POLSC401 Study Guide

Navigating this Study Guide

Study Guide Structure

In this study guide, the sections in each unit (1a., 1b., etc.) are the learning outcomes of that unit. 

Beneath each learning outcome are:

• questions for you to answer independently;
• a brief summary of the learning outcome topic;
• and resources related to the learning outcome. 

At the end of each unit, there is also a list of suggested vocabulary words.

How to Use this Study Guide

1. Review the entire course by reading the learning outcome summaries and suggested resources.
2. Test your understanding of the course information by answering questions related to each unit learning outcome and defining and memorizing the vocabulary words at the end of each unit.

By clicking on the gear button on the top right of the screen, you can print the study guide. Then you can make notes, highlight, and underline as you work.

Through reviewing and completing the study guide, you should gain a deeper understanding of each learning outcome in the course and be better prepared for the final exam!

Unit 1: The Role of Ethics and Morality in Politics

1a. Define the term "ethics" and explain how it differs from law

• What are some common definitions of ethics?
• Define a law and explain how it differs from ethics.
• Define policy making, statute and international law.
• How does ethics relate to laws and societal norms?
• Describe how political views can influence one's ethical values, such as how people with liberal and conservative views may have different perspectives about ethics.

The word ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, which means custom or habit. Ethics describes the branch of philosophy that is concerned with morality, which is derived from the Latin word moralis, meaning custom. In common parlance, many use ethics synonymously with "morality," "values," and "moral philosophy."

The study of ethics involves an examination of the norms, behaviors, and codes of conduct which community members create and share. Our ethical and moral values reflect our beliefs about how people should treat others and act as members of their community. The ethical values a society prescribes can help individuals make decisions about whether to act in certain ways, because they are morally right or wrong.

Policymaking is the process members of a community follow to make laws, statutes, and other decisions that will impact the community. Politicians base many of the laws they make on the moral values and ethical codes of conduct the community shares. For example, legislators create laws, and judges determine legal punishment, based on their beliefs or notions of fairness, justice, and equality.

A statute refers to a domestic law. International law describes the set of laws governments around the world follow, based on common notions of human rights, such as the belief that all human beings should be allowed to live in a way that is free from persecution from other individuals and governments.

People frequently have differing societal norms and ethical beliefs about what they consider to be right or wrong, especially when they come from different cultures. Note that we will study specific theories about the common good, duty, and ethical decision making in Unit 2.

Review the articles What Is Ethics? and The Common Good by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J. and Michael J. Meyer; the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University; What is Government Ethics? by Judy Nadler and Miriam Schulman; Ethics Are Culturally Relative by Charles A. Ellwood; and The Moral Roots of Liberals and Conservatives by Jonathan Haidt.

1b. Explain the difficulties of enforcing ethics in government

• Define government.
• What is the role of ethics in government action?
• Describe some ways the U.S. government tries to ensure its employees follow ethical standards?
• What is the relationship between individual action and public policymaking in the realm of ethics?
• Describe Max Weber's thoughts about ethics in politics.

Government is the political entity societies create to make decisions that will guide their collective life. This process involves an interplay between personal action and collective decisions.

This U.S. government attempts to ensure its employees and elected officials comply with ethical standards through a series of laws, agency-specific codes of conduct, and watchdog offices charged with investigating suspect conduct within a particular office or agency. 

The relationship between individual and collective ethics comes together in the realm of public policy. Here individuals bring their own ethical commitments to their jobs as legislators. A member of congress, for example, must decide when to hold firm to a principle and when to compromise to achieve a partial victory. The full process yields decisions that have ethics-based components, but do not always neatly reflect any one person's ethical sensibilities.

Max Weber (1864–1920), a German sociologist, philosopher, and political economist, is one of the most influential thinkers about the role of politics in the modern world. In his essay, "Politics as Vocation," Weber speaks about a variety of political ideologies that had become popular during his lifetime. His brand of politics is still with us today.

Review What is Government Ethics?; by Judy Nadler and Miriam Schulman; Doing the Job Right: Best Practices for Everyday Decision Making in the Public Sector by Judy Nadler; and Politics as a Vocation by Max Weber.

1c. Identify codes, statutes, and treaties that pertain to ethics

• Define a code of law, legal statute, and treaty.
• Define a code of ethics.
• Are codes of law, legal statutes, and treaties always ethical?
• Can you name some examples of actions that you feel we should perform for ethical reasons, but are not necessarily legal, illegal, or enforced by statute? 
• How and why do those who create statutes and treaties appeal to ethical standards when they encourage politicians and states to ratify them.

Most communities base the laws they create and codify, and the treaties they sign, on the moral codes of conduct they have agreed to follow as a society. For example, the laws the executive, legislative and judicial branches in the United States are based on the values the Founders upheld in Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Nevertheless, our legal and ethical standards do not always overlap: the difference can be sublime.

For example, some activities may be legal, but we no longer consider them to be ethical. American history is full of examples where the government failed to protect and actively violated the rights of minority populations. Examples include legal and legislative support for slavery, Jim Crow laws, and discrimination against native Americans and immigrant groups.

In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the practice of slavery in its decision Dred Scott v. Sanford, and slavery remained legal in many parts of the country although many Americans considered it to be immoral. The 13th Amendment did not abolish slavery until 1865 and, after it was ratified, many state governments quickly passed Jim Crow laws to allow injustices against minority populations to continue.

Likewise, many would argue that individual actions may be ethical, even if they are considered illegal. For example, many Americans believe they have a moral duty to help immigrants who are hurt, hungry, or abused, even if they have entered the country illegally. Others disagree and would argue that any effort to help an illegal immigrant is wrong due to the person's immigration status. In addition, anyone who offers assistance is also violating the law even if their intention is to do what they consider moral.

In the same vein, our laws do not always require us to act in a moral fashion. For example, we are not legally required to donate to a cause or help an elderly neighbor, although many would argue we should do so for ethical reasons.

Review Chapter 8: Ethics by Philip A. Pecorino; Human Rights by James Nickel; the U.S. Government Accountability Office code of conduct U.S. Government Ethics Standards; and Doing the Job Right: Best Practices for Everyday Decision Making in the Public Sector by Judy Nadler.

1d. Identify the respective roles of agencies with ethics oversight or enforcement authority

• Define ethics oversight and enforcement authority.
• What is the role of the Government Accountability Office in the United States?
• What are some ways that independent agencies ensure that ethical guidelines are being followed by the institutions they oversee? 
• What is the difference between congressional oversight committees and regulatory agencies?

Enforcing ethical standards on government agencies is a complicated and difficult task. The U.S. federal government divides this responsibility across a number of organizations: Congress, independent regulatory agencies, the press, and independent public watchdog groups all play a role in the endeavor. Additionally, some agencies have investigative and enforcement authority which enables them to levy fines or other penalties. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for example, can assess large fines to companies that do not comply with rules about air pollution.

Review more examples, such as the mission of the Government Accountability Office, in Doing the Job Right: Best Practices for Everyday Decision Making in the Public Sector by Judy Nadler; About GAO from the U.S. Government Accountability Office; and Politics as a Vocation by Max Weber.

1e. Describe the types of ethical issues that might arise for local, state, national, and international political leaders

• What is the relationship between ethics, human rights, and distributive justice?
• Briefly summarize the intellectual history of the concept of human rights.
• How does encouraging ethical activity differ on the international and domestic stage?
• What is the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Human rights is a 20th century notion that states all individuals possess specific rights, such as the right to live with dignity and respect, regardless of where they live or the type of government that rules their country. In other words, human rights are universal and apply to all humans at all times no matter what. In western thought, the concept of distributed justice goes back to Plato (429 BC–348 BC) the Greek philosopher. Distributive justice refers to the concept of fairness when distributing material goods, such as food, water, property, and money.

It can be difficult to define ethical standards and human rights in an international context, because no one person or entity has the legal or moral authority to define what these principles mean across country borders. While the terms are used widely and serve as a common point of reference for individuals from diverse societies, many disagree with what these concepts mean in specific detail.

For this reason, since its creation in 1945, groups of countries have met over the years under the auspices of the United Nations to craft shared agreements about the human rights every individual should enjoy and how governments should treat individuals around the world without exception. 

This Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) is especially important because it provides a foundation for our most popular understanding of human rights. To understand the context of today's human rights debates, you need to understand the contents of this document since it summarizes so many relevant ideas on the topic.

Review the reading Human Rights by James Nickel; The Universal Declaration of Human Rights from the United Nations; the report Human Rights in Brief from the U.S. State Department; the video 2009 Global Status of Human Rights from Amnesty International; and the reading International Distributive Justice.

Unit 1 Vocabulary

• Code
• Conservative
• Distributive justice
• Enforcement authority
• Ethics
• Ethics oversight
• Government
• Government Accountability Office (GAO)
• Human rights
• International law
• Law
• Liberal
• Max Weber
• Political view
• Societal norm
• Statute
• Treaty
• United Nations
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Unit 2: Theoretical Frameworks for Analyses of Ethical Dilemmas

2a. Identify key ethicists and the theories of their work

• Define virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, and the fairness approach.
• Explain why Plato and Aristotle believed that virtue ethics promote human flourishing (eudaimonia) or living a good life?
• Which ethical framework does Immanuel Kant use?
• Define, the good will, maxim and the categorical imperative.
• Which key thinkers best embodies the utilitarian approach?
• Define and compare hedonistic and idealistic utilitarianism.
• Define John Rawls's concept of justice as fairness and the original position.
• Describe the argument John Rawls used to defend his concept the fairness approach?

There are several approaches to ethics and this unit covers some major ethical frameworks, such as virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, and the fairness approach. We can differentiate these schools of thought by exploring their highest goal for an ethical system.

Virtue Ethics

Plato (c. 423–348 BC) and Aristotle (384–322 BC), the Greek philosophers, examined what it means to live virtuously, or in ways that will promote human flourishing (eudaimonia) or living a good life. These thinkers provided the foundation for what we call virtue ethics.

Aristotle considered courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom the most important virtues. Likewise, cultivating one's character involves learning to avoid the opposing vices: cowardice (or brashness), injustice, intemperance, and ignorance. These theories about virtue focus on the development and state of one's character. So, rather than simply learn moral rules, the virtue theorist focuses on learning to become a moral person, to develop a virtuous character.

Deontology

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), the German philosopher, believed that issues of morality depend on our intentions rather than the consequences of our actions. Even if we are completely ineffective in our efforts to do good, the good will is praiseworthy in itself. In other words, our intention is more important than the outcome. Kant uses the word, maxim, to identify the intentions or principles we use to guide our actions. For example, "Always put others first" or "Do whatever it takes to get ahead." People follow maxims to help them choose an appropriate action or response.

Kant's categorical imperative is about acting according to the right maxims. The morally-correct maxims are those which accord with our duty, rather than our inclinations. Kant ultimately claims that an action is morally correct, not only if it aligns with our duty, but if we do it for the sake of duty.

We derive the term, deontology from the Greek word for duty, deos. Deontological ethics is based on duty. Since Kant based his ethics solely in the concept of duty, or "doing the right thing," rather than consequences, his ethical theory provides the main foundation of deontological ethics. 

The maxim to do our duty, or do what is right, is the morally-correct action. We should not only act in the right way, we need to do so for the right reason. Kant believes that any being that has reason is a person and deserves a certain dignity. This dignity means a human being is an end-in-themselves, and not merely a useful tool for some other purpose, or as Kant describes it, "not merely as a means."

Utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), the English philosopher, was the first major philosopher to espouse the principle of utility and utilitarianism. He examined the moral consequences of our actions in addition to the intrinsic quality of the act.

Bentham believed that the right thing to do, individually and collectively, is to maximize the balance of pleasure over pain, and happiness over suffering, to promote the greatest good for the greatest number. He stated that it is preferable to act in ways that uphold "the greatest benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness ... to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness."

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), also an English philosopher, and Jeremy Bentham were both utilitarians, but they had different ideas about the specifics of utilitarianism. We could describe Bentham as a hedonistic utilitarian, and John Stuart Mill as an idealistic utilitarian, because Mill believed some pleasures are higher and more ethical than others.

Justice as Fairness

John Rawls (1921–2002), the American moral and political philosopher, argued that utilitarianism is incompatible with the democratic values of freedom and equal rights, and created a theory of justice based on the idea of a social contract between citizens and their government. He presented his concept of justice as fairness, the basis for a liberal and egalitarian society, in his book, A Theory of Justice.

The first principle is that everyone in society should be granted equal rights and basic human liberties. The second principle places certain restrictions on social and economic inequalities: 1. everyone should receive equal opportunity to attain any position; and 2. any inequalities should grant the "greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society."

Rawls defends his arguments with a hypothetical, social contract-type thought experiment, which he calls the original position, in which free, equal, rational, and unbiased individuals receive the opportunity to create the best possible society for themselves and everyone else. When given the choice, people living in the original position will choose to live in conditions of justice as fairness.

Review the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University.

Review these articles on the five ethical frameworks: Ethics and Virtue (virtue ethics), Rights (deontology), Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics (utilitarianism), The Common Good (the common good or communitarianism), and Justice and Fairness (justice as fairness approach), by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J. and Michael J. Meyer.

Review this lecture on Immanuel Kant's approach in Mind Your Motive by Michael Sandel, and Act in Accordance with Universal Law by Immanuel Kant.

Review this lecture on utilitarianism in Putting a Price Tag on Life/How to Measure Pleasure by Michael Sandel.

Review this lecture on the fairness or justice approach in A Lesson in Lying/A Deal is a Deal by Michael Sandel, and Rawls: The Original Position by John Kilcullen.

2b. Explain several frameworks for ethical decision making

• What is the ultimate goal of virtue ethics? 
• How does utilitarianism differ from the fairness approach to ethics?
• Define the common good or communitarian approach.
• What practical value does the common good approach seek to bring to ethical decisions?

The virtue approach focuses on the motivation of the actor, rather than the consequence. We should act in ways that align with our ideal virtues and provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues include our society's ideal representation of wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. "What kind of person will I become if I do this?" or "Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?"

The rights approach which focuses on maximizing access to human rights across the world, is the youngest of these schools of thought. This approach builds on Kant's argument that we have a duty to treat everyone with dignity because everyone is an end-in-themselves, or, as Kant would say, "not merely as a means."

The utilitarian approach focuses on consequences of actions rather than our motivation. A utilitarian should make a pleasure calculus and support the actions or activities that promote the most good and pleasure for the greatest number of people, and oppose actions or activities that cause them harm or pain. For a utilitarian, the end or final result justifies the means.

The fairness approach seeks to ensure that resources are distributed according to a sense of justice and fairness. For example, this approach wants to make sure workers are treated fairly, women receive equal pay for equal work, and that social status does not determine one's economic success.

The common good or communitarian approach seeks to maximize the value of the resources, spaces, and goods that positively impact the entire community. We should act in ways that reflect compassion and respect for others (especially the vulnerable), because supporting the community is good in itself. This ethical framework contains elements of utilitarianism, deontology and the fairness approach.

Review the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University; 

Review these articles on the five ethical frameworks: Ethics and Virtue (virtue ethics), Rights (deontology), Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics (utilitarianism), The Common Good (the common good or communitarianism), and Justice and Fairness (justice as fairness approach), by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J. and Michael J. Meyer.

Review this lecture on Immanuel Kant's approach in Mind Your Motive by Michael Sandel;

Act in Accordance with Universal Law by Immanuel Kant; 

Review Communitarianism by Daniel Bell; Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill; and Rawls: The Original Position by John Kilcullen.

2c. Discuss the application of these ethical frameworks to dilemmas seen by government policymakers

• Describe how government policymakers have used virtue ethics, deontological ethics, utilitarianism, and the fairness approach when making decisions and public policy. 
• What is the relationship between each ethical framework and public policy in the 21st century?

Individuals who work in government use their own personal ethical framework to make public policy decisions every day. Sometimes they base their decisions on their own ethical beliefs. At other times, their chain of command or the law dictates the specific framework they should use.

Regardless, it is impossible to make public policy choices without relying on some sort of ethical principles. Consequently, those who elect these public officials should try to understand what their government leaders value and the guiding principles they use to make public policy.

Review two different approaches to the same question: What is the Common Good from Fox News and What is the Common Good from the Center for American Progress; Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant; Principles of Morals and Legislation by Jeremy Bentham; and Rawls and the Original Position by John Kilcullen.

Unit 2 Vocabulary

• Aristotle
• Categorical imperative
• Common good 
• Communitarianism
• Deontology
• Deontological ethics
• Eudaimonia
• Fairness approach
• Hedonistic utilitarian
• Human flourishing
• Idealistic utilitarian
• Immanuel Kant
• Jeremey Bentham
• John Rawls
• John Stuart Mill
• Living the good life
• Maxim
• Original position
• Plato
• Pleasure calculus
• Rights approach
• The good will
• Utilitarianism
• Virtue ethics

Unit 3: Individual Liberty, Public Safety, and Justice

3a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of individual liberty

• Name three examples where judges may face a dilemma when interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
• Name some ways that the Second Amendment is controversial from a public safety standpoint.
• Describe an ethical dilemma policymakers face regarding illegal drug use.
• Describe an ethical dilemma policymakers face regarding illegal immigration.
• Describe some ethical shortcomings in how the American criminal justice system functions?

Individual liberty is the highest aim of the human rights approach to ethics and provides the dominant ethical framework for most of today's western democracies. While this approach provides people with a great deal of freedom, it also presents challenges when one person's rights infringe on the rights of another.

For example, should you use your right to freedom of speech to instill fear in another person, discriminate, jeopardize a business, or disrespect the American flag? Likewise, do you have the right to promote certain religious beliefs in a way that conflicts with another person's right to equal treatment? The examples are endless. Having a rights-based society requires finding ways to navigate these difficult questions.

Review the following readings which discuss the individual rights mentioned above in detail.

• Exceptions to the First Amendment by Henry Cohen; Free Speech David Edmonds, Nigel Warburton, and Thomas Scanlon; and Texas v. Johnson which discusses the Supreme Court case on whether protesters have the right to burn the American flag;
• Gun Control Legislation by William J. Krause, and the video Gun Control.
• Legalizing Marijuana;
• What Are the Solutions to Illegal Immigration in America? and Immigration by Christopher Heath Wellman;
• Should Felons be Allowed to Vote? and the video Prisoner Reentry.

3b. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of public safety

• Explain how the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution presents a dilemma between individual rights and concerns for public safety.
• Should governments have the authority to restrict an individual's right to use certain drugs in their home if they do not infringe on anyone else's rights?
• Should governments have the authority to incarcerate drug dealers to promote public safety?
• Should governments have the authority to incarcerate individuals who enter the United States illegally, to promote public safety? What if data shows immigrants do not pose a risk to public safety?
• Are juveniles responsible for their crimes? Should the government have the authority to incarcerate juveniles or abrogate their personal freedoms, to promote public safety? 
• How about the death penalty? Should the government have the authority to execute individuals (abrogating their ultimate right–to live) for purposes of retribution or to deter crime?

Sometimes the right an individual has to act in a certain way conflicts with public safety. In these cases, many policymakers feel they have the right to abrogate individual liberties to protect the public well-being. But does the punishment fit the crime or justify taking away the perpetrator's rights, is it simple retribution to make the victim feel better, or will it prevent future crimes?

For example, is the personal, private use of marijuana a public safety issue? Does it matter if the personal, private use is for medical or recreational purposes? Does your ethical calculus change when we talk about the public use of marijuana, such as smoking in a public park? Think about how one person's rights may infringe on the rights of others. Does your ethical calculus change when we talk about distributing or selling marijuana to others? Why why not?

From a practical perspective, let's talk about the effectiveness of your solution. What if criminalizing the activity is not effective, or it exacerbates or creates more dangerous societal problems, such as drug trafficking and drug cartels.

Does your ethical perspective change based on the practical results of your ethical calculation? For example, for years governments trusted large U.S. pharmaceutical companies to market and distribute opioids in an ethical manner to patients and doctors. These companies were allowed to freely and legally market their prescription drugs to Americans to communities that now struggle with a costly, deadly, and widespread opioid addiction crisis. Did those who worked at these companies operate ethically? Should the government punish U.S. pharmaceutical companies in the same way they have punished illegal drug dealers who were incarcerated for distributing marijuana, cocaine, and heroin? Both sellers were out to make money.

Try asking similar questions for the other issues below: gun control, illegal immigration, the death penalty, and juvenile sentencing. In U.S. legal terms, a juvenile is someone who is younger than 18 years old.

Review the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University.

Review the following readings which discuss these ethicals dilemmas in detail.

• Issues in a Liberal Society: Gun Control by Elijah Weber;
• What Are the Solutions to Illegal Immigration in America?;
• Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency; and
• Should the Death Penalty be Allowed?;
• Juvenile Sentencing Decision.

3c. Analyze how ethical dilemmas involving issues of individual liberty or public safety may be resolved under various ethical decision-making frameworks

• How would a virtue ethicist respond to the issue of illegal immigration?
• What does utilitarianism have to say regarding drug legalization? 
• Would a policymaker focused on the rights approach to ethics want felons to vote?
• How would the common good approach change the First or Second Amendments?

Applying the various ethical frameworks to particular issues of public policy is the fundamental work of government officials. Since these questions often involve balancing multiple interests (what is considered good for one person, group, or the entire population) policymakers use their own ethical frameworks to make their judgements.

A policymaker who is a follower of virtue ethics will focus on acting in a way that is right and just, in a way that promotes their concept of the right thing to do. For example, they will choose the option that resembles their society's ideal representation of courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom.

A policymaker who is a follower of utilitarianism will choose the path that benefits the greatest number of people and promotes the most happiness. They will choose the option where the majority will benefit. 

The policymaker who follows a fairness approach wants to ensure recipients are treated fairly, regardless of whether they are in the majority. They will choose the option where members of the entire community benefit in some way, not simply the majority.

Review the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University.

Review these articles on the five ethical frameworks: Ethics and Virtue (virtue ethics), Rights (deontology), Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics (utilitarianism), The Common Good (the common good or communitarianism), and Justice and Fairness (justice as fairness approach), by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J. and Michael J. Meyer.

Review the appropriate resources listed in Unit 2 to help think about how different ethical framework approaches would approach particular questions of public policy.

Unit 3 Vocabulary

• Drug legalization
• Ethical dilemma
• Felon voting
• First Amendment
• Free speech
• Gun control
• Illegal immigration
• Juvenile
• Juvenile sentencing
• Second Amendment
• Texas v. Johnson

Unit 4: Income Taxation, EEO Compliance, and Affirmative Action

4a. Identify the legal bases for affirmative action and imposition of income taxes in the United States

• Why was affirmative action introduced in the United States?
• Define Jim Crow Law.
• Define employment discrimination and explain the role of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
• What do incomes taxes pay for in the United States? 
• What reasons did policymakers give for beginning each of these programs? 

Unit four explores three examples of government intervention in the lives of citizens to promote the common good: affirmative action, equal employment opportunity (EEO) compliance, and income taxes.

Affirmative action refers to government policies that promote members of minority groups who have suffered from past discrimination, such as by providing access to education and employment opportunities. Affirmative action laws are designed to ensure employers take extra steps to ensure minority job applicants have a fair chance. 

The John F. Kennedy administration introduced the term affirmative action with an executive order it issued in 1961 that required government contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."

In 1965 Congress created the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC, to investigate claims of employment discrimination and ensure federal laws prohibiting these practices are enforced. For example, if the EEOC has reason to suspect an employer is responsible for discriminating against its job applicants or employees based on their race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information, it will collect evidence to support its case and can legally punish or sue the employer.

The EEOC outlines the rights and responsibilities of employees and employers on its Web site, although employee rights can vary depending on the type of employer, the number of employees the business or organization employs, and the type of discrimination alleged.

Governments impose income taxes to help promote programs and services designed to help the entire community. For example, the U.S. government uses the taxes it raises to pay for the government services in provides, invest in current and future public programs, and slow the growth of the national debt.

Before Congress and the states ratified a federal income tax with the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1913, the federal government relied on sales and property taxes to pay for its programs and services. However, Americans were required to pay a federal income tax during the Civil War (1861–1865) and in 1890. 

Review Affirmative Action by Robert Fullinwider; and Laws and Guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Income Tax: A Law Overview by James M. Bickley; the chapters Financing Government and Income Inequality.

4b. Explain arguments and proposals for reform of affirmative action and imposition of income taxes in the United States

• What role does Grutter v. Bollinger play in affirmative action reform efforts?
• What has the U.S. Supreme Court said about the value of diversity in judging affirmative action cases?
• What are some current proposals to reform income taxes in the United States?
• Name some legislation Congress has passed to protect equal opportunity in the workplace.
• Define racial quota.
• In what ways does diversity in the workplace benefit businesses?
• What is the role of equity in reforming income tax policy?
• Define sales, excise and income tax.
• Define regressive and progressive income tax.
• How can governments make income taxes more fair?

Affirmative Action

The policymakers who created affirmative action policies, equal opportunity laws, and federal income taxes in the United States argued that their goal was to promote principles of equity, fairness, and efficiency in their communities. They focused on the need to promote and maintain the public good and minimize costs to individuals. Since the practical application and effectiveness of these federal mandates has varied in practice, policymakers have made periodic adjustments to these laws at the state and federal levels. They have proven to be quite controversial.

Affirmative action policies aim to address the effects of ongoing and past social and economic discrimination which have stymied minority communities for generations. For example, due to past slavery and the Jim Crow laws that still persist in come regions of the country, many African Americans are still unable to obtain bank loans to buy houses or grow their businesses. Many cannot get good jobs despite their qualifications, continue to experience substandard schools, and are incarcerated at much higher rates than white Americans for committing the same crimes.

On the other hand, affirmative action policies can create feelings of anger and resentment among members of the white community who argue the laws unfairly support discriminatory practices against themselves when they were not personally responsible for the injustices that occurred in the past.

In the past educational institutions and businesses used racial quotas, meaning they reserved a specific number of places or staff positions for individuals from certain minority groups. While the Supreme Court rejected the use of strict racial quotas in the case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), a majority of the justices supported the concept of promoting affirmative action for individuals as long as race was one of many other admissions criteria.

The justices also upheld affirmative action in the case Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). Colleges can consider race when choosing whether to admit an individual applicant, but a college cannot simply accept every minority applicant on the basis of race alone.

Equal Opportunity in the Workplace

Today, most communities and businesses recognize the importance of creating and supporting equal opportunity in the workplace. The practice not only supports the idea of equality, fairness, and social justice, but it makes practical business sense. As our population becomes more culturally diverse, global and dynamic, creating a more inclusive workplace environment that welcomes all types of employees who have different ideas can generate an economic and competitive advantage.

New and diverse perspectives, ideas, and strategies foster creative decision making and problem solving, companies can, in turn, understand their diverse clientele more readily, and employees feel more comfortable and welcome in a friendlier, more open work environment.

Nevertheless, American business managers are legally required to promote anti-discriminatory practices. Those who fail to comply with equal employment opportunity laws, risk running afoul of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination Act of 1967, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 and the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.

Income Taxes vs. Sales and Excise Taxes

Before the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913, those who supported creating a national income tax argued it was unfair to rely on working class Americans and businesses to pay for government services when the entire community benefits. They argued that everyone should be required to pay taxes accordingly.

Sales and excise taxes on particular goods and services are inherently regressive, which means they disproportionately hurt poor individuals. In other words, it is more difficult for someone who earns less money to pay the extra sales tax amount, but easier for a wealthy individual. For example, it is unfair that someone who earns $200 a week is forced to struggle to pay $10 in sales taxes for an item they need, while someone who earns $2,000 a week hardly has to think twice about the payment. The $10 is a large percentage of a poor person's paycheck, but a minor percentage of the wealthy individual's income.

A progressive income tax system adjusts the amount due to each taxpayer's annual income level. So someone who earns below the poverty line pays little, if any, taxes, while someone who is wealthy pays a higher percentage of their income. Many say this type of system asks each person to pay their fair share because it they contribute according to how much they can afford.

A proportional income tax levies the same percentage of tax on all taxpayers, regardless of their income. For example, everyone would be required to pay 25 percent of their income regardless of whether they have an annual income of $25,000 or $300,000.

Some argue this system is more fair, since everyone pays the same percentage of their income. However, others argue it hurts poor individuals more dearly since, as with the sales and excise taxes, a poor person will likely struggle to generate even this small amount because they have a hard time paying for their most basic needs at this income level. Meanwhile, a rich person can easily afford the extra amount due.

As with affirmative action and equal opportunity laws, income and business taxes can be quite controversial. Wealthy individuals argue they should not have to pay more: they deserve to enjoy the wealth they earned. The higher tax rates discourage U.S. investment, as companies move their operations abroad to avoid paying U.S. taxes. Others argue the system is unfair for other reasons. Since the government does not enforce its tax laws, wealthy individuals take advantage of legal exceptions and tax loopholes that allow them to avoid paying their fair share. 

Review the Supreme Court case Grutter v. Bollinger in Affirmative Action by Robert Fullinwider; Basics of Employment Discrimnation Law for Law Clerks from the Federal Judicial Center;

Tax Reform: An Overview of Proposals in the 112th Congress by James M. Bickley; and

Arguing Affirmative Action/What's the Purpose? by Michael Sandel.

4c. Assess the frameworks through which dilemmas involving affirmative action and imposition of income taxes can be effectively analyzed

• What are some ethical dilemmas involving affirmative action?
• Name one ethical dilemma regarding income tax policy. 

We usually think about an ethical dilemma as a situation where there are no morally good alternatives   where an individual must choose between two or more options that present consequences that are both undesirable. However, life is usually more complicated and nuanced. The consequences of our choices   the beneficial and negative results of the dilemmas we confront   are not always readily apparent or easy to decipher as completely right or wrong.

A policymaker who follows virtue ethics will focus on acting in a way that is right and just, in a way that promotes their concept of the right thing to do. For example, they will choose the option that resembles their society's ideal representation of courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom. Would a virtue ethicist support affirmative action? How about an income tax policy?

A policymaker who follows utilitarianism will choose the path that benefits the greatest number of people and promotes the most happiness. They will choose the option where the majority benefits. Would a utilitarian support affirmative action? How about an income tax policy?

A policymaker who follows a fairness approach wants to ensure recipients are treated fairly, regardless of whether they are in the majority. They will choose the option where members of the community benefit in some way, not simply the majority. Would someone who promotes a fairness approach support affirmative action? How about an income tax policy?

These are the questions you will examine throughout this course as we explore the ethical dilemmas and issues policymakers must grapple with on a daily basis.

Review the video Five Ways to Think Ethically and follow up article A Framework for Ethical Decision Making from Santa Clara University; 

Review these articles on the five ethical frameworks: Ethics and Virtue (virtue ethics), Rights (deontology), Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics (utilitarianism), The Common Good (the common good or communitarianism), and Justice and Fairness (justice as fairness approach), by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J. and Michael J. Meyer.

Review the lecture Arguing Affirmative Action/What's the Purpose? by Michael Sandel, Laws and Guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Comparing Regressive, Progressive, and Proportional Taxes from the Internal Revenue Service.

Review the appropriate resources listed in Unit 3 to help think about how different ethical framework approaches would approach particular questions of public policy.

Unit 4 Vocabulary

• 16th Amendment
• Affirmative action
• Diversity
• Efficiency
• Equal opportunity
• Equity
• Employment discrimination
• Excise tax
• Fair share
• Grutter v. Bollinger
• Income tax
• Progressive income taxes
• Proportional taxes
• Racial quota 
• Reform
• Regressive income tax
• Sales tax
• U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
• U.S. Supreme Court

Unit 5: Care for the Poor, Sick, Elderly, and Infirm

5a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of caring for the poor, sick, elderly, and infirm

• How do lawmakers and officials justify taking from some in the form of taxes to give to those who need assistance?
• In what ways are programs that care for the poor, sick, elderly and infirm, examples of distributive justice.
• What are the ethical and legal limitations on these programs?
• Explain the difference between entitlement programs and discretionary spending programs in the United States.
• Describe some groups in America that are most vulnerable and in need of social programs. 
• What are the main arguments for and against treating healthcare-as-a-right?

Poverty and sickness can impact anyone at any time, but they are chronically persistent among the elderly and other vulnerable populations. Do governments have a social responsibility to help individuals who are poor, suffer from medical conditions, or failed to save for retirement? This unit traces some arguments from the left and the right about the causes of and solutions to these problems.

The reading Historical Background and Development of Social Security explains that President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Congress passed the Social Security Act in 1935 to help Americans meet the economic uncertainties the elderly face "brought on by unemployment, illness, disability, death and old age." "In addition to the program we now think of as Social Security, it included unemployment insurance, old-age assistance, aid to dependent children and grants to the states to provide various forms of medical care."

We call Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, most Veterans' Administration programs, federal employee and military retirement plans, unemployment compensation, food stamps, and agricultural price support entitlement programs because Congress has guaranteed or mandated this spending to benefit particular groups and segments of the population. Discretionary spending programs refers to programs Congress approves every year through its appropriation process.

Opponents of these programs often argue that social security and other social government programs are too large, too expensive, and will soon be bankrupt anyway, but they rarely address the ethical basis for why society should, or should not, support these programs. On the other hand, supporters tend to argue the government has an ethical responsibility for supporting the poor, sick, elderly and infirm, but they frequently ignore the financial implications of providing these services.

In the video Social Security Myth Milton Friedman says government programs have become too large and should not be responsible for providing social services to Americans, who never demanded these programs in the first place. He argues that special propaganda groups from Madison Avenue who wanted to see an expansion in the role of government convinced Americans to demand these services in the 1930's. The video Social Security Empty? from the PBS Nightly Business Report says this government program will be bankrupt soon anyway.

Some policymakers believe government involvement is essential to addressing these problems, while others believe the private sector should provide the solutions.

Do governments have a moral duty to help the poor, sick, elderly, and infirm as a deontologist would likely argue? Do members of groups who protest the size of government speak from a different ethical framework than those who support these programs? Do you think supporters of social security and healthcare could better sway opponents if they can convince opponents they can run these programs more efficiently and effectively? In what ways are economic efficiency and costs to the taxpayer relevant to ethical policy making?

Review distributive justice in Unit 1 and in the reading Distributive Justice by Julian Lamont and Christi Favor.

These websites features opinions about whether government should provide social security to retirees Should Social Security Be Privatized? and Should All Americans Have the Right (be Entitled) to Health Care?.

Marian Wright Edelman argues that we should invest in our children for ethical, religious and practical reasons in A Course for the Next Generation.

5b. Analyze how ethical dilemmas involving issues of caring for the poor, sick, elderly, and infirm may be resolved under various ethical decision-making frameworks

• Describe a moral dilemma related to physician-assisted suicide?
• Describe a moral dilemma related to involuntary commitment?
• Describe a moral dilemma related to homelessness?
• What would someone who values distributive justice think about America's healthcare system?

Governments continue to struggle with many moral or ethical dilemmas, such as physician-assisted suicide, involuntary commitment, and homelessness.

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

For example, in the case of physician-assisted suicide, should governments have the right to prevent a mentally-competent adult, who is suffering from a terminal illness, from being able to follow through on a decision to end their own life, safely and painlessly in the comfort of their own home? These patients argue that their action will not infringe on the rights of others, and that they should have the right to make their own end-of-life decisions without government interference. Does the government have a moral duty to protect these individuals in any way? Do they require protection?

Review these articles which discuss different moral perspectives in Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?

In the 1960's many states began deinstitutionalizing their mental hospitals for economic and civil rights reasons. Many of these institutions were in such poor condition that they discharged their patients and closed their facilities, which meant many people with mental illnesses no longer received regular psychiatric treatment and became homeless. Many were incarcerated for committing petty crimes.

Should governments have the right to detain an adult who does not wish to stay in a hospital, even when they may be mentally incompetent? Should hospitals have the right to force individuals to take medicine that may help them? What if the patient is causing harm to themselves, but not to others? What if the patient may hurt others, but has not committed a crime?

The article Involuntary Commitment by Alicia Curtis examines whether governments should detain mentally ill patients without their consent.

Curtis describes the many U.S. veterans who are homeless and suffer from mental health issues. Does the government have a moral duty to house and treat these individuals who served their country? What if they have incurred injuries that prevent them from working in another capacity? Does the government have an equal duty to help homeless individuals who did not serve in the military?

Background and Statistics from the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans.

Unit 5 Vocabulary

• Discretionary spending
• Distributive justice
• Entitlement program
• Healthcare-as-a-right
• Homelessness
• Involuntary commitment
• Physician-assisted suicide
• Private sector
• Privatization of social security
• Social security
• Stratification
• Subsidies
• Veteran

Unit 6: Issues Involving Families and Relationships

6a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of marriage, cohabitation, custody, divorce, adoption, and other personal relationships

• What are some ethical issues policymakers may need to consider when creating policies regarding divorce?
• What is the connection between interracial marriage and same sex marriage in U.S. legal history?
• What is the connection between contraception and abortion in U.S. legal history? 

In this unit, we explore ethical dilemmas that relate to personal liberties, such as interracial marriage, LGBTQ rights and same-sex marriage, custody, adoption and the well-being of children, surrogate motherhood, contraception, and abortion.

Making laws and policies that pertain to marriage and personal relationships are controversial because they concern topics related to the personal and religious experiences of individuals. These policies frequently affect our every-day lives and can be quite emotional.

Do policymakers have the right to restrict the rights of individuals from participating in activities they believe are immoral, even when the so-called guilty party is not infringing on the rights of others? Perhaps these infringements on our rights are subtle, hidden, or do not affect us personally, but infringe on the rights of our family, friends, coworkers, and fellow citizens.

Do the rights of the majority always win as a utilitarian would have it? What about the rights of those who are in the minority? Do citizens have the right to prevent policymakers from using their tax dollars to support activities they oppose for religious or moral reasons?

What if policymakers feel they have a duty to protect their constituents against the crimes of divorce, interracial marriage, same sex marriage, or abortion, even when they are not personally affected? Are these activities crimes when no one is harmed?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy by John Christman; the Supreme Court decision on interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia; the lecture Debating Same-Sex Marriage/the Good Life by Michael Sandel; the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision on same sex marriage in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health; the compendium of articles Should Gay Marriage be Legal?; the Supreme Court decision on contraception in Griswold v. Connecticut; and the website Should Abortion be Legal?.

6b. Analyze ethical dilemmas involving issues of marriage, cohabitation, custody, divorce, adoption, and other personal relationships

• What rights should grandparents have related to the children of divorced parents?
• How does surrogate motherhood and genetically-engineered children present ethical dilemmas to policymakers?
• What is the significance of Lawrence v. Texas in the eventual legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States?
• What is one way policymakers can take the rights of mothers and unborn children into account when making policies related to abortion? Is a fetus an unborn child?

Policymakers face ethical dilemmas when they legislate on issues related to personal relationships because they can promote conflicts among the rights of individuals. For example, can a court invalidate a legal contract (ignoring the rights of the surrogate parents who signed it), to support the rights of a surrogate mother who willingly (or unwillingly) signed away her parental rights? Can a court remove the parental rights of a mother, to award child custody to the father because he and the court believe she has been a bad mother? What about the rights of other stakeholders, such as the child's grandparents?

What about the rights of a couple who wants access to contraception, or the rights of a couple who wants to have an abortion due to an unplanned pregnancy? Does the ethical rational change if the woman would like to abort a pregnancy caused by rape or incest? What if the woman's doctors predict she will surely die in childbirth if she does not have an abortion? Does the fetus have any rights in any of these cases? What role does religious belief have in this discussion?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy by John Christman; the decision of the Superior Court of New Jersey regarding the rights of surrogate mothers In the Matter of Baby 'M' (1988); the decision of the Supreme Court of North Carolina regarding parental rights in Speagle v. Seitz; and the article on the rights of grandparents in Grandparents Affected by Parental Divorce: A Population at Risk? by Jane E. Myers.

Review the discussion Contraception and Abortion by Elizabeth Collins, the Supreme Court decision on contraception in Griswold v. Connecticut; the website Should Abortion be Legal?.

Unit 6 Vocabulary

• Abortion
• Contraception
• Divorce
• Fetus
• Genetic engineering
• Interracial marriage 
• Lawrence v. Texas
• LGBTQ rights
• Same sex marriage
• Surrogate motherhood

Unit 7: National Security

7a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of national security, military affairs, intelligence operations, and war

• Define and explain the relationship between war and ethics.
• What are some of the main ethical questions relating to the use of chemical and nuclear weapons?
• What role does international law play in the ethics of war?
• What is the difference between prisoners of war and enemy combatants?
• How should policymakers differentiate between soldiers and civilians?
• Define the military policy from 1993 to 2011 regarding LGBTQ soldiers, don't ask don't tell (DADT).

While some consider wartime to be a time when combatants ignore societal and ethical rules and conventions, policymakers have long attempted to create rules to make warfare more ethical. Examples of ethical dilemmas include defining legitimate military targets, how to create international laws on the rules of warfare, and the place of nuclear weapons in modern conflict.

For example, is a military base that includes soldiers and civilian workers a legitimate military target? How about a hospital or school? Is it ever ethical for a country to use chemical or nuclear weapons? Should soldiers be allowed to torture, maim, or kill an unarmed prisoner of war? How about a child soldier who was drafted into the army? Should military leaders or politicians have the right to restrict the rights of LGBTQ soldiers who want to serve their country?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review the articles on this website Ethics of War; Precision Attack and International Humanitarian Law by Michael N. Schmitt; Enemy Combatant Detainees by Jennifer Elsea and Michael John Garcia; and Ethical Issues in Counterterrorism Warfare by Martin Cook, and Homosexuals and the U.S. Military: Current Issues by David F. Burrelli and Jody Feder.

7b. Analyze ethical dilemmas involving issues of national security, military affairs, intelligence operations, and war

• Define national security.
• Define and describe the difference between a state actor and a terrorist organization. 
• Define and describe the ethical issues related to torture.
• Define and describe the ethical dilemma psychologists face when asked to participate in enhanced interrogation techniques.

• What role do global institutions, such as the United Nations International Court of Justice, play in deciding questions about human rights, humanitarian concerns, and warfare? What limitations do these arbiters of human rights face in the international arena?

Identifying ethical dilemmas related to national security is relatively easy since there are few easy answers. For example, should policymakers consider national security issues when making ethical decisions about chemical and nuclear weapons or torture? What are the limits of human rights, humanitarian concerns, and international law when it comes to warfare? 

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review The Problem of Dirty Hands by C.A.J. Coady; the Supreme Court case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld; The War on Terrorism: Its Moral Justification and Limits by Peter Simpson; and The Moral Debate about Torture with Shaun Casey and Jean Bethke Elshtain.

Unit 7 Vocabulary

• Chemical weapons
• Civilian
• Don't ask, don't tell (DADT)
• Enemy combatant
• Enhanced interrogation techniques
• Humanitarian concern
• Human rights
• International court of justice
• International law
• Legitimate military targets
• National security
• Nuclear weapons
• Prisoners of war
• State actor
• Terrorist organization
• Torture
• United Nations International Court of Justice
• War

Unit 8: Foreign Relations, Foreign Trade, Foreign Aid, and Military Intervention

8a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of foreign relations, foreign aid, foreign trade, and foreign intervention

• What is the role of hegemony in the formation of U.S. foreign policy?
• What are some impacts of free trade agreements on the ethical content of foreign policy?
• What are some considerations policymakers should keep in mind when weighing an intervention for humanitarian reasons? 
• Describe the ethical conundrum of loyalty to one's state in foreign policy. 

Foreign policy decision making is complicated because it involves the citizens and resources of your own country in addition to those who live in foreign states. For example, deciding whether to launch a humanitarian intervention on ethical grounds is complex: What problem will the intervention solve, what new problems will result, and how do the relevant stakeholders feel about the intervention? How do the citizens in your country feel about expending resources on people who live outside their borders?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review the lecture The Claims of Community/Where Our Loyalty Lies by Michael Sandel; Foreign Aid: An Introduction to U.S. Programs and Policy by Curt Tarnoff and Marian Leonardo Lawson; and The Millenium Development Goals by Luisa Blanchfield and Marian Leonardo Lawson.

8b. Analyze ethical dilemmas involving issues of foreign relations, foreign aid, foreign trade, and foreign intervention

• What are some ways that public diplomacy can be used ethically or unethically?
• Describe some of the main ethical concerns policymakers have with administering a foreign aid program fairly.
• What is one way that John Rawls would approach the question of how to structure global trade fairly?
• Describe the ethical concern at the heart of the debate about Chinese currency manipulation.

Some of the most complicated analysis in this course comes in this unit. It is not easy to determine what is fair in foreign aid programs since policymakers need to balance the needs of citizens at home versus the plight of those abroad, prioritize the types of aid needed, and calculate how much will be most effective.

For example, should Americans view themselves as global citizens which implies they have responsibilities to the people who are part of the global community, such as to promote human rights, provide humanitarian assistance, protect the global environment, preserve cultural diversity, support gender equality, reduce warfare, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction?

Trade is another area where ethical concerns can be confusing. Should we promote free trade because it increases the wealth of the most successful companies and individuals, or should we support other economic systems that distribute wealth in a more just fashion, so the more people benefit, but the richest citizens may not earn quite as much?

Countries often manipulate the foreign currency exchange market: they devalue the value of their currency to boost their exports. Policymakers who support free trade claim this practice is unethical because it undercuts their sales while the goods of their competitors become cheaper for foreign countries to buy according to the exchange rate. Nevertheless, many countries are guilty of this practice. They would ask whether it is wrong to take steps to support the businesses and workers who reside in your own country.

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review the brief video Moral Questions and the Libya Intervention; the article No Good Comes from Not Intervening by Nicholas Fotion; international human rights issues in Ethical Problems in Globalization with Wilhelm Vossenkuhl; and Chinese Currency and Ethics from the Carnegie Council.

Unit 8 Vocabulary

• Currency manipulation
• Foreign aid program
• Free trade agreements
• Global citizens
• Global trade
• Hegemony
• Humanitarian intervention
• Intervention
• loyalty state
• John Rawls
• Public diplomacy

Unit 9: Science, Technology, and Commerce

9a. Identify ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of science, technology, and commerce

• From an ethical perspective, why did the U.S. federal government support the automotive bailout in 2008? 
• Describe the ethical concerns policymakers face regarding laws that enforce mandatory vaccination.
• Define and describe some ethically-based arguments for and against net neutrality.
• Define and describe some ethically-based arguments for and against genetic screening and privacy concerns related to social media? 

With advances in technology and science, policymakers face complex questions about widespread economic loss, health and medicine, access to the Internet, and Internet privacy issues.

For example, should President Barack Obama have used public money to save the U.S. automotive industry when it threatened to collapse in 2008. Millions of American jobs were at stake since the industry affected so many additional small and large automotive suppliers and vendors. In this case, the industry eventually repaid the money it had borrowed from the government, but what if it had not survived despite the bailout? Did the policymakers who supported the president act ethically?

Should local governments and school administrators force parents to vaccinate their school-age children against contagious diseases that once plagued our communities, to protect infants and other vulnerable populations that cannot take these preventative medicines?

Should the Federal Communications Commission require Internet Service Providers to allow free and unfettered access to the Internet, including those who cannot afford to pay higher fees to use more bandwidth, under the auspices of net neutrality? Will charging higher rates to nonprofit organizations and other users who cannot afford to pay more cause the Internet to collapse and ruin this vital public communication tool for everyone?

What about privacy rights issues related to genetic screening and the way social media networks track and store our personal information. Alan Wertheimer defines exploitation as a situation where someone takes unfair advantage of another person and uses their vulnerability for one's own benefit. We generally assume this practice unethical, but what about when an individual or government uses the information it obtains for the common good?

For example, should policymakers allow police investigators to use what they learn through genetic screening and social media to solve crimes or anticipate where criminal activity may occur? Do you think your opinion would change if you happen to be a member of the minority group they happen to target?

How about when insurance companies use the health information they obtained through this genetic screening or your social media account to calculate your annual insurance premium? Does it matter that if the news they obtained is good, they may charge you a lower insurance rate, but they may charge you more if the news is bad?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review Should the Big Three Car Manufacturers Be Bailed Out by the US Government?; Mandatory Vaccinations: Precedent and Current Law by Kathleen Swendiman; Net Neutrality by Bill Moyers; The Ethics and Politics of Search Engines from Santa Clara University; Exploitation by Alan Wertheimer; Privacy: Electronic Information and the Individual by Joseph Westfall; and What We Know Outstrips What We Can Do by Margaret McLean.

9b. Analyze ethical dilemmas involving issues of science, technology, and commerce

• What is the meaning of exploitation in the context of the free market?
• Define and describe some ethically-based arguments for and against genetically-modified food.
• What is one ethical concern with today's pharmaceutical industry.
• What is one way that advanced genetic screening could be used for good and one way it could be used poorly? 

Analyzing ethical problems in the fields of medicine, privacy, and the economy requires policymakers to understand complex technical details and maintain a big-picture view, so they do not lose sight of the human concerns in play.

For example, making an informed decision about the legality of stem cell research, requires policymakers to understand how stem cell research works, what the research scientist hopes to achieve, and the potential benefits and costs to the community.

As we explored above, exploitation describes a situation where someone takes unfair advantage of another person and uses their vulnerability for one's own benefit. We generally assume exploitation is unethical, but what about when an individual, scientist or the government uses the information it obtains about one person to support the common good, whether to support the free market or a medical treatment? Does the end justify the means or deem the practice ethical?

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review Exploitation by Alan Wertheimer; the video Ethical/Policy Challenges of Advanced Genetic Screening by Edward McCabe; perspectives on cloning in Double or Nothing by Robin Sterns; the pros and cons of genetic testing in Neuroethics: The Neuroscience Revolution, Ethics, and Law by Henry Greely; and creating trust in business relationships in How Trust is Achieved in Free Markets by Daniel Klein.

Unit 9 Vocabulary

• Advanced genetic screening
• Automotive bailout
• Exploitation
• Free market
• Genetically modified food
• Genetic screening
• Mandatory vaccination
• Net neutrality
• Pharmaceutical industry
• Privacy rights issue
• Required genetic screening
• Social media networks
• Stem cell research

Unit 10: Daily Operations of Government, Lobbying, Campaigns and Elections

10a. Identify and analyze ethical dilemmas that policymakers may face in dealing with issues of daily operations of government, lobbying, campaigns, and elections

• Define what a whistleblower does and the protections they have according to U.S. law.
• Discuss the relationship between cronyism and nepotism.
• Name some ways lobbyists can do their jobs ethically. 
• What are the major ethical concerns regarding America's system of campaign finance?
• What is the role of government oversight and how does it work? 
• What are some ethical problems with public pensions and they way they are managed? 

This last unit covers the basic functions of government. We explore the ethical concerns politicians experience in government operations, lobbying, campaigning, and elections. We consider how policymakers can govern in an ethical manner. 

In the video, "What is Government Ethics," Hana Callaghan says a public servant should act in the interest of the common good. They have a duty to put the public interest before their own; to treat constituents equally, with fairness and impartiality, regardless of their party or whom they voted for; to act competently and obey the law; to be transparent and act with accountability; to campaign in an ethical manner; to reduce the public vitriol; and, to be available for respectful political discussion.

A key takeaway is that lobbying is unavoidable and poses many ethical challenges. While lobbying can open the public discourse, provide a productive way for citizens involved in interest groups to present their case, and help policymakers make informed decisions, it can also provide an avenue for corruption. It can be difficult to enforce protections against abuses, such as bribery, cronyism, nepotism, conflicts of interest, and other forms of government corruption.

Support for whistleblowers is an American tradition which protects those who call attention to ethical wrongdoing that occurs within an organization. These individuals should "blow the whistle" in four ways according to the Government Accountability Project: 1. report wrongdoing or a violation of the law to the relevant supervisor, hotline, or inspector general; 2. refuse to participate in workplace wrongdoing; 3. testify in a legal proceeding; and, 4. leak evidence of wrongdoing to the media.

In a controversial decision in 2010, the Supreme Court struck down a ban the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 imposed on independent political expenditures. The justices held that corporations have a First Amendment right to make political contributions in its decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. 

Review these questions from the framework of someone who supports 1. virtue ethics (Aristotle), 2. deontology (Kant), 3. utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), 4. the common good and 5. a fairness approach (Rawls).

Review the video What is Government Ethics?, the articles Whistle Blowing in the Public Sector, Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism, Lobbying Ethics, Gifts and Bribes, and by Judy Nadler and Miriam Schulman; the lecture Can the Government be Trusted to Oversee Itself? by Melanie Sloan; Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech with Bradley Smith; the controversial Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission; and the ethics of public pensions Thinking Ethically about Government Pensions by Miriam Schulman.

Unit 10 Vocabulary

• Campaign finance
• Cronyism
• Government oversight
• Lobbyist
• Nepotism
• Public pensions
• Whistleblower