POLSC232 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
• 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: American Political Foundations

1a. Distinguish the distribution and use of power within different forms of government

• What are power and political legitimacy?
• What are Weber's three types of legitimate authority?
• Why is rational-legal authority often more stable than charismatic authority?

To understand politics and the American government, we need to define power, which is the ability of an individual to influence the behavior of others despite resistance or disagreement. Max Weber (1864–1920), the German sociologist, distinguished three types of political legitimacy (where citizens or other types of followers deem the authority, and their use of power, just and appropriate).

1. Leaders derive rational-legal authority from the acceptance of citizens for the authority and rules of certain organizations or institutions and the organizational structures that define them. Citizens typically limit the authority of these organizational structures, institutions, and the leaders who represent them.
2. Leaders derive traditional authority from their society's long-standing beliefs and practices. Citizens assign authority to these individuals in accordance with their community's customs and traditions.
3. Leaders derive charismatic authority from their charismatic personal qualities. These individuals typically exhibit a hold over followers because they revere or respect their charismatic personality.

Rational-legal authority is fairly stable because it remains even after government leaders and bureaucratic officials change. Charismatic authority, on the other hand, is unstable because the authority the charismatic leader has may not extend to their successors after the leader dies.

To review, see What is Government and Majority Rule vs. Minority Rights.

1b. Explain the fundamental principles in the Declaration of Independence

• What were the Second Continental Congress and the Declaration of Independence?
• Why did the American colonies declare independence from British rule?
• What theoretical and historical factors influenced the writers of the Constitution?
• What principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence would Americans later have difficulty adhering to?

On July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress approved the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps the most revolutionary aspects of the Declaration were its assumptions that people have natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed; and that when a government "becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government".

The Declaration was the culmination of a series of conflicts between the American colonies and the government of Great Britain. In May of the previous year, the First Continental Congress had sent King George III (1738–1820) a petition for a redress of grievances – essentially, a list of complaints about the British rule of the colonies that the colonists wanted to be resolved. When the King failed to respond, the Continental Congress began to take on the role of a federal government, forming an army and issuing a currency.

The first section of the Declaration lists the "abuses and usurpations" that made independence from Britain expedient for its writers. Many of the complaints registered in the Declaration of Independence would inform the writing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which we discuss in greater detail later.

The colonists listed several complaints in the Declaration of Independence:

• the dissolution of legislative bodies in the colonies;
• refusing to allow the creation of new judiciary bodies;
• quartering troops in colonists' homes;
• keeping standing armies in the colonies in times of peace;
• refusing to allow colonists the right to a jury trial;
• cutting off colonists' trade with other countries; and
• taxing the colonists without their consent.

To review, see Pre-Revolutionary Period and the Roots of the American Political Tradition and A Declaration of Independence.

1c.  Analyze the flaws in the Articles of Confederation

• What was the political system under the Articles of Confederation?
• What were some inherent problems with the Articles?
• What factors generated the need to replace this system of government?
• How did the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation affect the United States?

The Articles of Confederation were the new nation's first attempt to create a federal government to avoid British rule's pitfalls and abuses. Americans considered this document the law of the land from the end of the Revolutionary War in 1783 until 1786. However, the Articles had several shortcomings that prevented them from being adopted as an effective, lasting way to govern the country.

Under the Articles, the United States was a loose assembly of 13 independent countries. There was no executive branch of government at the federal level, nor was there a federal system of courts. Trade between states was unregulated, and the government had no way to tax them, such as to pay for the debts of the war. States used different currencies, which made interstate and international commerce complicated and difficult.

Things came to a head in Massachusetts when Daniel Shays (1747–1825), a former captain in the army during the Revolutionary War, led a rebellion against the state government. Shortly after state troops defeated Shays' Rebellion in 1787, leaders decided it was time to establish a new form of government.

The Articles of Confederation created several negative impacts on the security and prosperity of the United States. For example, since the federal government could not tax its citizens, it could not raise money to defend the country. This made it vulnerable to Britain and Spain, which still held neighboring territories, and to internal insurrections, such as Shays' Rebellion.

Since each state used a different currency and imposed alternative methods for taxing imports and handling debts, trade between states and foreign countries was hampered. These complications disrupted the economic exchange, commerce, and growth that the country needed.

To review, see Introducing the Articles of Confederation and Articles of Confederation.

1d. Identify the plans the Constitutional Convention delegates promoted regarding representation and slavery

• Why was compromise necessary at the Constitutional Convention?
• What major areas of disagreement led to compromise?
• What was the three-fifths compromise, and how did it conflict with other values exposed by the Founders?

Every state except Rhode Island sent delegates to the Constitutional Convention to replace the Articles of Confederation with a new, more stable, and effective government. The delegates came from various backgrounds and brought divergent ideas about governance to the meeting.

Several key points of contention emerged, such as how congressional representation should be allocated. States with more citizens favored basing the number of representatives on population, while less populated states argued each state should have an equal number of representatives. The delegates debated whether all citizens of each state or a certain select group should elect their federal representatives.

When drafting the new Constitution, they compromised by creating a bicameral legislature: citizens in each state would elect a designated number of representatives to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives based on their population, while each state legislature would select one senator to serve in the U.S. Senate. Note the 17th amendment to the Constitution changed the Senate selection process in 1913, so constituents in each state would elect two senators to serve in the U.S. Senate.

The issue of slavery was a major point of contention among the Founders. In the Southern states, slavery was integral to the plantation economy, but many White citizens in the North began to view the practice as immoral and untenable. Representatives from the southern states argued they should be allowed to include their slave population when calculating their state's number of congressional representatives. Northern states disagreed because the number of Southern representatives in Congress would have significantly increased. The delegates agreed to only count three out of every five slaves when calculating each state's population for congressional representation: the so-called three-fifths compromise.

The delegates also tabled an initiative to abolish slavery. They voted to allow each state to decide whether to legalize slavery within its borders but agreed the federal government could not address the issue of the need to abolish slavery on a federal basis for 20 years.

To review, see Developing the U.S. Constitution, Amendments to the Constitution, and Constitutional Change.

1e. Compare the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the Constitution's ratification process

• What were the Federalist Papers?
• What were the key arguments put forth in the Federalist Papers?
• What were the key concerns the Anti-Federalists had about the Constitution?
• How did the Federalists compromise to win support from some Anti-Federalists?
• How did the Federalists and Anti-federalists interpret the necessary and proper clause differently?

The Federalist Papers were a series of essays Alexander Hamilton (1757–1804), James Madison (1751–1836), and John Jay (1745–1829) wrote and published in New York newspapers from October 1787 to April 1788. As Federalists, the three authors presented arguments for supporting the Constitution and described how ratification would benefit the states and the citizens of America.

The papers are divided into several sections that address different issues, such as the importance of the union, the defects of the Articles of Confederation, support for a republican form of government, and the descriptions of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches as presented in the Constitution.

Anti-Federalists were concerned about the consequences of centralizing too much power in the federal government. They had just fought a bitter war against tyranny and government overreach and worried that a strong central government would become tyrannical in its rule over the states.

After much debate, the Federalists agreed to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution, a series of amendments that would guarantee certain rights for individual citizens and state governments to limit the reach of the federal government.

While adding the Bill of Rights convinced several delegates to ratify the Constitution, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists interpreted several parts of the Constitution differently. They often disagreed about the scope of powers and authority of the federal government.

For example, they differed on the "necessary and proper clause", which established that Congress could pass any laws necessary to exercise the powers granted in the Constitution. Federalists felt the government needed this clause to allow it to adapt to new circumstances, while Anti-Federalists felt it gave the federal government too much flexibility to expand its power.

To review, see Federalist No. 10 and Federalist No. 51, which are considered some of the best examples of political writing in U.S. history. Numbers 16, 17, and 39 argued for the need to establish a strong central government. Also, review Ratification of the Constitution.

1f. Explain the importance of minority rights in a democracy

• What are minority rights and tyranny of the majority in the context of American democracy?
• Why are protections for minority rights important?
• How does the Constitution protect minority rights?
• How have minority rights been abused in American history?
• What is the impact of the government's failure to protect minority rights?

Democracy is a form of government that vests its power in the will of the people. But who are the people?

In most democracies, the majority rules: the candidate, bill, or policy proposal with the most votes wins. But what about minority rights? When the majority decides, many people are left unsatisfied by the outcome. A tyranny of the majority can occur when the majority disregards and tramples over the rights of individuals and minority groups. Majority rule threatens the notion of democracy when the government lacks guarantees that allow minority groups and individuals to engage in the system in a meaningful way.

The Constitution argues that support for regular and fair elections, and a system of checks and balances, can protect minority rights in the American government.

Despite these protections, American history is full of examples where the government failed to protect and actively violated the rights of the minority. Examples include legal and legislative support for slavery, Jim Crow laws, and discrimination against Native Americans and immigrant groups throughout history.

To review, see Majority Rule vs. Minority Rights, Developing the U.S. Constitution, Amendments to the Constitution, and Constitutional Change.

1g. Describe the principles of the Constitution, including separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism

• What are the three branches of government?
• What are separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism?
• What was the rationale for the separation of powers and checks and balances in the Constitution?
• Name some examples of checks and balances. Describe how each branch of government checks the powers of the other two branches.
• What are the costs and benefits of a style of federalism that favors the national government?
• What are the costs and benefits of a style of federalism that favors state governments?

The separation of powers refers to the division of power and authority that the Constitution grants to each of the three branches of government: the legislative branch, executive branch, and judicial branch.

The founders created this system of checks and balances to prevent any branch from becoming all-powerful or tyrannical. Each of these institutions enjoys separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility. For example, in the United States, the legislative branch (Congress) is responsible for creating laws, the executive branch (the office of the president) executes or administers these laws, and the judicial branch (the court system and the U.S. Supreme Court) interprets and applies the law. The Founders divided these governmental powers to prevent any one person or branch of government from becoming too powerful.

However, each branch lacks complete control over the powers the Constitution grants them: each branch has the power to limit or influence the authority of the other two branches. For example, a president does not have to sign every law Congress puts forward and can veto a law they dislike to prevent it from going into effect. If Congress feels the president uses their veto power unjustly, a two-thirds majority may overrule the veto. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional and overturn it.

Federalism describes the division of powers between federal and state governments. For example, the Constitution designates that certain powers belong exclusively to the federal or state governments, while some are concurrent or shared.

Note that, as with disputes among the federal branches of government, state legislatures frequently disagree and debate whether an issue or concern falls under the jurisdiction of the local, state, or federal government since the Constitution could not have predicted every situation where government power would be necessary. In these cases, the judiciary may be called in to resolve these types of disputes.

To review, see U.S. Constitution, Annotated, Developing the U.S. Constitution, and Federalist No. 51.

1h. Differentiate various types of federalism that define power-sharing between national and state governments

• What are the strengths and weaknesses of a federal system?
• How is power shared between the federal and state governments in a federal system?
• How do dual federalism, nation-centered federalism, and cooperative federalism differ?
• What is fiscal federalism?
• How do block grants, categorical grants, and general revenue sharing differ?

A more recent version of federalism, often described as a period of devolution, makes room for states to become "laboratories of democracy" by reducing limits and regulations on money granted to states from the national government. This independence and the ability to experiment with different ways of involving citizens in the decision-making process has led to several policy innovations since the 1990s. Because state governments are more accessible to citizens (due to their relative size and geographic proximity to their constituents), they typically promote increased political participation and efficacy.

In a federal system, state and local governments also can block some important federal policies their legislators oppose. For example, differences of opinion were especially apparent and violent in many areas when the federal government tried to implement civil rights legislation.

Federalism can also lead to major discrepancies in how people are treated at the individual state and local level by governments responsible for administering a program. For example, state and local governments that lack the political will, expertise, or funding mechanisms to support certain proposals may prevent major federal policy goals from being implemented or distributed fairly and uniformly.

For example, while the U.S. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010, its implementation has varied widely due to the level of support it received from state legislators who were responsible for putting its promises and guidelines into practice. Several states declined to receive funding from the federal government, which limited the number of patients who could benefit from the legislation.

Dual federalism (layer-cake federalism) refers to a system in which federal, state, and local governments have distinct spheres of authority and power which do not overlap. In contrast, cooperative federalism (marble-cake federalism) describes a system where federal, state, and local governmental authority overlap and are shared. Nation-centered federalism refers to a system where the federal government has more authority and power than the state or local governments, such as in many authoritarian governments.

Fiscal federalism refers to the funding of government programs. For example, many say Democrats support increasing federal government control over the funding and administration of federal programs and initiatives, while Republicans tend to demand greater state and local authority for these programs. In reality, political parties frequently change their stance depending on the issue and whether they support the person in charge of implementing the policy.

Congressional funding can take several forms.

1. Block grants are grants which the federal government issues to state and local governments to support broadly-defined programs, such as law enforcement or social services.
2. Categorical grants provide grant funding for more specific or narrowly-defined purposes or programs. These programs typically see greater federal government oversight as supporters try to ensure they are administered and implemented as planned.
3. General revenue sharing refers to a situation in which some of the revenue raised by the federal government is shared with state and local governments for them to use. It was introduced as part of a larger process of devolving more authority to the states.

To review, see:

• Division of Powers
• Evolution of American Federalism
• Intergovernmental Relationships
• Competitive Federalism Today
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Federalism
• Evolution of Federalism
• American Federalism, 1776 to 2000

1i. Describe how amendment and interpretation have changed the Constitution since its ratification

• What do we mean when we describe the Constitution as a living document?
• How has the Constitution been interpreted over time, such as when the public changes its view about a certain issue?
• Why did the Founders believe citizens and their representatives should have a process to amend the Constitution?
• What are some key amendments to the Constitution?

Since the framers of the Constitution knew they could not anticipate every challenge or situation that would arise in their new country, they agreed future generations should be able to adapt the Constitution to keep it vibrant and relevant. Necessary modifications, or amendments, would help the Constitution maintain its status as the "Supreme Law of the Land" in line with future circumstances. Americans consider the Constitution a living document because the framers intended it to be interpreted and modified as necessary, according to the needs of the people.

The U.S. Supreme Court has the final say in interpreting the Constitution. Since it outlined the power of judicial review in the case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Supreme Court has deemed more than 125 federal laws and hundreds of state laws unconstitutional, preventing their implementation.

Presidents have enhanced their executive authority through their interpretation of the Second Article of the Constitution. For example, President George Washington (1732–1799) used his interpretation of executive power to establish that the president is the key figure in deciding foreign policy. Abraham Lincoln expanded executive power to issue the Emancipation Proclamation and free enslaved people in the South in 1863.

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution ratified in 1791, guarantee certain rights for Americans and was an important addition to the Constitution. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery in 1865. The 14th Amendment guaranteed certain civil rights in 1868, and the 15th Amendment recognized the voting rights of African-Americans in 1870. These are just a few examples of how the Constitution has been shaped over time.

To review, see:

• U.S. Bill of Rights
• Amendments to the Constitution
• Constitutional Change
• Interpreting the U.S. Constitution
• An Adaptable Document

Unit 1 Vocabulary

• 13th amendment
• 14th amendment
• 15th amendment
• Anti-Federalists
• Articles of Confederation
• block grants
• categorical grants
• charismatic authority
• Constitution
• Constitutional Convention
• cooperative federalism
• Declaration of Independence
• dual federalism
• executive branch
• federalism
• Federalist Papers
• Federalists
• fiscal federalism
• general revenue sharing
• judicial branch
• legislative branch
• living document
• minority rights
• nation-centered federalism
• political legitimacy
• power
• rational-legal authority
• separation of powers
• three-fifths compromise
• traditional authority
• tyranny of the majority

Unit 2: American Political Behavior

2a. Define the primary sources of political socialization in American society

• What is political socialization?
• What key factors contribute to political socialization in America?

Political socialization refers to how individuals form their political opinions, such as through their interactions with others. Agents of political socialization, such as parents, teachers, friends, coworkers, and media figures, often play a large role in influencing others. However, political engagement is far from uniform, and agents often conflict, such as when your friends and family have different political opinions.

We can base political ideologies on an individual's political generation, where groups share similar political beliefs because they lived through similar social, economic, or political experiences. For example, consider those who lived through the Great Depression (1929–39), the Vietnam War (1955–75), or the World Trade Center attack in 2001. Political events can occur during the most formative and impressionable years of political socialization (late adolescence to early adulthood) when a new generation of voters confronts new political and economic realities.

Today, the news and social media play a major role in our political socialization. For example, entertainment and media depictions of different social groups can greatly impact how we think about others and the world around us and influence how we engage in politics. Positive and negative depictions can shape American attitudes toward politics and government.

To review, see Political Ideology and Political Culture and Socialization.

2b. Describe the special role of the media and how it influences the American public and political behavior

• What role does the media play in American public opinion?
• How does the media influence political behavior?
• What do people mean when they call the media the fourth branch of government?
• How have new forms of media changed the American political landscape?

Some refer to the media as the fourth estate or fourth branch of government (after the executive, legislative, and judicial branches) because it is a vital link between politicians, government officials, and the public. The media keeps people informed about political issues and can shape public opinion by presenting the news the editors consider important. In a democracy, the media can highlight policies that work and uncover deception and corruption so voters can make informed choices about political candidates, public policy, and public institutions.

New forms of media, such as social media and blogging, have become important factors in American politics. The accessibility of these relatively new forms of media means anyone can report and share their interpretation of local, public, and civic events to a wide audience. On the one hand, this new accessibility allows individuals to distribute stories that traditional media outlets ignored in the past. On the other hand, authors are not bound to the same rigorous professional and ethical standards traditional journalists follow. Readers do not know whether the news stories reflect events accurately or were fabricated to support a particular hidden political agenda.

Competition among media distribution outlets means stories are shared so quickly with readers that editors have less time to check facts and determine whether the stories are newsworthy or were designed to hide certain facts. The 24-hour news cycle means public figures have less time to check for accuracy and craft thoughtful responses that will influence their policy-making.

To review, see Evolution of the Media, Regulating the Media, Impact of the Media, and Elections: New Media, New Challenges.

2c. Describe public opinion, how it is measured, and how it has evolved in American politics

• What is public opinion?
• What role do public opinion polls play in measuring public opinion? What are their limitations?
• Why is public opinion important in a democracy?
• What is the relationship between political socialization and public opinion?
• How have public opinion polls changed over time in the United States?

Public opinion refers to the collective preferences that a group of people, usually citizens or residents, have on government matters. It can be difficult to obtain an accurate reading of public opinion. When political scientists determine what the majority of the general public thinks (the sum of individual opinions), they describe the public opinion on an issue. Political leaders, the news media, interest groups, business marketing, and other national organizations can play a large role in shaping public opinion.

We can segment public opinion into different groups. For example, the attentive public pays close attention to the general issues of politics. Issue publics follow specific issues, such as the environment, defense spending, or healthcare. These individuals may not be as concerned about broader political issues because they may have a personal relationship with their issue of interest, such as a healthcare activist with a close family member with a medical condition.

Polls measure public opinion by asking about individual preferences on certain political issues. Politicians use this data as evidence to support why the government should take certain actions. For example, liberal politicians often point to public opinion polls on gun control policies to support creating new laws to restrict gun sales.

Democratic governments that aim to reflect the will of the people pay attention to public opinion so politicians can learn whether their policies match the preferences of the majority of their constituents. However, some argue that politicians should disregard public opinion polls when deciding on certain issues because the public is less informed about an issue, such as when public policy matters involve confidential information. Others complain that the polls ignore minority groups who also deserve a voice. Democratic governments have an ethical duty to protect their constituents, including the minority.

Straw polls conducted in the early days of the United States were often inaccurate. By the 1920s, researchers began using more scientifically-rigorous polling methods by gathering samples that reflected the population more accurately. Researchers continue to refine the polling process by introducing techniques such as probability sampling. They are also experimenting with alternative ways of measuring public opinion, such as public judgment and deliberative polling.

To review, see Nature of Public Opinion, How Public Opinion Is Measured, and What Does the Public Think?.

2d. Discuss how public opinion polling influences electoral outcomes

• What role does public opinion polling play in elections?
• What factors besides majority opinion matter in public polling?
• What are the limits of public opinion polling?

Public opinion polls can give political candidates a sense of how their constituents feel about certain issues so they can craft a political message that is relevant and appealing. This allows them to shape a platform responsive to the desires of the people they represent.

The intensity of an interest group's policy preferences can be critical. For example, a small number of constituents who care deeply about an issue may organize and convince other voters to follow them, while a large group with a passing interest may lack the motivation to act or show up on election day.

Public opinion polls measure public opinion on a given topic during a certain period. For example, new circumstances and facts can cause individuals to change their opinion frequently. Pollsters are also limited because they do not have the time or resources to talk to everyone. Consequently, they must rely on representative samples to gauge what a group of potential voters thinks. For example, if you take a poll that includes female voters, you may obtain a different response when you conduct a later poll that excludes them.

While sampling methods have improved, they do not reflect the population perfectly. Pollsters and those who take polls should also be aware that questions can be worded in ways that prompt respondents to choose a response that may misrepresent their position.

To review, see Effects of Public Opinion.

2e. Differentiate various methods voters employ to participate in politics

• What are some key ways voters participate in American politics beyond voting?

Americans participate in a wide range of civic activities beyond the ballot box. For example, many donate money to a certain political party or participate in pre-election activities, such as by making phone calls (phone banking) or visiting homes to encourage individuals to vote (canvassing).

Americans engage with their elected officials by participating in rallies and demonstrations, attending local town hall meetings, writing letters, making phone calls, and sending emails and tweets to express their thoughts about the issues they consider important.

We also contribute to political culture when we discuss political issues, candidates, and our voting plans with friends, family, and coworkers. When we go to vote, we set an example for our friends, family, and children that demonstrates we believe the electoral process is important to us and our community.

To review, see The 19th Amendment.

2f. Explain the characteristics of voter turnout, party identification, and issue preferences on how people vote

• What is voter turnout?
• Why is voter turnout important?
• What is party identification, and how does it affect voter turnout?
• How do issue preferences affect how people vote?
• Why do some people choose not to vote?
• What are some reforms that might encourage more people to vote?

Voter turnout refers to the number of people who submit a ballot by going to a polling station or submitting an absentee ballot to vote. This way, we can express our opinions or preferences in an election. Voter turnout is a key element of representative democracy and helps ensure the government reflects the interests of its constituents. Politicians tend to pay more attention to populations who vote for or against them because their election depends on them. Voter turnout also tends to predict whether citizens will engage in other forms of civic engagement.

Party identification or affiliation refers to the political party an individual tends to support, whether voting in an election, donating campaign funds, volunteering, or encouraging others to do the same. People who identify strongly with a political party are more likely to turn out to vote during the election.

Issue preferences refer to how individuals vote based on a specific public policy issue. For example, an individual who feels strongly about an issue, such as gun control, climate change, or reproductive health, is more likely to vote during an election when one candidate has taken a strong position for or against the issue they support. In some cases, issue preferences can predict party identification, but an individual's views do not always neatly align with the entire party platform.

While voting can be a primary way for citizens to influence their democratic government, fewer eligible voters participate in elections than in the past. Perhaps citizens are complacent or disenchanted with the political system. They may not identify with the candidates or political parties; the issues do not seem compelling or relevant; the candidates seem to take similar positions; or the individual feels their one vote will make little if any, difference. Many believe candidates only reward their big donors, lobbyists, and special interest groups. Likewise, voters in safe districts may be less inclined to vote when an incumbent candidate or party has almost assured a win because they believe they enjoy a majority.

Some suggest adopting a ranked-choice voting system that would allow third-party candidates to participate in elections more easily, a system that is in place in many European countries. Nonpartisan redistricting could also make these safe districts more competitive and force candidates to listen to those with opposing viewpoints. Others promote campaign finance reform to limit donations from wealthy individuals and companies so less wealthy voters have more say in policy decision-making. The media also needs to do a better job covering local elections, where smaller numbers can turn the tide on issues that affect the entire local community.

To review, see Voting Behavior and Intensity.

Unit 2 Vocabulary

• attentive public
• fourth estate
• issue preferences
• issue public
• media
• party identification
• political socialization
• polls
• public opinion
• voter turnout

Unit 3: Political Parties, Campaigns, Elections, and Interest Groups

3a. Explain the roles, functions and structure of political parties

• What is a political party?
• What role do political parties play in a democracy?
• What are the major political parties in the United States?
• How does the U.S. party system compare with other democracies around the world?

Political parties are organizations that support different political issues and agendas. Members of the same party tend to share similar beliefs about the role government should play in public life. The parties usually endorse and support candidates who share their political beliefs and work on their behalf.

We call the United States a two-party system because it has two main political parties: the Democrats and the Republicans. In some regions, the Green, Libertarian, and Constitution parties are fairly active. Some candidates declare themselves independent if they do not have ties with either major party. Many democracies, especially those with a parliamentary system, have many more political parties.

Political parties serve several functions in a democracy. They provide political candidates with financial and other resources, such as additional publicity, volunteers, and recognition from party leaders, to help them succeed. Many voters appreciate knowing which candidates support the political platform of their chosen political party, especially if they do not wish to research the positions a given candidate has taken on specific issues.

For example, many Democrats believe government should actively address inequality issues, while many Republicans believe government involvement should be small, outside federal security services. These ideological differences can give voters a sense of the candidates they may want to support.

We describe the voting system in the United States as "winner takes all" or first past the post since the one candidate who obtains the majority of votes wins the electoral contest, while the loser does not receive any representation. Note states have different rules on whether candidates must win an absolute majority (more than 50 percent of the vote) to win and whether they need to call a new election if one candidate does not win a majority or only wins by a small percentage.

Many democracies have a parliamentary system where representation in parliament, or the number of seats each party enjoys, depends on the overall number of votes the party received in the general election. When one party does not win a majority of seats, they must create a coalition government with another party to obtain a majority of seats necessary to govern. This can cause problems when a smaller party, which knows it is in high demand from the larger parties, makes many major demands before joining a coalition. Some argue this gives too much power to a minority segment of the population. While these types of party coalitions are unnecessary in the United States, the minority party is always forced to wait until the next election to enter government, which can also hurt. No system is perfect!

To review, see What Are Parties and How Did They Form?, The Two-Party System, Shape of Modern Political Parties, and Divided Government and Partisan Polarization.

3b. Discuss the historical evolution of political parties and the advantages and disadvantages of the U.S. two-party system

• How did the Framers perceive political parties or factions?
• When and why did political parties first begin to develop?
• How have U.S. political parties changed since colonial times?
• What are candidate-centered politics?
• Why does the U.S. have a two-party system?
• What are some advantages and disadvantages of a two-party system? How do they compare to other types of democracies?

Although they were initially concerned that political factions or parties might cause too much conflict, the Framers soon realized a formal way was needed to organize elected officials and political candidates who held similar political beliefs. For example, when government became more routine in post-revolutionary America, citizens began to coalesce around key political ideas to promote their views. By 1828, Americans adopted a two-party system, although their precise makeup and belief systems would continue to evolve.

In the 1800s, slavery was a defining issue. After the Civil War (1861–1865), party machines – authoritarian party structures that depended on loyalty and group identity rather than strong political values – dominated the political landscape. The system frequently led to accusations of patronage and corruption since the party controlled political appointments and access to privileges. During the 1900s, a series of reforms transformed the parties beyond recognition. Several states introduced primary elections to give voters more say over choosing each party's candidate. This led to a shift toward candidate-centered politics when people voted to elect a specific politician rather than to support party loyalty.

In a two-party system, most elected officials belong to one of two major parties. Again, we describe the voting system in the United States as the winner takes all or first past the post since the one candidate who obtains the majority of votes wins the election contest, while the loser does not receive any representation at all. The candidate who loses must wait for two, four, or six years to run again, depending on the term of office for the position opening. Most democracies have multi-party systems, so several minority parties can remain competitive even if they only win a few seats in Parliament.

American political parties tend to be more flexible in their ideologies than in other countries. For example, what it means to be a Democrat or Republican can vary from state to state and district to district. While party leaders adopt a party platform every year to express commonly-held views on public policy, individual politicians frequently adapt these ideals to create their own policy goals to better reflect the interests and opinions of the constituents in their region. Americans are not required to pay dues to join a political party as in many other countries, where party leaders are free to expel candidates and members who fail to toe (follow) the party line.

Supporters of the two-party system say it has a moderating effect on politics. They argue that having too many parties can be destabilizing, confuse voters, and allow extremists to gain an inordinate amount of political power. Others argue that a two-party system limits voter choice and discourages eligible voters from participating in government because they may feel the two main parties do not reflect their political beliefs.

To review, see What Are Parties and How Did They Form? and The Two-Party System.

3c. Explain voter turnout and the importance of party identification on voter preferences

• How do party identification and voter preference influence each other?

Party identification and voter preference influence the likelihood of a person's participation in politics. People who have a strong sense of party identification or feel passionate about an issue are more likely to turn out to vote and engage in other civic activities, such as volunteering, donating to a campaign, talking about politics with friends and family, and spreading awareness about an issue on social media.

Party identification can help voters identify the candidates who reflect their preferences when they are unfamiliar with the candidates they see listed on the ballot. For example, when a voter who tends to support the Republican party sees that a candidate is a Republican, they may vote for them even though they do not know exactly how the politician stands on an issue they care about. For this reason, a candidate running for office may decide to toe the party line on issues they do not feel strongly about since it may help them get elected.

To review, see Party Identification, Voter Registration, and Voter Turnout.

3d. Explain the nominating system and the differences between primaries and caucuses

• What is the nomination process for presidential candidates?
• What are primaries and caucuses?
• How are presidential candidates chosen in the United States?

U.S. presidential candidates compete in primaries or caucuses, depending on the system a state prefers, so each political party chooses only one candidate to run in the general election. Each state determines the rules the candidates should follow to win the primary in their state.

Primaries tend to allow more voters to participate in the selection process, while caucuses tend to restrict participation to party members who have been more active in the party. But, again, the rules vary from state to state.

For example, open primaries allow all registered voters to choose a candidate regardless of their chosen party affiliation. In closed primaries, you can only vote for candidates who share your party affiliation. For example, only registered Democrats can vote in the Democratic primary to choose the Democratic candidate. In a blanket primary, candidates from the same and different parties compete against each other in a primary election for the same office.

The rules for caucuses can be complicated and vary from state to state. They typically involve lengthy meetings where longstanding party activists debate, vote, and choose the individual delegates who will attend the party's nominating convention. Traditionally, the most famous and earliest caucus takes place in Iowa.

Each state will choose a slate of delegates who will represent them at the national convention that is held for each party to formally nominate the candidate who has won the most votes at the primary and caucus level. The party delegates also approve the final party platform or official position it will take on a range of political issues and policy-making concerns.

While these events used to be fairly raucous affairs with plenty of public debate and last-minute decision-making, today's conventions tend to be staged political events where party leaders finalize and announce their chosen nominee based on how the candidates performed during the state primaries and caucuses. The presidential candidate usually announces who they have chosen to serve as their vice presidential running mate.

To review, see Elections.

3e. Assess the role of redistricting, incumbency, and money in elections

• What are redistricting and gerrymandering?
• How does the U.S. redistricting process support incumbent versus new candidates?
• What are some advantages incumbents hold over other candidates in elections?
• What role does money play in American elections?
• What is a political action committee (PAC)?
• What are hard money and soft money?
• What have been some attempts at campaign finance reform in the United States?
• How can public funding work in U.S. political campaigns?

Each state receives a specific number of representatives in Congress based on its population. Every ten years, the Constitution requires the government to take an accurate count of the population via a national census. When the census shows the district's population has changed, state lawmakers must redraw the district lines or voter boundaries to ensure the population within each district in the state is equal. This process is known as redistricting.

During redistricting, the party that controls the state legislature can shape each district to protect their incumbent politicians (those who hold the current seat and may be up for re-election) and increase the number of congressional representatives affiliated with their party.

For example, you might draw the boundaries so all of your party supporters are in one district to create a safe district that will elect a candidate from your party. Alternatively, you might draw the district boundaries to divide neighborhoods that include groups of members from the opposing party to dilute their votes among districts that have a majority of your party supporters. We call the process of drawing district lines to advantage one party over the other gerrymandering.

Incumbents are the politicians who currently hold office and are seeking reelection. An open seat means that there are no incumbents. The previous occupant may have retired, stepped down, or choose not to run again because they fear they may lose.

Incumbents have several advantages over their challengers. For example, since they have experienced winning a campaign in the district, their staff may be more organized than their opponent. They probably have greater name recognition among voters and have established relationships with donors and party activists. They know who to contact for help in fundraising events and may even have some money left over from previous campaigns. This campaign war chest they have amassed will help pay for future campaign expenses, such as advertising and travel. Meanwhile, the media often gives the current officeholder free publicity with news stories about how the incumbent candidate is executing their job responsibilities, representing their constituents, and working on popular projects in the community.

Money can play a critical role in financing American political campaigns. The Wall Street Journal reported that the presidential and congressional contests cost $5.3 billion in 2008. Roughly 60 percent of political spending was spent on media costs, such as television advertising. Campaigns also spend money on travel, administration, event planning, payroll, technology, printing, and direct mail.

Since politicians raise and spend so much money to run a political campaign, accusations of bribery, corruption, and other scandals abound. Congress periodically passes campaign finance reform laws to raise awareness about the need to follow ethical standards and limit corruption.

For example, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) limited the amount individuals, political parties, and other political groups could contribute to campaigns and how candidates could spend these contributions. Campaigns were obligated to disclose their financial information to the recently established Federal Elections Commission (FEC), which was responsible for publicizing the information.

Opponents argued these laws unfairly limited political expression. Proponents believed fair elections would help ensure candidates listen to the concerns of their constituents rather than solely respond to the demands of their more wealthy campaign donors.

Enforcement from the Federal Elections Commission led politicians and donors to differentiate how they handled money for different purposes. For example, to limit fraud, the FECA imposed strict regulations and record-keeping requirements on hard money or contributions that support a particular political campaign or candidate. The FECA imposed much less scrutiny on soft money, which supports general get-out-the-vote drives, party-building activities, issue-based advertising, and general campaigning which did not advocate for or against a specific candidate. Politicians realize that these financial sources are equally important to their election.

Some support public funding of election campaigns as an alternative, where presidential candidates can elect to receive the public funds taxpayers approve when they check a designated box on their annual income tax forms. To be eligible, candidates must raise $100,000 in contributions of $250 or less, with at least $5,000 coming from 20 different states. The government matches the first $250 of every individual contribution with public funds. Today, many candidates opt out of this funding mechanism since, although they would appreciate the funds, the system requires them to adhere to strict spending limits that they feel would jeopardize their campaigns.

To review, see Elections and Campaigns and Voting.

3f. Explain how the Electoral College functions as a method of electing the president, including the arguments for and against the current system

• How does the Electoral College work in U.S. presidential elections?
• What are some arguments for and against the Electoral College?

The Electoral College describes the 538 electors who represent each state and meet in December following a presidential election to officially choose the president via a majority vote. The number of electoral votes for each state is calculated by counting one elector for each member of Congress and one for each senator. This means less populous states have an advantage: each state receives two additional electors regardless of the size of its population.

Since the number of electoral votes is based on congressional seats rather than the direct population, and nearly all states have adopted a winner-take-all system to apportion their electoral votes, a president can win enough electoral votes to win but lose the popular vote. This occurred when George W. Bush lost the popular vote to Al Gore in 2000 by nearly 550,000 votes, and Donald J. Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in 2016 by nearly three million votes. Both won the electoral college.

Due to this compromise, the Founders specified in the U.S. Constitution that the president is not chosen by popular vote in the United States.

To review, see Has the Electoral College Outlived Its Usefulness?.

3g. Analyze the purpose, roles, and functions of interest groups and their impact on the electoral process

• What is an interest group? What are some examples of important interest groups in American politics today?
• How do interest groups influence elections?

The Founders called the interest groups "factions" when groups of like-minded citizens join together to support (or oppose) an issue or cause. Interest groups range in size, level of organization, and policy goals. Some focus narrowly on specific issues, such as the American Peanut Council or the National Rifle Association, while others promote a broader agenda, such as the National Organization for Women or the Children's Defense Fund.

Interest groups can be effective advocates for action and can generate a great deal of publicity for the candidates they support. Many meet with their congress members, make financial contributions, and lobby Congress to pass legislation that supports their particular public policy agenda. Interest groups frequently use free or paid media to publicize their cause and educate the public about their position. They frequently endorse (or oppose) politicians from political campaigns that support a favorable (or conflicting) viewpoint.

To review, see Interest Groups Defined, Collective Action and Interest Group Formation, Interest Groups as Political Participation, and Pathways of Interest Group Influence.

Unit 3 Vocabulary

• blanket primary
• campaign finance reform
• campaign war chest
• candidate-centered politics
• caucus
• closed primary
• Electoral College
• Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971
• first past the post
• gerrymandering
• hard money
• incumbent
• interest group
• national convention
• open primary
• party machine
• political party
• primary
• public funding
• soft money
• two-party system

Unit 4: American Political Institutions

4a. Explain the roles, duties, structure, and functions of the U.S. Congress

• What is the structure of the House and the Senate?
• What are the differences between the two houses of Congress? How do their roles differ and overlap?
• What are the similarities and differences between the Senate and House of Representatives when it comes to their structure, roles in government, and the rules for how they function?
• What are the powers of the legislative branch of government?
• Which article of the Constitution addresses the legislative branch?
• How does the modern Congress differ from what the Founders created in 1789?
• What demographic and sociological changes have influenced these changes in Congress?
• What have been some differences between Congress throughout history?
• How has the structure of Congress changed over time?

The United States has a bicameral legislature, which means it is composed of two houses: the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The House of Representatives includes 435 representatives elected by congressional districts in each state. The number of representatives each state elects is based on population and fluctuates according to the percentage of Americans who live in each state. For example, when the population in New York decreases and Arizona increases, New York loses representatives while Arizona gains. Each representative serves a two-year term and can run for re-election an unlimited number of times. In other words, they do not have term limits.

The Senate includes 100 senators (each state elects two senators) who each serve a six-year term without term limits. While each House representative is only responsible to the citizens who live in their district, each senator represents the entire population in their state.

Members of the House and Senate have different responsibilities but share others. For example, they share the power to implement and collect taxes, declare war, regulate commerce among the states and with foreign countries, raise an army and navy, and propose and pass amendments to the Constitution. However, only the House can initiate bills that raise revenue, such as taxes. Only the Senate ratifies treaties with foreign countries and approves presidential appointments, such as for the Supreme Court or members of the Cabinet.

A legislative bill must pass the House and Senate (and be signed by the president) to become law. While both houses can initiate legislation, only the House can initiate bills that raise revenue. According to the Constitution, the president "shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States… (Article 2, Section 2)". The Senate also has the power to ratify treaties with foreign countries.

House members must be 25 years old and citizens for seven years. Senators must be at least 30 years old and citizens for nine years. Senators represent their entire state, while House members represent their individual districts.

Every two years, the entire membership of the House is elected. At the beginning of the new term, members vote on the rules that will apply for the next two years. We call the Senate a "continuous body" because only one-third of senators are elected every two years (two-thirds remain current members). The Senate does not adopt new rules every two years but tends to follow tradition and precedent when determining procedure.

The House of Representatives can impeach a government official, while the Senate has the sole power to conduct impeachment trials. When the president of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice presides. Since 1789, the Senate has tried 17 federal officials and two presidents.

The legislative branch of government is responsible for writing and passing laws to govern the country. Its powers are outlined in Article I of the Constitution, which establishes a bicameral legislature and vests it with the authority to make laws and perform other duties, such as to lay and collect taxes, borrow money on the credit of the United States, regulate commerce among the states and with other countries, coin money, establish post offices, declare war, and raise an army and navy.

Demographics refers to the statistical data that describes the population in a certain area. For example, we often divide groups based on age, education, ethnicity, gender, income level, marital status, occupation, profession, and race. In the early days, U.S. legislators could ignore women and enslaved populations without suffering political consequences. The recognition that the U.S. Constitution gives every man and woman the right to vote and demographic changes forced politicians to support political platforms and policies that appealed to new populations.

After the Civil War and the passage of the 15th Amendment (1870), legislators in many southern states passed Jim Crow laws which required citizens to pay poll taxes, pass literacy and comprehension tests, submit to property ownership requirements, and present certain identification documents, such as birth certificates, to vote. These laws prevented most African Americans and many poor white voters from voting in elections. While the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has helped alleviate most of these injustices, restrictions continue to prevent certain citizens from voting.

The 19th Amendment (1920) affirmed women had the right to vote as part of the U.S. Constitution. The passage of the 15th and 19th Amendments and shifting demographics have created a more diverse legislative body, as women, African Americans, and other people of color have won elected office. Review the civil rights movement in more depth in Unit 5.

Changes in employment opportunities, economic status, gender politics, immigration, internal migration, and religious identity can alter the demographics and political participation in individual districts, states, and the country. Changing demographic patterns, such as migration from rural to urban areas or from the South to the North, can also alter the makeup of political parties, such as where they are most popular and more likely to be elected. The voters who turn up at the polls can change the kind of candidates who are successful in different districts and regions of the country.

In addition to the demographic changes, the procedures, size, and focus of Congress have changed and evolved as the country has expanded. For example, until the total number of representatives in the House was capped at 435 with the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, each state had one representative and one for every 30,000 people in the state. Consequently, the House expanded as the population grew until 1929. The Senate has also grown as Congress has admitted new states into the United States.

In addition, House and Senate leaders periodically modify their roster of subcommittees and committees to address relevant or pressing issues of the time. For example, they may combine or change the focus of existing committees or create new committees that reflect new federal or executive branch priorities. They may also eliminate irrelevant committees. Congressional leaders may also form less-formal policy groups or caucuses to address certain policy issues or trends.

Congressional leadership positions frequently evolve to address issues of concern and reflect the leadership needs, capacities, and personalities of the day. For example, leaders who seek the limelight may vie to serve on committees that track foreign policy issues during wartime, regulate the banking industry during an economic recession, or participate on the Senate Committee on the Judiciary during confirmation hearings for nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. Legislators also try to serve on committees that will address issues that are timely and relevant to the needs of their constituents.

To review, see:

• The Institutional Design of Congress
• Congressional Representation
• Roles and Duties of a Member of Congress
• House and Senate Organizations
• Party Leadership
• Congressional Oversight

4b. Explain the process of how a bill becomes a law

• What is the approval process a bill follows before becoming law?
• What is the Congressional budget process?
• What is pork barrel legislation and log rolling? How do these concepts fit into the legislative narrative?
• What is a congressional committee?
• What is the difference between a standing, select, special, and joint committee? How do these committees factor into the legislative process?
• What are the party leadership positions in Congress?
• What role do party leaders play in Congress?

Making a law in the United States is a complex and lengthy process, and most of the bills members of Congress introduce never pass muster.

Any lawmaker (House member or Senator) can draft a legislative proposal, which they introduce to their respective house of Congress, although any laws relating to revenue must first be introduced in the House. The legislator is the bill's sponsor: others can join them as co-sponsors. Once introduced, bills are referred to the relevant subcommittee or standing committee. When members of the subcommittee or committee people cannot agree on the terms of the legislative proposal, we say the bill "died" in the subcommittee or committee, and it does not proceed.

Bills that originate in subcommittee proceed to the committee level for a committee vote. If it obtains a majority, the bill may reach the House or Senate floor for debate. At this point, other legislators can introduce amendments and additions to the bill while they debate the pros and cons of each facet of the bill. The original bill may change significantly during this process.

For example, lawmakers may change the specific language of the bill to benefit constituents in their district or state or add an amendment that is only remotely related to the purpose of the bill. We call these unrelated amendments pork barrel legislation, which many accept as necessary legislative components of lawmaking. Some call the practice of compromise and trading favors logrolling; the process lawmakers use to obtain enough votes to ensure a majority of legislators can support and pass their bill.

Once a majority of legislators in the House or Senate vote to approve the bill, a legislator from the other house will introduce a similar, if not identical, bill in their respective house. This legislation follows the same pathway: moving and gaining approval from the subcommittee and committee all the way to the House or Senate floor. The process offers the same opportunities for changes in language and the adoption of additional amendments.

Once the two companion bills have survived their respective House and Senate floor votes, the House and Senate leadership creates a conference committee, with members from both houses, to resolve any differences that exist between the House and Senate versions. Once differences are smoothed out (often accompanied by an official report to explain any salient details or areas of confusion), both houses call a final vote to approve or disapprove the combined final version of the legislation.

Once approved by both houses of Congress, the bill goes to the president's desk for signature. If the president signs the legislation, it becomes law. If the president vetoes the legislation, the bill is dead, or Congress can vote again to override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote from both houses.

Congressional committees review and amend legislation. They play a key role in the legislative process. They consult with outside experts to get opinions on legislation under consideration and determine whether a bill will proceed to the next stage in the legislative process. They may call a public hearing to invite experts to discuss different perspectives and respond to questions from the committee members.

These committees also oversee relevant executive agencies and conduct investigations into government affairs as necessary. For example, the armed services committees in the House and Senate study bills related to the military.

Standing committees are more permanent because they deal with areas Congress must consider on a regular basis. For example, in 2017, the Senate had 15, and the House had 20 standing committees. These cover issues such as agriculture, appropriations, armed services, banking, commerce, education, energy, environment, finance, foreign relations, healthcare, housing, judicial affairs, labor, and transportation.

Congressional leaders also create a select committee or special committee to investigate or study more specific issues or policy areas. The leadership typically tasks these committees with writing a report for members of Congress with the results of their investigation. Examples include the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities (Watergate Committee), which existed from 1972 to 1974, and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, which existed from 2007 to 2011.

Joint committees include members from both houses and deal with issues that require joint jurisdiction.

Both houses of Congress have several party leadership positions. For example, members of the House elect the Speaker of the House on the first day of a new Congress. The Speaker is responsible for ensuring that the House passes legislation supported by the majority party. The Senate majority leader performs a similar role.

In addition to taking the lead on House negotiations with the president and the Senate, the Speaker fulfills a variety of duties, including administering the oath of office to new representatives, referring bills to committees, putting questions to a vote, counting and declaring all votes, and appointing House members to select and conference committees.

The House majority leader serves directly below the Speaker in the leadership hierarchy and takes the lead in planning the legislative agenda and scheduling legislation for floor consideration. They often work behind the scenes to gauge member support for legislation before putting it to a vote. The minority leader speaks for the rights of the minority party and organizes any criticism or opposition against the majority party's policies. The whip for each party coordinates their respective network of party loyalists to build support for party initiatives and goals and communicate among the party leadership and members.

The Senate also has majority and minority leaders and party whips. In addition, they have a committee chair and conference chair, and conference secretaries.

To review, see The Legislative Process.

4c. Explain the role and constitutional powers of the presidency and vice presidency

• Which article of the Constitution addresses the role of the presidency?
• What powers and limitations does the Constitution give the presidency?
• How does the constitutional system of checks and balances specifically affect the presidency? What powers does it give the president to check other branches of government? How does it limit presidential powers?
• What are the formal powers of the presidency specified in the Constitution?
• What informal presidential powers have emerged over time since the passing of the Constitution?
• What powers and duties does the presidency have now that the office did not have when the Framers wrote the Constitution?
• How has the presidency gained new powers?
• What is the role of the media as the "fourth branch of government"?
• How has the relationship between the media and the president changed over time?
• What are the responsibilities and powers of the vice president?
• How does the vice president influence politics in America?
• What is the presidential Cabinet?
• What were the original Cabinet positions, and how have they changed over time?

Article II of the Constitution establishes the office of the presidency and outlines its powers, responsibilities, and limitations. The president of the United States serves as the chief executive of the American government and commander in chief of the armed forces, with the power to make treaties, appoint ambassadors, nominate Supreme Court justices, and select several other officers who serve the United States. The Senate must approve any treaties and government appointments the president proposes by a two-thirds majority.

Article II specifies that the president must make a State of the Union address to Congress from time-to-time, and states that the "President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors".

The Framers wanted to avoid giving too much power to any one person or institution. So when they wrote the Constitution, they created a system of checks and balances to keep any one branch from becoming too powerful. In other words, each branch had a way to limit or contain the power of the others.

For example, the Senate must approve any treaties the president has brokered before they can become official policy and confirm many higher-level appointments before they can take office. Presidential power is also limited because only members of Congress can introduce new legislation. Congress also has "the power over the purse", which means that its legislators decide, through the legislation they pass, how to spend American taxpayer dollars.

The president has the power to veto any legislation Congress submits for presidential signature (an example of a presidential check on congressional power). However, Congress can overturn the veto with a two-thirds majority (an example of a congressional check on the president's power). The power of judicial review means the judiciary can overturn any legislation Congress and the president have passed that it deems unconstitutional. Neither Congress nor the judiciary can overturn a presidential pardon, although Article II states this right may be curtailed in cases of impeachment.

Article II of the Constitution specifies the formal powers of the presidency, such as the president's role as commander-in-chief and their right to make federal appointments. However, the president also has many informal powers.

As the country's most famous politician and representative of their party who was elected less than four years ago, the president often takes center stage in American politics. A popular president can use their office to persuade the public to support certain policies, oppose others, bring an issue before the public eye, or ignore its import. An effective president can help build public pressure to move legislative priorities through Congress.

The presidency has evolved beyond the explicit duties laid out in the Constitution as new challenges of governance have arisen and new technologies have made it possible for the president to exercise different kinds of power. Review presidential power in learning outcome 4k.

The evolution of modern news media has allowed the president to use their platform to garner support for their party's policies and campaign for other candidates for office, as mentioned above. For example, some consider Franklin Roosevelt the first modern president in this regard. His "fireside chats" used the medium of radio to make him a familiar figure in the lives of the American people. In the process, he also negotiated a political coalition and transformed American politics for years to come.

In recent decades, the office of the president has also laid claims to more expanded executive privilege, which is an argument for a right to confidentiality regarding certain activities of the president. The president can invoke executive privilege when asked to show documents regarding presidential decision-making that the president wants to keep confidential. However, this right is not absolute. If the legislature can prove their need for the information, they can demand it. In general, the courts tend to err on the side of trusting presidential claims of executive privilege.

Some of the major cases involving executive privilege in American history include the Watergate scandal under the Nixon administration, Iran/Contra under Reagan, and six different cases under George W. Bush, including a case involving alleged corruption in the FBI's Boston field office.

The media, sometimes known as the fourth estate or fourth branch of government, provides yet another check on power by making the government more transparent and accountable by informing the public about political activity. While most politicians tend to criticize the media for negative coverage, they recognize they also depend on the media to publicize their successes and help rally public support behind their policies. Today, our most credible media outlets try to be fair and nonpartisan. Review the role of the media in learning outcome 2i.

While America's first newspapers served as mouthpieces for the political parties, media outlets have adapted to fulfill new needs and expectations as Americans have become better informed and more interested in government affairs.

When newspaper coverage was the only game in town, journalists reported about the president, Congress, and Supreme Court fairly equally. However, this changed when radio and television provided a means to communicate directly with voters; the president became a scripted and prepared figurehead to share the most important news about politics in Washington. Media outlets were forced to cover the president earnestly, and the president, in turn, was subject to greater media scrutiny.

It seems like the Founders created the office of the vice president almost as an afterthought. Before the president and vice president became a political team with the passage of the 12th Amendment, voters cast separate ballots for the president and vice president. This selection process led to conflict when voters elected individuals from different parties with conflicting policy ideas. The individuals were expected to work together but often clashed.

The Constitution specifies only two official duties for the vice president: 1. to cast a vote as president of the Senate when needed to break a tie, and 2. to receive the certificates from each state to tally the number of electoral votes each candidate has received in a presidential election and announce the winner to members of the House and Senate. However, presidents have recently assigned additional responsibilities to the vice president, who can be a popular political campaigner and champion for presidential initiatives.

The Cabinet refers to the group of advisors who report regularly and directly to the president. In 2019, the Cabinet included the vice president and the Cabinet secretaries charged with administering 15 executive departments: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, and the attorney general. In 1789 the Cabinet only had four members: the Secretaries of State, Treasury, War, and the Attorney General. The Cabinet expanded as the country grew, governing became more complex, and presidential powers increased.

The Senate must confirm all Cabinet appointments, a process that offers senators the opportunity to question nominees about their qualifications, determine whether they have conflicts of interest, and review issues that could jeopardize the individual's ability to fulfill the duties of the position appropriately.

To review, see:

• The Design and Evolution of the Presidency
• The Presidency
• Presidential Governance: Direct Presidential Action
• Executive Privilege: History, Law, Practice and Recent Developments

4d. Analyze the role of the bureaucracy as the implementation arm of the executive branch

• What is the makeup of the Executive Office of the president (EOP)? What is its purpose?
• When was the EOP established? What predated it?
• What is bureaucracy?
• Which three primary groups comprise the American federal bureaucracy?
• What role does the bureaucracy plays in the American government?
• What is the difference between merit hiring and patronage appointments?
• What is Congress' responsibility to oversee the bureaucracy?
• How can Congress influence the bureaucracy?

The Executive Office of the President (EOP) describes the group of federal agencies that serve and report to the president. Many were established by law, and some positions require Senate confirmation.

In 2019, the EOP included the Council of Economic Advisers, the Council on Environmental Quality, the Executive Residence, the National Security Council, the Office of Administration, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the Office of the Vice President, and the White House Office.

The structure for today's EOP was established in 1939, but presidents have always conferred with individuals for advice to fulfill their responsibility to administer the many executive branch agencies of government. For example, in 1916, during the Woodrow Wilson administration, Congress created the Council of National Defense. During the 1930s, President Franklin Roosevelt established the Executive Council and the National Emergency Council to provide regular up-to-date insight and advice.

According to Max Weber, bureaucracy is a form of organizing that includes a hierarchical structure, formal written procedures, and a staff of technical experts. While critics often complain about our vast government bureaucracy and the many civil servants who run its agencies, our government could not function without them.

Three primary groups categorize the American federal bureaucracy: Cabinet departments, executive agencies, and regulatory commissions. Congress delegates responsibilities for enacting public policy to these bureaucratic groups and gives them the resources they need to act. The civil servants who staff these bureaucracies are hired on the basis of merit and their requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities. However, some top positions are reserved for political appointments which the president may make according to a system of patronage or party loyalty. Since the Senate must approve political appointments, appointees usually need to possess some relevant qualifications to work in the area they will administer. The Pendleton Act of 1883 established this system of hiring civil servants and administrators according to merit or patronage.

Congress uses its powers of Congressional oversight to monitor the extensive executive bureaucracy. For example, House and Senate staffers gather information about the respective agencies and commissions and report to Congress and the public about how the offices are performing. This oversight can range from a single lawmaker who gets involved due to a constituent complaint to conducting major public or closed hearings and investigations.

The process is not centralized and does not follow a formal process every time. Instead, Congress responds to complaints from the public, interest groups, and the media to determine whether they need to investigate the relevant executive agency. This investigative role, and the fact that Congress determines the annual funding level and resource allocation for each bureaucracy, is another way Congress keeps tabs on executive branch activities. The Senators can also influence presidential appointments to key leadership positions in each bureaucracy.

Likewise, government bureaucratic agencies can influence Congress by building public support for their work. For example, depending on how the legislation is worded, the individual agency may have the authority to allocate the public funds Congress granted them, such as by awarding projects to recipients across several states and districts. In this way, grant recipients and other program supporters can publicly oppose Congressional staff members who attempt to defund popular initiatives.

To review, see:

• Bureaucracy and the Evolution of Public Administration
• Toward a Merit-Based Civil Service
• Understanding Bureaucracies and Their Types
• Controlling the Bureaucracy
• Development of the U.S. Bureaucracy

4e. Discuss the constitutional origins of the judicial branch and the judicial selection process

• Which article of the Constitution addresses the judicial branch?
• How can the judiciary check the legislative and executive branches?
• How did the Founders try to guarantee judicial independence in the Constitution?

Article III of the Constitution, which focuses on the government's judicial branch, establishes one Supreme Court and "such inferior courts" as Congress deems necessary. The jurisdiction of the court system includes all constitutional and legal matters that pertain to the laws and treaties the executive and legislative branches pass, interstate cases, and other areas. The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction for most cases, which means the justices typically only review cases a lower court has tried first and there are sufficient grounds for appeal.

The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, which means it can overturn laws that the justices believe violate the Constitution, even after Congress has passed a bill and the president has signed it into law. This unique ability checks the powers of the other branches and gives citizens a place to turn when they believe a law is unfair.

The Founders protected judicial independence in the federal courts by giving each judge a lifetime appointment. In this way, a new president cannot remove judges a previous president appointed due to political disagreements. Only Congress can remove judges from office, for treason or other crimes, through a formal impeachment process. Likewise, the president and Congress do not have the authority to reduce a judge's salary.

To review, see:

• Guardians of the Constitution and Individual Rights
• The Dual Court System
• The Federal Court System
• Supreme Court Appointment Process: Roles of the President, Judiciary Committee, and Senate

4f. Analyze how the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the law, paying particular attention to the competing judicial philosophies of judicial restraint and judicial activism

• What is the role of the Supreme Court?
• Define and contrast the philosophies of judicial restraint and judicial activism.
• What is judicial review?
• What court case established the right of judicial review?
• What role does judicial review play in American government?
• What is the judicial selection process? Explain the roles of the executive and the legislative branches in the process.
• How do politics factor into the selection process?
• What is the filibuster, and how is it used in judicial confirmation hearings?

The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, which means it can overturn laws it believes violate the Constitution, even after Congress has passed a bill and the president has signed it into law. This process can be quite complex when the justices have different approaches to interpreting the Constitution.

We categorize two approaches as following judicial restraint and judicial activism. Those who promote judicial restraint argue the Court should limit itself when interpreting the laws Congress and the president have passed, according to the strict principles specifically outlined in the Constitution. The Court should rarely strike down laws the executive and legislative branches have enacted.

Politicians who object to the direction the justices are taking on an issue frequently accuse judges of promoting judicial activism: they complain the judges have taken an inappropriately active role in interpreting the Constitution to reflect contemporary values, challenges, and injustices. They claim these issues should be left to the legislative and executive branches. They also argue the Court is more likely to reverse decisions by lower courts and overturn legislative proposals that run counter to their interpretation of how the Constitution applies in a given situation. Note that many of these same critics are quite happy to support judicial activism when the Court rules favorably on an issue they support or approve.

The Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review and cemented the Court's place as the final authority in interpreting the U.S. Constitution. Judicial review is one of the strongest checks the judicial branch has against the legislative and executive branches and ensures Americans can challenge laws that violate their constitutional rights.

Article II of the Constitution states the president must appoint judges with the "advice and consent of the Senate". While many believe presidents should nominate judges who share their philosophical outlook, some argue that senators should refrain from taking the nominee's legal philosophy into account when voting to confirm a new judge or justice.

Senators should determine whether a nominee is competent and free of ethical conflicts of interest, but confirmation may hinge on the nominee's view of the judiciary's role in the American legal system. This scrutiny dates back to the earliest days of the republic when the Senate rejected President George Washington's nominee John Rutledge. We see this divide most clearly when the president and Senate have differing political views.

Even when a Senate majority supports the president's judicial nominee, an opposing senator can filibuster the proceeding according to Senate rules. An individual senator has the right to unlimited debate on a subject the Senate is considering, which means they can delay or may even ultimately block a floor vote or judicial confirmation. A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to close debate during a filibuster, a higher bar than the simple majority needed to confirm a nominee.

To review, see The Supreme Court, Judicial Decision-Making and Implementation by the Supreme Court, and The Supreme Court.

Unit 4 Vocabulary

• Article I
• Article II
• bicameral legislature
• bureaucracy
• conference committee
• Congressional committee
• Congressional oversight
• Executive Office of the President (EOP)
• filibuster
• House of Representatives
• joint committee
• judicial activism
• judicial independence
• judicial restraint
• judicial review
• logrolling
• majority leader
• Marbury v. Madison
• merit
• minority leader
• patronage
• pork barrel legislation
• select committee (special committee)
• Senate
• Speaker of the House
• standing committee
• vice president
• whip

Unit 5: Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

5a. Distinguish between civil rights and civil liberties

• What are civil liberties? What are civil rights? How are the two different?
• How were these rights established in the early days of the American Republic?

Civil liberties refer to the rights and freedoms individuals possess that the government cannot infringe upon, according to the U.S. Constitution. Politicians continue to debate which specific rights should be included in this list.

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, provides the legal and political basis for civil liberties in the United States. The Founders added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution to restrict the federal government from infringing on the lives of individuals and minority populations. They wanted to ensure the government could not violate individual rights, as the British had compromised theirs.

The rights in the Bill of Rights fall into several broad categories: freedom of expression, the right to keep and bear arms, the protection of person and property, due process rights, the rights of the accused, protection from disproportionate punishments, and the right to privacy.

Before adding the Bill of Rights, the Constitution still provided for basic civil liberties, such as the right to request a writ of habeas corpus, a document that lists the reasons for an individual's arrest. The Constitution also prevents the federal government and the states from issuing bills of attainder, laws that punish an individual without giving them a trial, and ex post facto laws, laws that retroactively make an action illegal.

Civil rights refer to the right to be free of discrimination. For example, civil rights deal with issues of equal access to social services, public resources, and the ability to participate in political activities. While civil liberties were a major concern to the Founders, civil rights did not enter the mainstream American political consciousness until Congress passed and the states ratified the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution after the Civil War.

• The 13th Amendment (1865) outlaws slavery and involuntary labor except when used as punishment for a crime.
• The 14th Amendment (1868) provides birthright citizenship, prevents states from violating due process, and holds that a state may not "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws", which is also known as the equal protection clause.
• The 15th Amendment (1870) prevents the federal and state governments from infringing upon a citizen's right to vote on the basis of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude".

To review, see What Are Civil Liberties?, Securing Basic Freedoms, and Rights of Suspects.
 

5b. Explain the history and importance of the Bill of Rights

• What is the Bill of Rights? Why did the Founders add them to the Constitution?
• What is a major limitation of the Bill of Rights with regard to individual civil liberties?
• What is incorporation?
• What amendment to the Constitution introduced the concept of incorporation?

The Bill of Rights refers to the first ten amendments to the Constitution. When the Founders debated the merits of the Constitution, the anti-federalists were concerned that the founding document centralized too much power in the hands of the federal government, which would lead to violations of individual and states' rights. Federalists agreed to include the Bill of Rights in the Constitution to convince the anti-federalists and the states to ratify the Constitution. Note that the Bill of Rights only applies to the federal government – it did not prevent state governments from passing laws that would violate the rights it outlines.

The first eight Amendments refer to protecting specific individual freedoms from government infringement. The Ninth Amendment states individuals have additional rights beyond those enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The 10th Amendment refers to issues of state's rights.

Incorporation describes the legal process that made the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. Initially, the Bill of Rights only prevented the federal government, not state governments, from infringing on individual civil liberties. However, the incorporation process extended enforcement of these protections to the state governments.

The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment established the principle of incorporation to guarantee states would protect the future civil rights of previously-enslaved Americans. The Bill of Rights had restricted the powers of the federal government, but incorporation strengthened the federal government's position concerning the states. The federal government now had the ability and responsibility to enforce the civil rights protections the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments clarified. Incorporation meant the federal government could act against state governments that violated these Constitutional rights.

To review, see What Are Civil Liberties?, Rights of the Accused, and Interpreting the Bill of Rights.

5c. Examine the rights protected under the First Amendment and key Supreme Court cases that have defined these First Amendment rights

• What rights are protected in the First Amendment?
• Which court cases have been the most influential in determining the extent of the First Amendment?

The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".

In other words, the First Amendment addresses five key freedoms: religion, speech, the press, assembly, and petition. For example, the government cannot financially or rhetorically support one religion to the detriment of another, establish an official state religion, or punish or prevent an individual from practicing their religion. The government cannot regulate or restrict an individual's right to speak freely or the work of a free press. Citizens have the right to assemble in groups, present petitions when they feel the government has caused them harm, and ask the government to address their grievances.

There are several exceptions to the free speech protected by the First Amendment. Individuals or companies have the right to file libel cases against those who publish defamatory information. These cases are difficult to win because the victim must prove the perpetrator published the information with malice and reckless disregard for the truth. Despite this difficulty, most media outlets and publications try to avoid libeling individuals since these cases can be expensive to defend in court and can generate negative publicity. The Supreme Court established this standard in New York Times v. Sullivan.

Several court cases have attempted to define obscenity and determine whether individuals have the right to possess obscene material. Today, we generally accept that while individuals have the right to possess obscene material in their homes, they cannot produce, sell, or ship it (primarily because it can harm others). The Supreme Court reviewed the issue of obscenity in Roth v. United States, Stanley v. Georgia, and Miller v. California.

Since the 1920s, several Supreme Court cases have established that the government can limit "fighting words", or speech that presents a "clear and present danger" and can provoke an immediate act of violence. However, when this interpretation led to the suppression of certain radical political speech, the Court limited the government's power to instances where violence was clearly intended and likely. The Supreme Court reviewed these issues in Schenck v. United States, Dennis v. United States, and Brandenburg v. Ohio.

To review, see Securing Basic Freedoms.

5d. Analyze the "right to privacy", its origins, and Supreme Court rulings on privacy

• Which amendment establishes a right to privacy? How does it define that right?
• How has the right to privacy been interpreted over the years? What are some of the questions that arise from the right to privacy?

The Fourth Amendment states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized".

We interpret this Amendment as guaranteeing the right to privacy. For example, law enforcement officials, as government representatives, do not have the right to search individuals or their homes without probable cause and a warrant signed by a judge.

What does this mean? Should individuals have the same right to privacy in their cars as in their homes? What about a student's locker at school? What if the police believe an individual is carrying a weapon and poses an imminent threat to public safety? What about electronic searches, such as government eavesdropping on electronic communications? Are our emails, text messages, and phone calls legally equivalent to the "papers and effects" the amendment mentions?

The courts, legal experts, the police, and citizens continue to grapple with these questions about the limits of the Fourth Amendment. Major Court cases that deal with the Fourth Amendment include Olmstead v. United States, Katz v. United States, and Kyllo v. United States.

The Fourth Amendment also includes the exclusionary rule, which specifies that prosecutors cannot use evidence the police collect during a search that violates the Fourth Amendment in court. The Supreme Court established this rule on a federal basis in Weeks v. United States and at the state level in Mapp v. Ohio.

To review, see The Fourth Amendment.

5e. Discuss the process of expanding civil rights to minorities and women in the United States

• What are de jure segregation and Jim Crow laws? Which Supreme Court case established segregation laws in the South?
• Describe the doctrine of separate but equal. What conditions did this policy support? What Supreme Court case opposed this policy?
• How would you describe the emergence of the Civil Rights movement in the United States?
• Who were some key figures, organizations, and accomplishments of the Civil Rights movement in the United States?
• What other minority groups have used the model civil rights activists followed to implement change? What challenges have these groups faced?
• What are some landmark cases and legislation these minority groups have achieved?
• How would you describe the experience of creating a Disability movement?
• What is affirmative action?
• What are the main arguments for and against affirmative action?

De jure segregation refers to the legal separation of the races. In other words, the legal system keeps the races divided. A system of de jure segregation emerged in the American South after the Civil War during Reconstruction when politicians at the federal and state levels failed to enforce the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to appeal to Southern voters.

After the Civil War, southern state legislators passed a series of Jim Crow laws that required citizens to pay poll taxes, pass literacy and comprehension tests, submit to property ownership requirements, and present certain identification documents, such as birth certificates, to vote. These laws prevented most African Americans and many poor white voters from voting in elections. Remember that slaves were not allowed to attend school or own property and did not receive the identification documents they would have needed to vote. Individuals also risked severe harassment, intimidation, economic reprisals, and physical violence when they tried to register to vote or cast their ballot.

The Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson (1892) established a state's right to make these laws and provide accommodations for each race that were separate but equal. In reality, the railway cars, schools, libraries, churches, parks, playgrounds, restrooms, other public facilities, and government services reserved for black Americans were separate but rarely equal in terms of accessibility and quality. The Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education (1954) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, arguing that separate facilities, accommodations, and services could never be equal.

In the early 1900s, African Americans mobilized to fight this discrimination. For example, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), founded in 1909, would introduce court cases to push back against segregation and discriminatory laws. Thurgood Marshall championed this strategy as an attorney for the NAACP and frequently argued its cases before the Supreme Court, including Brown v. Board of Education. President Lyndon Johnson appointed Marshall to the Supreme Court in 1967, where he served until 1991.

The Civil Rights movement grew after World War II (1939–1945), when many African Americans fought in the armed forces and worked in the defense industries. When they returned to the United States after serving their country, the injustices they had experienced in their communities became more apparent, and they began to organize more militantly for equal rights. In the early 1950s, they organized boycotts, sit-ins, marches, and other actions to pressure their local, state, and federal governments into promoting and protecting their rights. Martin Luther King Jr., who founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in Atlanta in 1957, was a central figure in the civil rights movement, although there were many others.

For example, on Dec. 1, 1955, police officers in Montgomery, Alabama, famously arrested Rosa Parks when she refused to surrender her seat on a city bus to a white passenger as the law required at the time. The incident sparked the Montgomery Bus Boycott, which eventually forced the state to desegregate public transportation. The civil rights activists also organized the Freedom Rides, where they toured the country to protest segregation and help register African Americans to vote.

During the 1960s, civil rights activists won two major political victories: the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The first forbids discrimination based on "race, color, religion, or national origin" in public accommodations and employment. Congress established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to protect these rights. The Voting Rights Act outlawed discriminatory voting practices, such as poll taxes and literacy tests. Certain states were required to prove that any future changes to voting practices would not infringe upon the right to vote. The federal government was required to monitor state and local elections to ensure voting rights were respected in certain states.

The civil rights movement has served as a model for other minority groups in the United States who have suffered from discrimination and persecution, such as Asian Americans, disabled Americans, LGBTQ Americans, Native Americans, and women. Many of these groups benefited from the rights and protections the civil rights activists clarified as existing in the Constitution, but discrimination still occurs.

For example, Latinos immigrants fought to require districts to provide voting materials in languages other than English in areas where more than five percent of the electorate are not native English speakers. Asian American activists fought discriminatory laws after more than 120,000 Japanese-Americans were interned during World War II and protested American involvement in the Vietnam War. Native Americans solidified some of their rights when Congress passed the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, although concerns related to tribal sovereignty and self-government on reservations remain.

Some of the first activists for women's rights participated in the abolition movement before the Civil War: they were disappointed when Congress did not recognize their right to vote when the war ended. Their protests became more militant until Congress passed and the states ratified the 19th Amendment in 1920, which recognized a woman's Constitutional right to vote.

Although the ratification deadline has passed, activists continue to try to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, which would mandate equal treatment for men and women. Congress passed the Amendment in 1971–72, but supporters failed to convince a three-fourths majority of states to ratify it. Members of the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning) community also continue to struggle for recognition of their civil rights and for protections against discrimination, which should not depend on an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity.

While policies for the disabled previously focused on rehabilitation, since the early 1900s, activists have pushed the government to recognize the rights of disabled American citizens despite their physical disabilities or mental health conditions.

In 1990 Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) which afforded protections against discrimination for Americans with disabilities and required covered employers and public schools to provide reasonable accommodations to employees and students with disabilities. Supporters argued that individuals with disabilities should be able to participate freely in society, perform their jobs, access educational opportunities, and take advantage of government services, just as any other citizen, regardless of their need to use a wheelchair or other type of assistive device.

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 policies aim to address the effects of ongoing and past social and economic discrimination which stymied minority communities for generations. For example, many African Americans are unable to obtain bank loans to buy houses or grow their businesses. Many continue to experience substandard schools, cannot get good jobs, and are incarcerated at much higher rates than white Americans for committing the same crimes.

On the other hand, some members of the white community oppose affirmative action policies because they argue they support discrimination against themselves when they were not personally responsible for the discrimination that occurred in the past.

To review, see The African American Struggle for Equality, The Fight for Women's Rights, Civil Rights for Indigenous Groups, and Our Fight for Disability Rights and Why We Are Not Done Yet.

Unit 5 Vocabulary

• 19th Amendment
• affirmative action
• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
• Bill of Rights
• Brown v. Board of Education
• civil liberties
• civil rights
• Civil Rights Act of 1964
• de jure segregation
• Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
• equal protection clause
• Equal Rights Amendment
• exclusionary rule
• First Amendment
• Fourth Amendment
• Freedom Rides
• incorporation
• Jim Crow laws
• LGBTQ
• libel
• Martin Luther King Jr.
• National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
• Plessy v. Ferguson
• reasonable accommodations
• Rosa Parks
• separate but equal
• Thurgood Marshall
• Voting Rights Act of 1965

Unit 6: Policymaking in American Government

6a. Distinguish between different types of public policy

• What are the major types of public policy in American government?

1. Economic policy refers to matters related to the federal budget, such as fiscal and monetary policy.
2. Domestic policy refers to a wide range of internal, national, and public policy matters or topics within a country's borders. Examples of domestic social public policy issues include crime and criminal education policy, justice, healthcare, housing, poverty reduction, and social security.
3. Foreign policy (also called defense policy, foreign relations, and foreign affairs) refers to external issues, such as diplomacy, national defense and security, global policy, and war.

6b. Describe the main steps of the policy-making process

• What is policy-making?
• What are the four steps of the policy-making process?
• What are the agenda-setting powers of different actors in the policy environment?

1. Issue identification refers to how policymakers identify a problem they will attempt to solve. For example, they may learn about concerns from citizens in several ways, such as from constituent complaints, lobbying from interest groups, media attention, and from relevant research reports.
2. Agenda setting describes the next step when policymakers begin to pay attention, study the issue, and devise possible methods for addressing it. They may begin by commissioning relevant research reports to study the issue, consult with experts, meet with stakeholders, or discuss their concerns with other policymakers.
3. Policy formulation describes the step where relevant policymakers meet to discuss the information they have gathered, consider alternatives, and develop a plan to define the shape of their policy goals and proposed legislation may take.
4. Policy adoption describes the last step, when policymakers finalize their policy choices from among the alternatives identified during the previous stages.
   

The two steps that follow the policy-making process are policy implementation and policy evaluation. During policy implementation, policymakers should prepare to face unexpected challenges which may require them to modify their policy goals. Policy evaluation occurs when policymakers and other stakeholders review the policy outcomes and determine whether they succeeded in achieving what they had set out to accomplish.

To review, see What Is Public Policy?, Categorizing Public Policy, and Policymakers.

6c. Discuss the budget process and key components included in the budget

• What is the Congressional budget process?
• What are the deficit and the debt ceiling?
• What is economic policy, and what issues does it attempt to tackle?
• What are the primary theories of U.S. economic policy? How do their approaches to how the government should engage with the economy differ?
• What is U.S. tax policy?

6d. Examine the development of social programs and education in the United States

• What is social public policy? What issues does it primarily deal with?
• When and why did these kinds of policies emerge?

• What is foreign policy?
• What issues does it address, and who is involved in making foreign policy?
• How has U.S. foreign policy changed over the years?
• What are the current issues in American foreign policy?

• agenda setting
• budget surplus
• Congressional Budget Office
• Congressional budget process
• debt ceiling
• domestic policy
• economic policy
• fiscal policy
• foreign policy
• government debt
• government deficit
• issue identification
• Keynesian economics
• laissez-faire economics
• Manifest Destiny
• monetary policy
• monetary theory
• Monroe Doctrine
• policy-making
• policy adoption
• policy evaluation
• policy formulation
• policy implementation
• social public policy
• Social Security Act of 1935
• supply-side economics