Ch 20 Notes
Foreign policy is a nations general plan to defend and advance national interests, especially its security against foreign threats
The Protagonist: The President
The Constitution allows the president to deal with other nations in several ways
The president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces
The president has the power to make treaties
The president appoints U.S. ambassadors and heads of executive departments
The president receives (or refuses) ambassadors from other countries
Over time the executive has used these provisions, laws, Supreme Court decisions, and precedents created by bold action, to emerge as the leading actor in American foreign policy.
The Protagonist II (and sometimes the Antagonist): Congress
The Constitution mentions the word “foreign” in five places, and all of these are in Article I (which defines the legislative branch)
The Consitution allows Congress to deal with other nations in several ways:
Congress has the power to create legislation
Congress has the power to declare war
Congress has the power to raise revenue and dispense funds
Congress has the power to support, maintain, govern and regulate the army
Congress has the power to call out state militias to repel invasions
Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations
Congress has the power to define and punish piracy and offenses against the law of nations
Congress has only used its power to declare war five times
Most importantly, Congress uses its power of the purse to provide funds for foreign policy activities it supports, and to prohibit funds for those it opposes
· The senate has specific powers that make it the leading chamber on foreign policy issues
· The senate must give advice and consent to treaties
· The senate must give advice and consent to appointment of ambassadors and other officials involved in foreign policy
The Senate rarely defeats a treaty the president has made (only 21 of thousands have been defeated), but many of those defeats have been historically significant
The Senate vetoed Woodrow Wilson’s treaty to join the League of Nations in 1921
U.S. entrance into the United Nations required Senate approval; despite some isolationist sentiment, the treaty passed.
The most recent rejection occurred in 1999, when the Senate rejected the Comprehensive nuclear Test Ban Treaty
The Power Move: Presidents can avoid Senate treaty rejection by creating foreign policy through executive agreements.
· An executive agreement is a pact between heads of countries and has the legal status of treaties
· They must conform to the Constitution, existing treaties, and the laws of Congress
· Most executive agreements deal with minor issues
· Presidents have occasionally resorted to executive agreements on issues that were unlikely to win Senate consent: NAFTA is a recent example
The Dance of Power: Legislation and Foreign Policy Making Power
Congress has allowed the presidency certain leeway on use of discretionary funds – large sums of money that may be spent on unforeseen needs to further the national interest
Congress has also granted the president transfer authority – allowing him to take money that Congress has approved for one purpose and spend it on something else
As commander-in-chief, the president has authority to commit the armed forces to respond to emergency situations, effectively involving the U.S. in undeclared wars
The War Powers Resolution (passed in response to the Vietnam War) requires the president to consult with Congress in “every possible instance” before involving troops in hostilities
Troops may not stay for more than 60 days without Congressional approval
The actual impact of the law is quite minimal; no president has ever been “punished” for violating its provisions
Making Foreign Policy: Supporting Players
· The Department of State
· The State Dept. helps formulate American policy and then executes and monitors it throughout the world
· The Secretary of State is the highest ranking official in the cabinet, and also (usually) the president’s most important foreign policy adviser
· Despite its size and selectivity in hiring, the State Dept. is often charged with lacking initiative and creativity
· The State Dept. lacks a strong domestic constituency to exert pressure in support of its policies; pluralist politics makes this a serious drawback
The Department of Defense
The Department of Defense (DOD) is charged with promoting unity and coordination among the armed forces and providing the bureaucratic structure needed to manage the peacetime military
The Secretary of Defense is a civilian, and has budgetary power, control of defense research, and the authority to transfer, abolish, reassign, and consolidate functions among the military services
The power wielded by the Secretary of Defense depends upon the Secretary’s own vision and willingness to use the tools available
The National Security Council
· The National Security Council (NSC) is a group of advisers created to help the president mold a coherent approach to foreign policymaking by integrating and coordinating details of domestic, foreign, and military affairs
· The statutory members of the NSC include the president, vice-president, and secretaries of State and Defense
· The role of the NSC varies considerably according to the wishes of the president
The CIA and the Intelligence Community
Before WWII, there was no permanent agency charged with gathering intelligence (information) about the actions and intentions of other nations
The CIA was created during the Cold War, and is charged with collecting, analyzing, evaluating, and circulating intelligence related to national security matters
The intelligence community also includes the Departments of Defense, State, Energy, and Treasury, which also possess intelligence capacities
Most material obtained by the CIA comes from readily available sources, such as statistical abstracts, books, and newspapers
Covert (secret) activities are undertaken are undertaken by the Operations Directorate, and have included espionage, coups, assassination plots, wiretaps, interception of mail, and infiltration of protest groups
Covert operations raise moral and legal questions in a democracy, particularly in the aftermath of the Cold War: when a government engages in actions that people know nothing about, the people cannot hold government accountable for its actions
Post-Cold War issues that concern the intelligence community include terrorism, drug trafficking, nuclear proliferation, and US economic security
Bit Players: Other Parts of the Foreign Policy Bureaucracy
· Globalization has caused the number of players concernec with foreign policy to expand
· The Agency for International Development (AID) oversees aid programs to nations around the world. It works with a full range of other departments and agencies
· The US Information Agency (USIA) provides educational and cultural materials about the United States in over 100 countries
· The US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) promotes, negotiates, and verifies arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament policies
· Many other departments, including the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Energy, engage in various foreign policy activities
· An array of government corporations, independent agencies, and quasi-governmental organizations also participate in foreign policymaking. These include the National Endowment for Democracy, the Export-Import Bank, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
· States and localities are also now paying attention to foreign policy; most state governments now have offices charged with promoting export state goods and attracting overseas investment.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
Ch 20 Synopsis
Ch 20 – Global Policy
Synopsis:
This chapter examines the players, structures, and primary issues that define the making of foreign policy in the U.S.. The decisions made in this process can be understood through the conflicts of freedom versus order and freedom versus equality: in the case of foreign policy, though, those conflicts are between those who favor freedom v. those who favor maintaining the traditional order of the nation-state system; and those who favor freedom versus those who favor government action to enhance the equality of people in all nations. The history of U.S. foreign policy and current global policy challenges can be understood within this framework.
The Constitution specifies that relations with other nations should primarily be the responsibility of two groups of actors; the executive branch and the legislative branch. The president, who has become the primary foreign policy authority, derives his authority from a few provisions –- including his role as commander-in-chief –that deal with the subject of foreign relations. Presidents have used these provisions and other pieces of legislation, Supreme Court decisions, and precedent, to expand their authority.
The other primary actor in the foreign policymaking arena is Congress. Congress has many powers that can be used in foreign policy, though the Constitution never specifically mentions that term. Both the power to legislate and the power of the purse give Congress the ability to promote or prohibit international involvement. The Senate has specific powers---including the power to ratify treaties---that make it a particularly important force in foreign policymaking.
There are many other actors who take part in making foreign policy: particularly important are the Department of State; Department of Defense; the National Security Council; and the CIA and other parts of the bureaucracy that have intelligence capabilities. Each of these organizations advises the president and Congress on matters concerning national security and other U.S. interests. In addition, many other agencies pursue foreign policy goals as part of their missions, and there is an array of government corporations, independent agencies, and quasi-governmental organizations that also participate in making foreign policy.
A brief review of the history of foreign policymaking reveals that the U.S. has gradually progressed from an isolationist to a regional to a global perspective in its foreign policy. Immediately after WWII, American foreign policy was dominated by the requirements of the Cold War and the containment of Soviet expansionism. A real turning point in Cold War foreign policy resulted from America’s unsuccessful involvement in the Vietnam War. Americans disagreed passionately both about what to do in Vietnam and how to do it. The Nixon Doctrine, however, inspired a dramatic departure from the past by advocating détente, a foreign policy aimed at reducing tensions between East and West. This policy represented a significant change. President Carter’s foreign policy emphasized human rights, and can be seen as reflecting “Vietnam syndrome”, a crisis of confidence about America’s role in the world. President Reagan had no such crisis, and undertook a major defense buildup as a means of rolling back perceived Soviet expansionism in Central America and elsewhere. When the Cold War ended in 1989, the conditions of foreign policymaking changed dramatically. As President Clinton’s policy of enlargement and engagement illustrates, it is now much more difficult to develop strong guidelines about U.S. involvement in situations around the world.
The most pressing international issues are global policy issues: these are intermestic problems that require global action. Solutions to these problems often require domestic policies and practices to be subject to international regulation. Global policymaking presents challenges to the very concept of national sovereignty. A review of the global policy areas of investment and trade, human rights policy and foreign aid, and environmental policy reveals both the need for and challenges to effective policymaking in these areas.
In a democracy, it would seem that public opinion could have a dramatic impact on foreign policy decisions. According to the majoritarian model of democracy, public opinion should be the fundamental guide for foreign policy makers. The problem with this view is that the public is not very interested in foreign policy, and most of those who are have views that are not very specific. The pluralist model of democracy, by contrast, recognizes that people are likely to learn about foreign policy from the leaders of groups they belong to, and so legitimizes the presence of these groups. Pluralism also recognizes and allows for the presence of foreign firms and governments as interest groups. Though the influence of these groups varies depending on the issue at hand, international lobbying efforts are most effective when they deal with non-crisis issues that are of little importance to the public at-large. Given the public’s relative disinterest in these matters, foreign policy, and now global policy, will tend to be made by opinion leaders and competing interest groups.
Synopsis:
This chapter examines the players, structures, and primary issues that define the making of foreign policy in the U.S.. The decisions made in this process can be understood through the conflicts of freedom versus order and freedom versus equality: in the case of foreign policy, though, those conflicts are between those who favor freedom v. those who favor maintaining the traditional order of the nation-state system; and those who favor freedom versus those who favor government action to enhance the equality of people in all nations. The history of U.S. foreign policy and current global policy challenges can be understood within this framework.
The Constitution specifies that relations with other nations should primarily be the responsibility of two groups of actors; the executive branch and the legislative branch. The president, who has become the primary foreign policy authority, derives his authority from a few provisions –- including his role as commander-in-chief –that deal with the subject of foreign relations. Presidents have used these provisions and other pieces of legislation, Supreme Court decisions, and precedent, to expand their authority.
The other primary actor in the foreign policymaking arena is Congress. Congress has many powers that can be used in foreign policy, though the Constitution never specifically mentions that term. Both the power to legislate and the power of the purse give Congress the ability to promote or prohibit international involvement. The Senate has specific powers---including the power to ratify treaties---that make it a particularly important force in foreign policymaking.
There are many other actors who take part in making foreign policy: particularly important are the Department of State; Department of Defense; the National Security Council; and the CIA and other parts of the bureaucracy that have intelligence capabilities. Each of these organizations advises the president and Congress on matters concerning national security and other U.S. interests. In addition, many other agencies pursue foreign policy goals as part of their missions, and there is an array of government corporations, independent agencies, and quasi-governmental organizations that also participate in making foreign policy.
A brief review of the history of foreign policymaking reveals that the U.S. has gradually progressed from an isolationist to a regional to a global perspective in its foreign policy. Immediately after WWII, American foreign policy was dominated by the requirements of the Cold War and the containment of Soviet expansionism. A real turning point in Cold War foreign policy resulted from America’s unsuccessful involvement in the Vietnam War. Americans disagreed passionately both about what to do in Vietnam and how to do it. The Nixon Doctrine, however, inspired a dramatic departure from the past by advocating détente, a foreign policy aimed at reducing tensions between East and West. This policy represented a significant change. President Carter’s foreign policy emphasized human rights, and can be seen as reflecting “Vietnam syndrome”, a crisis of confidence about America’s role in the world. President Reagan had no such crisis, and undertook a major defense buildup as a means of rolling back perceived Soviet expansionism in Central America and elsewhere. When the Cold War ended in 1989, the conditions of foreign policymaking changed dramatically. As President Clinton’s policy of enlargement and engagement illustrates, it is now much more difficult to develop strong guidelines about U.S. involvement in situations around the world.
The most pressing international issues are global policy issues: these are intermestic problems that require global action. Solutions to these problems often require domestic policies and practices to be subject to international regulation. Global policymaking presents challenges to the very concept of national sovereignty. A review of the global policy areas of investment and trade, human rights policy and foreign aid, and environmental policy reveals both the need for and challenges to effective policymaking in these areas.
In a democracy, it would seem that public opinion could have a dramatic impact on foreign policy decisions. According to the majoritarian model of democracy, public opinion should be the fundamental guide for foreign policy makers. The problem with this view is that the public is not very interested in foreign policy, and most of those who are have views that are not very specific. The pluralist model of democracy, by contrast, recognizes that people are likely to learn about foreign policy from the leaders of groups they belong to, and so legitimizes the presence of these groups. Pluralism also recognizes and allows for the presence of foreign firms and governments as interest groups. Though the influence of these groups varies depending on the issue at hand, international lobbying efforts are most effective when they deal with non-crisis issues that are of little importance to the public at-large. Given the public’s relative disinterest in these matters, foreign policy, and now global policy, will tend to be made by opinion leaders and competing interest groups.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Ch 19 Synopsis
Chapter 19 – Domestic Policy
Synopsis
This chapter concentrates on the role of government in providing for the welfare of its citizens through government policies. It begins with a discussion of why and how the government became involved in the minimum requirements of life for its citizens. At one time, governments provided only the minimal resources necessary for security and order. Now, through the welfare state, most governments provide a variety of services and programs designed to shield individuals from economic insecurity and to promote increased economic equality. The promotion of welfare goals through government is controversial, however, because it requires government to choose between freedom and equality.
The Great Depression was instrumental in changing thinking about how much government intervention was needed to promote social welfare. The New Deal policies were designed to remedy the problems caused by economic stagnation, by boosting farm prices, reducing unemployment, and increasing social welfare expenditures. President Johnson’s Great Society programs carried the spirit and programs of the New Deal one step further. Comprehensive legislation was passed to redress political, social, and economic inequality. Although successful in some areas, the Great Society programs failed to achieve their goals because of administrative problems and growing indifference. Since the 1980’s, conservative thought on the importance of pursuing economic equality (rather than economic freedom) has altered the policy environment, and has particularly impacted public assistance programs. In 1996, public assistance programs were substantially altered by the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act. Still, government does attempt to alleviate some of the consequences of economic adversity, using social insurance programs such as those defined through the Social Security Act of 1935. Although there are questions about the financial viability of the system in the future, making significant changes to Social Security entails too much political risk. Another program under this legislation, Medicare, has undergone attacks by conservative critics who see it as a wasteful and unnecessary intrusion of government into healthcare. Meanwhile, about 15% of Americans who are not elderly have no health insurance, and they must rely on a patchwork public system. As a result, many believe some form of health-care reform is needed. Americans disagree over public policies in these areas because they disagree over the need for government actions, the goals the government should have, and the means it should use to fulfill those goals.
Another social welfare benefit, public education, has also recently been the object of some reform discussion, though reforming education at the national level is difficult because it is primarily a state and local function. Both parties have substantial policy agendas on this issue, though.
Is government providing benefits fairly? Some would argue not: why should government subsidize the poor by providing non-means tested benefits? Transforming some non-means tested benefits into means-tested benefits also has allure during times of budget crises.
Synopsis
This chapter concentrates on the role of government in providing for the welfare of its citizens through government policies. It begins with a discussion of why and how the government became involved in the minimum requirements of life for its citizens. At one time, governments provided only the minimal resources necessary for security and order. Now, through the welfare state, most governments provide a variety of services and programs designed to shield individuals from economic insecurity and to promote increased economic equality. The promotion of welfare goals through government is controversial, however, because it requires government to choose between freedom and equality.
The Great Depression was instrumental in changing thinking about how much government intervention was needed to promote social welfare. The New Deal policies were designed to remedy the problems caused by economic stagnation, by boosting farm prices, reducing unemployment, and increasing social welfare expenditures. President Johnson’s Great Society programs carried the spirit and programs of the New Deal one step further. Comprehensive legislation was passed to redress political, social, and economic inequality. Although successful in some areas, the Great Society programs failed to achieve their goals because of administrative problems and growing indifference. Since the 1980’s, conservative thought on the importance of pursuing economic equality (rather than economic freedom) has altered the policy environment, and has particularly impacted public assistance programs. In 1996, public assistance programs were substantially altered by the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act. Still, government does attempt to alleviate some of the consequences of economic adversity, using social insurance programs such as those defined through the Social Security Act of 1935. Although there are questions about the financial viability of the system in the future, making significant changes to Social Security entails too much political risk. Another program under this legislation, Medicare, has undergone attacks by conservative critics who see it as a wasteful and unnecessary intrusion of government into healthcare. Meanwhile, about 15% of Americans who are not elderly have no health insurance, and they must rely on a patchwork public system. As a result, many believe some form of health-care reform is needed. Americans disagree over public policies in these areas because they disagree over the need for government actions, the goals the government should have, and the means it should use to fulfill those goals.
Another social welfare benefit, public education, has also recently been the object of some reform discussion, though reforming education at the national level is difficult because it is primarily a state and local function. Both parties have substantial policy agendas on this issue, though.
Is government providing benefits fairly? Some would argue not: why should government subsidize the poor by providing non-means tested benefits? Transforming some non-means tested benefits into means-tested benefits also has allure during times of budget crises.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Ch 19 Notes
· Chapter 19 Notes
· Government payments to individuals as a percentage of the federal budget have almost doubled since 1960
· As of 1995, 60 cents of every dollar spent goes to payments for individuals
· The welfare debate is an example of the modern dilemma of government, the choice between freedom and equality
· The ideological origins of social welfare as government policy are in the Industrial Revolution, when production shifted from the home to the factory
· A major result of the Great Depression was to increase the economic role of the federal government
· The New Deal was a package of programs that was not guided by, or based on, a single political or economic theory
· The New Deal consisted of two basic elements: (1) boosting prices and lowering unemployment; (2) aiding specific groups of disadvantaged people
· The Supreme Court opposed the New Deal on the belief that Congress was exceeding its Constitutional authority
· Equality was the underlying value of LBJ’s Great Society
· Kennedy’s domestic policies included limited programs for the poor along with a middle class tax cut
· Originally, the War on Poverty sought to involve the poor themselves in administering anti-poverty programs; its major legal component was the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964
· Regarding the reasons for poverty, Americans cite lack of effort by the poor and uncontrollable circumstances about equally
· In social welfare policy, Reagan shifted the emphasis from economic equality to economic freedom
· Reagan’s legacy, the budget deficit, continued to make any spending increases on social welfare policy impractical even after he left office
· Reagan effectively reversed the New Deal
· Those who opposed Medicare in the 1960’s were correct in the prediction that it would become enormously expensive
· Medicare provides care to those age 65 and older; Medicaid provides care to poor people under 65
· Compare to the western European democracies, the United States provides its citizens the lowest level of health benefits
· More than 14% of the US GDP is spent on health care
· Public assistance varies from state to state
· About 14% of Americans are officially living in poverty
· Government payments to individuals as a percentage of the federal budget have almost doubled since 1960
· As of 1995, 60 cents of every dollar spent goes to payments for individuals
· The welfare debate is an example of the modern dilemma of government, the choice between freedom and equality
· The ideological origins of social welfare as government policy are in the Industrial Revolution, when production shifted from the home to the factory
· A major result of the Great Depression was to increase the economic role of the federal government
· The New Deal was a package of programs that was not guided by, or based on, a single political or economic theory
· The New Deal consisted of two basic elements: (1) boosting prices and lowering unemployment; (2) aiding specific groups of disadvantaged people
· The Supreme Court opposed the New Deal on the belief that Congress was exceeding its Constitutional authority
· Equality was the underlying value of LBJ’s Great Society
· Kennedy’s domestic policies included limited programs for the poor along with a middle class tax cut
· Originally, the War on Poverty sought to involve the poor themselves in administering anti-poverty programs; its major legal component was the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964
· Regarding the reasons for poverty, Americans cite lack of effort by the poor and uncontrollable circumstances about equally
· In social welfare policy, Reagan shifted the emphasis from economic equality to economic freedom
· Reagan’s legacy, the budget deficit, continued to make any spending increases on social welfare policy impractical even after he left office
· Reagan effectively reversed the New Deal
· Those who opposed Medicare in the 1960’s were correct in the prediction that it would become enormously expensive
· Medicare provides care to those age 65 and older; Medicaid provides care to poor people under 65
· Compare to the western European democracies, the United States provides its citizens the lowest level of health benefits
· More than 14% of the US GDP is spent on health care
· Public assistance varies from state to state
· About 14% of Americans are officially living in poverty
Monday, April 2, 2007
Ch 17 Notes
Chapter 17 Notes – Policymaking
Public policy is a general plan of action adopted by government
“Muddling through” refers to govt. taking little or no action, hoping that a problem will solve itself
Public policymaking can be divided into four categories, based on policies that prohibit, protect, promote, or provide
The purpose of tax expenditures is to encourage citizens to engage in activities that the govt. finds desirable EX. Home mortgage deduction
The principle of collective benefits is most compatible with majoritarian democracy, while selective benefits lend themselves to pluralist democracy
Interest group opposition can defeat a proposed a policy
Most policymaking involves the interaction between govt. and interest groups
Agenda refers to a set of problems or situations that have come to the attention of govt as requiring some sort of action
When problems become part of the agenda, govt tends to act
Public policy is often presented in vague terms to provide negotiating room for policymakers
States often resist federal regulations because they seldom have input into making them
The difficult and complex process involving the coordination of many agencies, levels, and interests, is true of implementation
The purpose of policy evaluation is to study an existing policy to discover what is working, what is not working, and what alternatives might work better
Policy evaluation is difficult because there is no standard method for evaluating policy
Feedback is the term applied to an evaluation of ploicies and the transmission of that information to policymakers
The assumption among political scientists is that policies are never over, they continue to evolve
The fragmented nature of the American political system gives interest groups may points of access and influence
Interagency task forces within the executive branch deal with the problem of coordinating different elements of govt.
If they must be regulated, industry prefers that it be by the national govt to provide uniformity
Issue networks are held together by knowledge, expertise, and interest in a particular policy area
Issue networks consist of key members of congressional committees; officials of the related bureau or agency; and lobbyists representing the agency's clients
Generally, policymaking is done by private-sector individuals and organizations, as well as by govt officials
Issue networks are involved in program development, policy implementation, and agenda setting
The term Iron Triangle refers to a tight alliance among bureaucratic agencies, congressional committees, and interest groups
Issue networks have become more prevalent than iron triangles, and reflect pluralist democracy
In-and-outers are those who switch jobs within policy communities, with the most typical switch being from govt to lobbying
The Ethics in Govt Act south to curb the excessive influence of former govt officals who were immediately becoming lobbyists
Political scientists view issue networks with some concern because networks favor well-organized constituencies over the broader public interest
The general public is most often given the least attention by policymakers
Public policy is a general plan of action adopted by government
“Muddling through” refers to govt. taking little or no action, hoping that a problem will solve itself
Public policymaking can be divided into four categories, based on policies that prohibit, protect, promote, or provide
The purpose of tax expenditures is to encourage citizens to engage in activities that the govt. finds desirable EX. Home mortgage deduction
The principle of collective benefits is most compatible with majoritarian democracy, while selective benefits lend themselves to pluralist democracy
Interest group opposition can defeat a proposed a policy
Most policymaking involves the interaction between govt. and interest groups
Agenda refers to a set of problems or situations that have come to the attention of govt as requiring some sort of action
When problems become part of the agenda, govt tends to act
Public policy is often presented in vague terms to provide negotiating room for policymakers
States often resist federal regulations because they seldom have input into making them
The difficult and complex process involving the coordination of many agencies, levels, and interests, is true of implementation
The purpose of policy evaluation is to study an existing policy to discover what is working, what is not working, and what alternatives might work better
Policy evaluation is difficult because there is no standard method for evaluating policy
Feedback is the term applied to an evaluation of ploicies and the transmission of that information to policymakers
The assumption among political scientists is that policies are never over, they continue to evolve
The fragmented nature of the American political system gives interest groups may points of access and influence
Interagency task forces within the executive branch deal with the problem of coordinating different elements of govt.
If they must be regulated, industry prefers that it be by the national govt to provide uniformity
Issue networks are held together by knowledge, expertise, and interest in a particular policy area
Issue networks consist of key members of congressional committees; officials of the related bureau or agency; and lobbyists representing the agency's clients
Generally, policymaking is done by private-sector individuals and organizations, as well as by govt officials
Issue networks are involved in program development, policy implementation, and agenda setting
The term Iron Triangle refers to a tight alliance among bureaucratic agencies, congressional committees, and interest groups
Issue networks have become more prevalent than iron triangles, and reflect pluralist democracy
In-and-outers are those who switch jobs within policy communities, with the most typical switch being from govt to lobbying
The Ethics in Govt Act south to curb the excessive influence of former govt officals who were immediately becoming lobbyists
Political scientists view issue networks with some concern because networks favor well-organized constituencies over the broader public interest
The general public is most often given the least attention by policymakers
Ch 17 - Policymaking
Respond to the following:
What is meant by fragmentation? How does fragmented government affect the creation and implementation of public policy?
What is meant by fragmentation? How does fragmented government affect the creation and implementation of public policy?
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Study Guide Ch 15/16 Test
Study Guide
Chapter 15/16 Test
Definition of civil rights and civil liberties
26th Amendment
Gideon v Wainwright
Establishment clause – 1st Amendment
Free-exercise clause – 1st Amendment
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971 – 3 prong Lemon test
WV State Bd of Ed v Barnette
22nd Amendment
Strict scrutiny
Prior restraint
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Standard for judging obscenity
Freedom of speech regarding criticism of public figures
NY Times v US 1971
Incorporation – due process clause 14th Amendment
Miranda warnings
Exclusionary rule
Griswold v CT, 1965
Roe v Wade, 1973
Bowers v Hardwicke, 1986
Brown v Bd of Ed, 1954
Brown v Bd. of Ed, 1955
25th Amendment
Bakke v California, 1978
Adarand Constructors v Pena, 1995
Equality of opportunity
Equality of outcome
13th Amendment
14th Amendment
15th Amendment
Plessy v Ferguson, 1896
Constitutional justification for the Civil Rights Act of 1964
19th Amendment
US v Virginia, 1996
Chapter 15/16 Test
Definition of civil rights and civil liberties
26th Amendment
Gideon v Wainwright
Establishment clause – 1st Amendment
Free-exercise clause – 1st Amendment
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971 – 3 prong Lemon test
WV State Bd of Ed v Barnette
22nd Amendment
Strict scrutiny
Prior restraint
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Standard for judging obscenity
Freedom of speech regarding criticism of public figures
NY Times v US 1971
Incorporation – due process clause 14th Amendment
Miranda warnings
Exclusionary rule
Griswold v CT, 1965
Roe v Wade, 1973
Bowers v Hardwicke, 1986
Brown v Bd of Ed, 1954
Brown v Bd. of Ed, 1955
25th Amendment
Bakke v California, 1978
Adarand Constructors v Pena, 1995
Equality of opportunity
Equality of outcome
13th Amendment
14th Amendment
15th Amendment
Plessy v Ferguson, 1896
Constitutional justification for the Civil Rights Act of 1964
19th Amendment
US v Virginia, 1996
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)