so, why? In answering the question, feel free to use my lecture from last week, your own considered views, and, especially, any outside sources you wish to bring in. You get half a point simply for signing in to the comments section. You can earn up to 3 points (pretty rare) for this week's assignment by providing more substance. Better answers will be well-developed (though they need not be long), will consider the comments of your colleagues (it's OK to disagree with one another; just don't be disagreeable!; and it's OK to respond to comments after others make them. Better answers may also bring up outside sources (feel free to leave a link).
Good luck on this assignment; it's due by 2:00 pm on Monday, January 27. If you have problems with it, please email at berchnorto@msn.com Good luck!--Neil Berch
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Welcome to the Spring 2014 POLS 220 blog!
Hi, everyone, and welcome to the POLS 220 blog for Spring, 2014. Please test out the blog comments by sending a comment. Make sure to sign your name. Do this by 2:00 pm on Wednesday, January 15, and you will receive two points toward your blog participation grade.--Neil Berch
P.S. If you post a comment and then go to the blog to see it but don't see it, please don't just post again. Please note that after the first 50 or so comments, you need to click the button at the bottom that says "Load More" in order to see more comments. That feature tricked me, too. If you run into problems, email me at berchnorto@msn.com
P.S. If you post a comment and then go to the blog to see it but don't see it, please don't just post again. Please note that after the first 50 or so comments, you need to click the button at the bottom that says "Load More" in order to see more comments. That feature tricked me, too. If you run into problems, email me at berchnorto@msn.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)