A More Perfect Union Book

Instead of the 10 edition, I am reading the 5 edition. The series itself is a good attempt to make American government accessible to readers by interspersing current events with the way government works.

Whereas a parliamentary system has greater accountability in seeing where exactly the fault lies in failed policies, the presidential system requires greater participation from its citizens to influence the process in every step of the way.

The central idea behind a written constitution was to limit and define political authority. The issue for the framers is how does one device a government strong enough to preserve order but not so strong that it would threaten liberty. James Madison had negative views over human nature thus proposing a set of checks and balances to counter act human beings natural inclination for grabbing power.

The rule of states did not work as can be seen in the Article of Confederation whereas Washington and Hamilton believed in a stronger national government for government to be effective.

The issue for Madison is confederations are too weak and crumble from internal dissension and stronger forms of government trample on the liberties of its citizens. "The framers had learned that when people practice politics they often produce 'a history of faction, contentions, and disappointments' that reveals the 'infirmities and depravities of the human character.'". The Declaration of Independence is the ideal that the Framers had to create a stable government from.

The reason why the Constitution was written the way it was despite numerous contentious issues was b/c it was done in secret without any input from special-interest groups. Madison feared the rule of the aristocracy as well as the rule of the majority than can trample the rights of the minority. To solve this issue, the Great (Conneticut) Compromise issued that there would be two Congress the House which be based on population (the Virginia plan) while the Senate which would preserve minority rights (New Jersey plan). Every one agreed on the need for separation of powers and federalism (separation of powers b/w national and state governments).

The framers believed that people would pursue their self-interests. Madison countered anti-federalist sentiment that believed being ruled by a government closer to its population is better by saying that a larger republic needs coalitions of diverse interests for it to work thus moderating a specific point of view. For the Framers, the issue of inequality laid at the foot of political power being concentrated in the hands of the few whereas today's inequality takes on a more economic bent.

By design the Constitution does not allow for dramatic bold leadership but instead for broad moderate coalitions to push for an agenda. Perhaps this is the reason why most Presidents that are well known are people who were war time Presidents that galvanized the whole nation to action.

Federalism: Federal vs state govt.

The founding fathers put in place federalism to protect personal liberty. The intention of the Founders was for federal government to not have powers beyond that explicitly stated in the Constitution all other government functions would go to the state government or to the people.

Federal government usually gives to the states the right to execute what it wants done such as welfare (medicaid) and the ACA state exchanges. States can be laboratories for democracy in best practices such as education reform and gay marriage but some policies in states can hinder national goals such as N. Carolina disenfranchisement of its minority population by decreasing voting days and halting the ACA implementation by electing not to create their own insurance exchanges.

Federalism encourages political participation by average citizens by having multiple outlets for voting and action. Ultimate power to create laws were given to Congress. Whereas Hamilton thought that ultimate power rested in federal government, while Jefferson thought the people should have ultimate sovereignty through state rights. The Civil War settled the issue that the national government was supreme and states could not simply secede from the union.

Where the Constitution is fuzzy on an issue the Supreme Court is there to settle an issue. The Civil War and later the Supreme Court overturned the idea of nullification in which the states could ignore a national law if they did not agree with it.

The idea of economic dual federalism disappeared as the 20th century saw commerce as increasingly an interstate activity. Federal government grant-in-aid programs allowed people of state to get things done while the governor can say they are against it such as Rick Perry's Texas saying he is anti-federal government while getting the benefits of a federal funded highway. It also allows the Federal government to get what it wants without having to break with the Constitution in matters of enforcing what it wants over the states.

In '95, the idea of devolution giving back power to the states and raising taxes to fund those activities went back to the states. The Federal government uses mandates or conditions of aid for states to do what wants them to do. Most governors oppose devolution of federal funds that would require them to raise taxes but support devolution of political autonomy.


PUBLIC OPINION AND THE MEDIA:

The Framers wanted checks to public opinion and thought multiple faction mainly to preserve the rights of the minority to be healthy in a democracy.

It is important how one words public opinion polls to get the response wanted from it. "Public opinion on many matters suffers from ignorance, instability, and sensitivity to the way the question is worded".

The role of political socialization in influencing our political beliefs:
1) The role of family - only is greatly influenced in families in which the family is themselves political.

2) The role of religious traditions:
Catholics tend to be Democrats b/c of a strong sense of social justice while Protestants tend to be Republican b/c of a strong sense of personal salvation and personal rectitude.

3) The role of the gender gap

4) The effect of education - people who finish a college education tend to be more liberal

5) Occupation plays less a role in political affiliation while Race plays more a role specifically Black tends to be staunchly democratic while Asians tend to follow White trends in party affiliation. Just like other trailblazers, Black professionals tend to experience the forces of discrimination than blacks in the general population. Geography in the south tend to have a significant backlash against the federal government b/c its civil rights support that now extends to less federal government intrusion to all matters of the bill.

Political Ideology:

Political activist tend to have a stronger ideological bent than the general population. Liberals tend to be in professional occupations, live in big cities, and have postgraduate degrees while conservatives tend to come from small towns and be involved in business. Libertarians live in big cities and employed in high-tech industries while populists are often blue-collared workers who have not been to college.

While traditional middle class who live in the suburbs, attends religious services, is friendly to business tend to vote Republican, new class middle class who live in cities, younger, have professional degrees tend to be Democrats. Whereas traditional middle class tend to be entrepreneurs, the new class have a specialized skill that makes them professionals.

MEDIA:

Although political media pundits/activists have made it increasingly impossible to do business in Washington, it does have he positive effect in decreasing unethical behavior especially in corruption and sexual behavior due to the increase scrutiny (ie: Clinton and Weiner). The nastiness of the press is due to increase competition between the various media outlets to get the "latest scoop".

In politics, the national press plays the role of gatekeeper keeping stories it deems worthy while discarding other stories, creates candidates out of thin air (a la Obama effect), and act as a watchdog exposing governmental scandals (Jim Crow laws). The President can use the power of the media that Congress cannot because of its fractured nature. Politicians such as Ted Cruz can sidestep their party apparatus in favor of media outlets who are sympathetic to their viewpoints.

The more informed the public is, the weaker the media influences tends to be while in media influence tend to be; while in matters we have little understanding, the media has greater role in influencing public opinion and in choosing lesser known public officials.


PARTIES:

A decrease in Party strength means an increase in influence of Interest Groups via lobbyists further fragmenting politics and making it harder to get a deal. In Europe, the people elect their party and the party chooses who represents them in government ( this is how Berscoloni of Italy could nominate porn stars to be members of his parliament) whereas in the US people vote for the people more than the party they represent. Primary voters not party leaders decide the candidates but as primary voters tend to be party activists they tend to vote for the more radical candidates.

The Founders were wary of political parties as they thought they were motivated by ambition and self-interests. Jacksonian Democrats increased voter participation to non- landowning white citizens and created nominating the leaders via national conventions. In the late '60's and early 70's, the Republican party became a well-financed organized machine whereas the Democratic party became factionalized this changed in the '90's in which the Democrats became more centralized as the Republicans can be. From party bosses, the power has shifted to political activists who decides who will win the presidential nominations.

While local politics is organized by local leaders, the political machine that bought votes in exchange for votes were destroyed by an educated middle class workforce and the national welfare system. Whereas machine values winning above all else, ideological party values principle above all else. PAC's have become the new hybrid b/w ideological parties and machines.

Activist delegates have a more purist attitude than general rank-and-file members.

INTEREST GROUPS:

Interest groups arise when broad economic development create new interests, government policy help create entrenched interest groups, new leaders must lead new interest groups, and expansion of government stimulates the expansion of groups interested in that area.

Interest groups can either be institutional groups which represents a group or membership interest such as a pro-life organization.

Membership interest group entices people to join via solidary incentives such as a sense of community, material incentives such as AARP incentive for more favorable supplemental insurance to its members, and purposive incentive in believing in the cause to which the lobby group proposes such as the ACLU. Lobbyist thrive when their party is out of power b/c they can claim that they are representing people who are going against powerful interest against them (NRA).

Interest groups tend to be upper class affairs b/c they are the one's with time and the resources to lobby. Lobbyist tend to be an upper-middle class wars. Interest groups supply information to Congress and bureaucrats so they are able to make decisions. Information provided by lobbyists is often most valuable when it concerns a narrow technical issue rather than broad and highly visible national policy. With the rise of independent legislators, outside strategy of directly influencing grass-roots movement to pressure legislature a certain way becomes action instead of an insider strategy which is cultivating relationships with legislators. The rise of conservative ideological PAC'S are troublesome for Congress to work. PAC's influence issues when there is little public knowledge for a given issue. There is also the issue of former politicians joining a PAC such as DeMint heading the Heritage Foundation.

Demonstrations are a common tactic for ideological PAC's that people in power fear because no matter what they do it looks bad for them.

In the US, there are more elected offices with lower voter turnout with weaker party politics compared to the European system.

Lower voter turnout can be explained by people who have different outlets to effect change in the US not just in politics. Political activists tend to be people who have high incomes and highly educated tend while apathetic voters tend to be low income and uneducated combine that with significant barriers to voting such as shortening voting days and voter ID laws that place uneducated, low income people at a significant disadvantage there is no wonder why more people do not elect to not vote. People vote b/c they feel civic pride for voting.

The elderly, men, and educated people tend to vote @ higher rates than young, women, and uneducated people. Political activist tend to be more actively engaged and thus have undo influence over the political process than people who are the "silent majority".

At the time the Constitution was written, voters were people who were white landowners and taxpayers. With the advent of Jackson, voting grew to include all white males. While the 20 th century saw the rise of every citizen as voters. With the increase of voting, politicians had to take into account people who they would have previously dismissed. Voter turnout tend to be only b/w 49% to 60% of voting age b/c of progressive laws that prevented blacks and transient voters from voting. Who knew that early 20th century voting had voter frauds including "ballot-box" stuffing. Voter ID laws are aimed at transients to a city but may effect recent people who moved from one place of residence to another.

In an increasingly mobile society, voter registration can pose an undue burden to voters involved in national elections such as President. B/c policies usually do not influence the vast majority of American lives that is little interference of government in our daily lives, they do not feel the need to vote. Congress in '93, created the motor-voter bill so the people to make voting registration simpler.

Campaigns:

1)As the power of party bosses have declined, political consultants have risen in importance.

2) Unpaid senior advisors who are old and trusted acquaintances who advices the candidate used for major strategic decisions

3) Citizen volunteers who are the unpaid ground workers of the citizens

4) Issue consultants who create position papers for candidates for media purposes as well as educate the candidates themselves.

In strategy, it is better to be personally well-liked in the primaries so one does not have to pivot in the general election to the middle and be seen as a waffler. This was a problem for both Romney and Kerry who were not seen as affable thus they had to pander to their base that made it harder for them to pivot back to the middle during the general election.

The economy which is largely out of the control the candidate determines whether an incumbent is revoted in office or not. TV is the preferred method of reaching vast amount of voters. TV can used paid spots to showcase what he can do or get free publicity by doing something that is of interest to TV producers.

Campaigns are more important for low-visibility offices and in elections not covered by the media.

With the decline of political parties, single-issue groups are picking up the slack in turning out the vote such as the Christian Coalition and NOW. They have undo influence in primary elections more than general elections.

Presidential elections are decided by: 1) political party affiliation are largely issues driven 2) The state of the economy 3) The character of the candidates. The economy and the character of the candidate are the largest drivers of who is voted into office. The average voter is retrospective in that they look @ the performance of the past while most political activists and ideologues are prospective in that they peer into the future to see how a presidential policy will effect the future of the nation.

While most congressional districts are safe from challenges b/c they are either lopsided Democratic or Republican. The once that are contested tend to follow national Presidential trends and tend to be more amenable to conciliation such as Paul Ryan a deficit hawk who is in a district won by Obama.

Party realignment occurs when a new issue of utmost importance to voters cuts across existing party divisions and replaces old issues that were fomerly the basis of party identification. The Democratic Party has the staunchest support of Blacks, Jews, most Hispanics while Republicans are party of business and the affluent, elderly retired people. While Catholics, white blue collared workers, and farmer's tend to be swing voters. Until Obama, the Black vote tend to be small portion of the electorate.

Electoral Campaigns:

The media has less influence in national campaigns or prominent campaigns that in unknown figures. The media merely reinforces existing beliefs rather than change them. Media help set the political agenda on matters with which citizens have little personal experience but have much less influence on how people react to---and vote on---issues that their lives directly. Whereas party leaders used both direct policy and campaigns, the view taken by today's campaign is separated from its policy formulation.

Impact of Money in Politics and Policy formation:

Challengers need more money to defeat Incumbents. The creation of PACs and its unlimited financing creates undo influence in the political system. Soft money can be funneled through state party coffers which then can be used for general election purposes. PAC's can spend unlimited amounts in support or against a candidate if it is uncoordinated with the Candidates campaign.

American govt is made to be slow and not to have sweeping changes thus having a mixed picture on who is at fault for a specific policy. People who can run successful campaigns may not be good @ governing. "Our system rewards people who can mobilize small but motivated constituencies, who can portray themselves as outsiders to the system, who have a talent to utter newsworthy sound bites, and are willing to spend 3 to 4 yrs campagining.