Ohne Titel

Seite 1

The Founding Fathers didn't wake up one morning with an original plan for the system of government. The ideas that influenced the Founders had been in the air for centuries, both in Europe and in the Americas. The Founders' genius was in the way they combined those insights about the nature of government, which they then put into practice.

Political thinkers all began their studies with a basic question: why do people get together to form governments at all? To answer this question, they liked to use the idea of "the state of nature". It helped thinkers to imagine what life would have been like before states, the government, and rulers.

Thomas Hobbes was a political philosopher in the 17th century. He was one of the first thinkers to build a political theory from the state of nature. Without the government, he said life would be dominated by violent conflict and the constant fear of death. Fear of the ruler keeps everyone in line and stops the constant state of war that exists without government. In return for this protection, people give up their natural freedoms to the ruler.

Hobbes developed the idea of social contract. According to this, governments exist because the people agree amongst themselves to set them up.

John Locke, a political thinker in the 17th century, posited that all humans were born with a set of natural rights that nobody could take away. Why, according to Locke, did people leave the state of nature? Not because it was incredibly violent (he was a bit more of a people person than Hobbes), but because governments helped people secure their rights and better protect their property.

Locke agreed that setting up governments took away some freedoms, but it doesn't mean giving up basic natural rights.

The most cited writers by the American Founders would be Baron de Montesquieu. He helped shape the idea of what a free government would look like. All writers before Montesquieu believed that a government could only work if there was only one single source over power. A final authority to resolve any and all conflicts that came up in the course of running a country. Otherwise, you'd get constant crises and civil wars.

Montesquieu disagreed. He advocated for the separation of powers, the idea that constitutions could prevent absolute rule by dividing the state into separate branches so that no one person or institution would have all the power. He argued that creating opposition between different parts of government was the key to preventing tyranny.

Seite 2

The Magna Carta was one of the first documents to place limits on the kings rule. One of the important rights it established was the right to trial by a jury of one's peers, but that only applied to the nobles. Still, though, it was a start.

The Mayflower Compact was signed aboard the Mayflower in 1620. It was a big step toward self-government. The Pilgrims on board claimed the right to "covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic" with "just and equal laws."

The English Bill of Rights was another big step in limiting the kings powers. It guaranteed elections to Parliament and protected freedom of speech without being hauled off to jail. It also protected the right to petition the king.

The Common Sense wasn't a legal document, but a influential pamphlet that made the case for American Revolution. It mocked monarchy and justified the colonists' right to rebel and set up a government of their own.

Seite 3

Taxes in Britain were not going to very important or good causes. This and many other problems lead to the colonists getting kinda ticked off.

The Declaration of Independence was like a breakup letter to the British. The British responded to American independence by invading and ultimately losing the Revolutionary War

The Declaration of Independence contained a lot of complaining, but no concrete plans for a new government.

Here's (an extremely condensed version of) what the Articles of Confederation government looked like:

National Congress with limited power. Possessed power to declare war, negotiate treaties, and establish currency, but no power to tax, draft soldiers, or regulate trade. Could only request money and troops from the states.

No executive to enforce the decisions of Congress.

No judiciary to provide a uniform interpretation of laws.

States represented equally (not based on population) in Congress, meaning one vote for each state, regardless of size. (For Delaware, it has been all downhill since.

Legislation required approval of 9 of 13 states to pass.

The Articles could be amended only by unanimous consent.

They failed miserably with the Articles of Confederation, so they made the Preamble of the Constitution. Preamble was written by Gouverneur Morris.

The branches of government would be in constant competition for power and influence, with the result that no institution would gain an upper hand and develop into a tyrant. The result was what's known as the system of checks and balances.

Here are the basics:

Legislative's checks on the executive: Makes laws, may override presidential vetoes with two-thirds vote, and may impeach the President. Senate must confirm treaties and presidential appointments. Congress has the sole authority to declare war.

Legislative's checks on the judiciary: Creates lower courts, must confirm judicial nominees, and may impeach judges.

Executive's checks on the legislative: May propose and veto legislation.

Executive's checks on the judiciary: Nominates Supreme Court and federal judges, can grant pardons.

Judiciary's check on the executive: Rules on constitutionality of executive actions. Once appointed by the president, judges enjoy life tenure.

Judiciary's check on the legislative: Rules on constitutionality of legislation.

Seite 4

Supporters of the Constitution were called Federalists, while opponents were called Anti-Federalists, and the fight between them over whether the Constitution should be ratified—that is, approved by the states and put into action—was a truly close call.

Actually, they had some pretty good reasons to doubt the Constitution. They objected to states' loss of power under the new system, the federal tax power, the "aristocratic Senate," and the power of the judiciary. But the main problem raised by the Anti-Federalists had to do with what the new Constitution was missing: a Bill of Rights. They argued that, without a list of specific protections, a newly powerful government would threaten individuals' liberties.

The rule of law basically means that final authority lies in a written legal code that applies to everyone. Theoretically, no one is above the law, not even the rich and powerful.

Constitutional law: Covers interpretations of the powers of the federal government, disputes between the branches of government, disputes between the federal government and states, and the scope of the rights protected by Constitutional amendments.

Criminal law: Law designed to punish those who commit crimes or harms against others. In criminal cases, the government prosecutes the accused.

Civil law: Law designed to resolve disputes between private parties and compensate victims. An example of the difference between criminal and civil law: if your neighbor attacks you with a shovel, the state can charge the neighbor with assault in a criminal case; if the neighbor negligently leaves their shovel in a place where you trip over it, you can sue the neighbor in a civil case.

Military law: Law that covers crimes committed by members of the armed forces. The Constitution authorizes the creation of federal military courts, or courts-martial, to try these offenses, which can include uniquely military issues like "dereliction of duty," as well as ordinary crimes.

Seite 5

There are three major ways to become a U.S. citizen: by birthplace, by parentage, and by naturalization

Obey the laws: Pretty self-explanatory. Of course, non-citizens have to obey the laws, too, but the idea is that citizens will have an even stronger reason to go along because they can participate in making the laws by voting.

Pay taxes: Everyone's favorite! Citizens have to file income taxes once a year. Actually, so do legal residents; many illegal immigrants also pay income taxes because those taxes are withheld from their paychecks just as they are for legal workers. And, of course, we all pay sales tax every time we buy anything in most states. Sure, taxes can be a pain, but the famous Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., once said, "Taxes are the price we pay for civilized society." In other words, all the things we take for granted as part of living in America—roads, sewers, police and fire protection, schools, streetlights, and so on—are all paid for by taxes.

Defend the nation: Citizens are required to serve in the military to defend the country if they are drafted. We haven't had a military draft since 1973 and aren't likely to have one in the near future, but male citizens are still required to sign up for the Selective Service by age 18. This keeps their names on file in case a draft is called. (Women aren't currently required to register for any potential drafts, but give it time: the ban on women in combat was only lifted in January 2013.) Last but not least, Conscientious Objectors are pacifists with a moral or religious objection to war and don't need to fight. It's tough to receive Conscientious Objector status, though; people can't just go to church on Easter and call it a year.

Serve on juries: The Constitution guarantees the right to trial by a jury of one's peers, which of course only works if the peers show up. If citizens get a summons to serve on a jury, they're required to report for jury duty on a specified date. If you report for jury duty, you aren't guaranteed to serve—you might be rejected in the jury selection process—but you do have to present yourself as a candidate.

Bill of Rights:

Freedom of Speech

Freedom to bear arms

No soldiers intruding houses

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trials

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The First Amendment protects six basic rights: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of petition, freedom of religion, and freedom from government establishment of religion.

The Fourth Amendment protects people from "unreasonable search and seizures." A search is most commonly "made reasonable" by obtaining a search warrant.

14th amendment guarantees that all people must have "equal protection of the laws. Equal protection (along with due process) means that laws in almost all cases have to treat everyone just the same, which outlaws discrimination

Through the process called incorporation, the Supreme Court has used the Fourteenth Amendment to expand the coverage of the Bill of Rights. Now, neither state governments nor Washington can trample on our basic Constitutional rights.

Seite 6

Thirteenth Amendment: Adopted right after the Civil War in 1865. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, which normally we'd go into great detail about, but now we can just tell you to go out and seeLincoln.

Fourteenth Amendment: Adopted in 1868. We covered above how its initial goal was to ensure equal protection for the newly freed slaves, but it specified equal protection for "any person," which is why its importance grew so much.

Fifteenth Amendment: Adopted in 1870. This amendment prevents federal and state governments from denying voting rights based on race. Of course, many states found ways to get around this law and continue denying or suppressing the vote to minorities well into the 20th century.

Nineteenth Amendment: Adopted in 1920. The Nineteenth Amendment expanded voting rights to women. Thanks, SBA!

Twenty-fourth Amendment: Adopted in 1964. It prevents polecats, er, poll taxes (taxes on voting), which many states had used as a way to prevent minorities from voting.

Twenty-sixth Amendment: Adopted in 1971. This amendment lowered the voting age to 18. Because we all know that 18-year-olds are wise, mature, worldly individuals.

Marbury v. Madison (1803) The case in which the Court first claimed the right of judicial review. This power, which is not in the Constitution, has generally been accepted as an important check on the President and Congress ever since because it allows the Court to strike down laws and executive actions by ruling them unconstitutional.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Ugh, one of the bad ones. In Plessy, the Court set up the notorious standard of "separate but equal," which allowed public racial segregation in schools, railroad cars, drinking fountains, restaurants, and basically anything else racist white folks felt like segregating.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) Yay! The Court overruled Plessy in 1954, holding that school segregation was unconstitutional after all. This would be the basis for laws and court rulings ending public segregation in other areas over the subsequent decades.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) The Court expanded the right to an attorney to defendants charged with crimes in state courts. Now states, not just the feds, had to pay for a lawyer if someone couldn't afford one. This ended the sad-but-also-funny-but-really-though-just-sad spectacle of defendants trying to go toe-to-toe with trained and licensed prosecutors.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) This ruling created the famous "Miranda warning." If you're arrested for a crime, your statements aren't admissible in court unless you're informed of your Constitutional rights, like the right against self-incrimination (known as "the right to remain silent") and the right to an attorney.

In re Gault (1967) The Court ruled that juveniles charged with crimes get most of the same due process protections that adults get. Clearly, this is Bart Simpson's favorite Supreme Court ruling.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Wow, the 1960s were a pretty happenin' year for Supreme Court rulings. This ruling protects some of students' First Amendment rights in schools. In this case, a suspension of students for wearing armbands protesting the Vietnam War was overturned because neither "students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

U.S. v. Nixon (1974) This was an important ruling in the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon. The Court ruled that the president had no right to withhold evidence relevant to a criminal trial (in this case, recordings relating to the Watergate break-in). More broadly, it established that nobody—no, not even the POTUS—is above the law.

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) Boo? The Court held that school newspapers have only very limited First Amendment protections on the grounds that a student newspaper is "a classroom activity," not "a forum for public expression." This kind of put a damper on some of that exciting Tinker v. Des Moines mojo the Supreme Court had got going two decades earlier.

Bush v. Gore (2000) Everyone's favorite thing about Florida! Except for Disney World. And the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. And Miami. And oranges. Okay, so maybe it's no one's favorite thing about Florida. The Court ended the Florida recount in the contested 2000 election, essentially making George W. Bush the next president. Unusually, though, the Court also said that its decision was for a one-time-only emergency—so unlike most decisions, it could not be used as precedent. Maybe, like the rest of America, they just wanted to forget the whole thing ever happened.

Seite 7

Dems the Breaks Democrats tend to be liberal, and they usually believe that government ought to take an active role in promoting social justice and equal opportunity. Important Democratic policies include

Support for universal health care

Government spending on education, housing, infrastructure, and environmental protection

Government support of unionization; and progressive taxation (where the wealthy pay higher tax rates)

Liberals celebrate the expansion of rights for underprivileged groups as a major theme in American history, and they have been at the forefront of the civil rights, feminist, and gay rights movements.

Where Democrats talk about "social justice," Republicans often talk about "individual responsibility." They usually support:

Lower taxes

Privatization of government functions

Curtailed federal programs

Less overall government spending

In general, most of us make our decisions on the basis of three reasons:

Candidate appeal

Party identification

Last but certainly not least, issues matter, too

Issue voting can be either prospective or retrospective. Prospective issue voting means supporting or opposing a candidate based on promises. ("He said he'd appropriate $100 million to supply me with ice cream!") Retrospective issue voting means supporting or opposing a candidate as a way to reward or punish him or her for past actions. ("He said last election that he'd appropriate $100 million to supply me with ice cream, and he lied!")

A rough outline of policy-making would look like this:

Problem identification: What problem are we trying to solve? How do we even know it's a problem? How did it come to the government's attention? Which government, if any, is responsible for it (i.e., federal, state, local)?

Policy formulation: What are the alternative potential solutions? What are the costs and benefits of each possible solution (cost-benefit analysis)? Who benefits from each alternative?

Policy adoption: Once we've decided what needs to be done, who's going to do it? Do we need to pass a law, or use an executive order from the president, or let a regulatory agency take care of it? Do we have to tack on a bunch of extra measures and addendums to get other legislators on board?"

Policy implementation: Now that we've settled on a solution and decided who's going to carry it out, what details need to be worked out to put it into practice? How much money should be spent, and where should it come from?

Policy evaluation: Okay, did it work? How do we know it worked, and how are we measuring success?