Cracking the AP U.S. Government & Politics Exam, 2012 Edition – Read Now and Download Mobi

Editorial
Rob Franek, VP Test Prep Books, Publisher
Seamus Mullarkey, Associate Publisher
Laura Braswell, Senior Editor
Selena Coppock, Editor
Heather Brady, Editor

Random House Publishing Team
Tom Russell, Publisher
Nicole Benhabib, Publishing Manager
Ellen L. Reed, Production Manager
Alison Stoltzfus, Associate Managing Editor

The Princeton Review, Inc
111 Speen Street, Suite 550
Framingham, MA 01701
E-mail: [email protected]

The Princeton Review is not affiliated with Princeton University.

Copyright © 2011 by The Princeton Review, Inc.

Cover design © 2011 by Random House, Inc.
Cover art © 2011 Daniel Kaesler/ Alamy

All rights reserved. Published in the United States by Random House, Inc., New York, and in Canada by Random House of Canada Limited, Toronto.

eISBN: 978-0-307-94450-4
ISSN: 1097-2757

Editor: Calvin Cato
Production Editor: Stephanie Tantum
Production Coordinator: Deborah A. Silvestrini

2012 Edition

v3.1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I want to thank all the great Princeton Review teachers I’ve worked with over the years. They are quite simply the brightest, most creative, and most energetic group of people I’ve ever come across, and they are undoubtedly The Princeton Review’s greatest asset.

Special thanks also go to Richard Strean, Matthew Polazzo, and John Hoj for their expertise. Finally, thanks to my family, the guys in my band—5 Chinese Brothers—and most especially to Lisa.

—Tom Meltzer

The Princeton Review would like to thank John Moscatiello for his work updating the 2012 edition of this book.

CONTENTS

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Acknowledgments

Introduction

PART I: THE TEST AND HOW TO CRACK IT

1      About the Advanced Placement Program

2      Being a Good Test-Taker

3      Cracking the Multiple-Choice Section

4      Cracking the Free Response Section

PART II: AP U.S. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS REVIEW

5      The Constitutional Underpinnings

Practice Questions

6      Public Opinion and the Media

Practice Questions

7      Political Parties, Interest Groups, PACs, and 527 Groups

Practice Questions

8      Elections

Practice Questions

9      Institutions of Government

• Congress

• The President

• The Judiciary and the Law

• The Bureaucracy

Practice Questions

10    Public Policy

Practice Questions

11    Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Practice Questions

12    Answers and Explanations to Chapter Quizzes

PART III: THE PRINCETON REVIEW AP U.S. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS PRACTICE TESTS AND EXPLANATIONS

13    Practice Test 1

Section I

Section II

14    Practice Test 1: Answers and Explanations

15    Practice Test 2

Section I

Section II

16    Practice Test 2: Answers and Explanations

Glossary

The Constitution of the United States of America

Index

About the Author

INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS THE PRINCETON REVIEW?

The Princeton Review is an international test-preparation company with branches in all major U.S. cities and several cities abroad. In 1981, John Katzman started teaching an SAT prep course in his parents’ living room. Within five years, The Princeton Review had become the largest SAT prep program in the country.

Our phenomenal success in improving students’ scores on standardized tests is due to a simple, innovative, and radically effective philosophy: Study the test, not just what the test claims to test. This approach has led to the development of techniques for taking standardized tests based on the principles the test writers themselves use to write the tests.

The Princeton Review has found that its methods work not just for cracking the SAT, but for any standardized test. We’ve already successfully applied our system to the GMAT, LSAT, MCAT, and GRE, to name just a few. Obviously you need to be well versed in government and politics to do well on the AP U.S. Government & Politics Exam, but you should remember that any standardized test is partly a measure of your ability to think like the people who write standardized tests. This book will help you brush up on your political knowledge and prepare for the exam using our time-tested principle: Crack the system based on how the test is created.

We also offer books and online services that cover an enormous variety of education and career-related topics. If you’re interested, check out our website at PrincetonReview.com.

PART I

The Test and
How to Crack It

1

ABOUT THE ADVANCED
PLACEMENT PROGRAM

WHAT IS THE ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAM?

The fact that you’re reading this book means that you probably already know something about the Advanced Placement (AP) program: After all, how many people pick up a test-preparation guide for a little light reading? So, you probably already know that the AP courses at your high school are supposed to be the toughest available and that, at the end of the school year, you can take an AP exam that may allow you to earn college credit for your work in the course. However, there are a few things you probably don’t know: Who decides what constitutes an AP course? Are AP courses the same at every high school? Who writes and grades the AP exam? This section of the book answers these and other related questions.

The Advanced Placement program is coordinated by an organization called the College Board. The College Board oversees college-admissions examinations; it also publishes test and course materials from previous years, holds seminars on college admissions, and sponsors educational research. Its membership is made up of college administrators and educators; college admissions officers; and high school administrators, college counselors, and teachers.

The College Board appoints a development committee for each of the 34 subjects in which AP exams are available. Each committee meets to decide what should be covered in an AP course and what should be on the AP exam. The Government and Politics Examination Committee, which writes both the U.S. Government and the Comparative Government Exams, is made up of six people—two high school government teachers and four college professors (two experts in U.S. government, two experts in comparative government). Its decisions are included in a publication called Advanced Placement Course Description: Government and Politics, which is available from the College Board. Don’t bother buying it—our book includes all the pertinent information from that booklet. If you want to take a look at it, ask your teacher if he or she has a copy; most social studies departments have copies of all the important College Board AP publications. It is also available as a free download on the College Board’s website: www.collegeboard.com.

The development committee has two important jobs: to update the course description to reflect recent events and trends in political science and to write the AP U.S. Government and Politics examinations. The committee is therefore responsible for making changes to both the course syllabus and to the test content and format. When the committee finishes writing an exam, it hands the test over to the Educational Testing Service (ETS), which prints and administers the exam. ETS also “normalizes” the multiple-choice section; that is, ETS makes sure that it is no harder or easier than the previous year’s multiple-choice section. Yes, ETS is the same group that administers the SAT and many other admissions exams; fortunately, its role in creating AP exams is more limited than it is on the SAT.

No one forces teachers to teach AP Government in a particular way; the committee’s requirements are actually more like suggestions. If you discuss your AP Government course with a friend taking the same course at a different school, you will likely find that his or her course is noticeably different from yours (especially if you are using different textbooks). Don’t worry about these differences: There is no one right way to teach AP Government. All teachers will interpret the meaning and importance of events in their own manner. In that way, your AP Government course is similar to a college course. In most other ways, it will probably be easier than a typical college course, although much harder than a typical high school course.

SHOULD YOU TAKE AP CLASSES? SHOULD YOU TAKE AP EXAMS?

There’s an obvious downside to taking AP classes: They are more difficult than regular classes. AP classes mean more detailed lectures, more homework, more research papers, more tests, and possibly a lower grade. So why take an AP course?

First, if you’re thinking about going to college, you want as many AP courses on your transcript as you can comfortably handle. These classes indicate to your prospective schools that you are serious about studying. Many admissions offices will give your AP grade a one-level “bump;” that is, they will treat your C as a B. (By the way, that’s how some high school students end up with GPAs above 4.0; they get almost all A’s, including their AP courses.) College admissions officers are more favorably disposed to students who take AP courses.

Second, AP courses help you develop skills you will need in college. A good AP teacher will assign research papers and administer essay tests; require you to study primary source material, maps, census data, and many other resources beyond your textbook; encourage discussion of course material; and lecture in a way that prompts you to take good notes in order to pass the course. All these aspects of AP courses will help prepare you for your college courses.

Third, AP courses are supposed to prepare you for AP exams, which can be quite helpful in getting your college degree. Many schools award college credit for good grades on AP tests. Because college credits cost money, success on AP exams could save you and/or your parents a lot of money. In some cases, a school will allow you to skip an introductory class if you have a good AP score. In a best-case scenario, taking AP tests can help you skip a year of college (and save a year’s tuition). It’s important to note that you do not have to take an AP course to take an AP exam. If you feel you’re up to speed in a subject, you should take the AP exam regardless of the course you took. Remember also that it is the individual college, and not the College Board, that decides whether to grant advanced placement for AP scores; the schools themselves also determine what is considered a satisfactory grade. Before committing to an AP exam, contact your prospective schools and find out their AP policies. You can also check the school’s course catalogue: Almost all schools print their AP policies in their catalogues, which are often available online.

Taking AP tests can help your college application in other ways as well. The College Board confers a number of awards to students who excel on three or more AP exams. The AP Scholar Awards are given to students who exceed an average grade of 3 on three or more AP exams; more prestigious awards are given to students who take more tests and receive higher grades. These awards are noted on the score reports that are sent to your prospective colleges.

HOW DO YOU SIGN UP FOR THE EXAM? WHAT WILL HAPPEN ON TEST DAY?

If you want to take one or more AP exams, the first thing you should do is visit your college counselor. He or she will direct you to the AP coordinator for your school. The AP coordinator is usually a teacher or counselor who is in charge of collecting exam fees and telling you when and where the exam will be held. If for some reason you can’t take the test through your school—for example, if you’re the only student who wants to take an AP exam or your school has not designated a coordinator—you can still take the test through another school. To find out which schools in your area offer the test, call the College Board’s AP Services office at 609-771-7300 or look on the website at www.collegeboard.com.

It costs $87 to take AP exams within the United States. This fee is expensive, but still much cheaper than the cost of the college course that you may place out of. Your school keeps $8 for administrative fees, and the College Board suggests that the school refund that money to you if you and your family have financial difficulties. You may also apply to the College Board for a $22 fee reduction based on financial need. If, for some reason, you need to take the test at a time other than when it is being offered, you may be charged an additional fee.

THE COLLEGE BOARD’S SUGGESTED TIMETABLE FOR STUDENTS PREPARING TO TAKE AN AP TEST

• January—discuss with your government teacher and your college counselor whether you should take the exam. If you decide to take the test, meet with the AP coordinator and hand over your fees. If you need to make special arrangements because of a disability, do so at this time. If your school does not offer AP exams, contact the College Board to find the location of the nearest school offering the tests.
• Mid-February—if you need to take the exam at another school and you still haven’t made plans to do so, DO IT NOW!
• May—AP exams are administered.
• Early and mid-June—AP exams are graded. If you want your score report sent to schools other than those you indicated on your test registration, or if you want to cancel your test scores, you have until June 15 to contact the College Board with your request (learn more about canceling your test scores on the next page, under the heading Special Circumstances).
• Early July—your prospective colleges start to receive your grades.
• Early to mid-July—you receive your grades.

The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam is usually offered at 8:00 A.M. The test may start a little earlier or later at your school, but not by much: College Board rules prohibit starting before 6:00 A.M. or after 10:00 A.M. On test day, you will need to bring

• Two number-two pencils (for the multiple-choice section). Make sure you have an eraser.
• A dark-blue or black pen (with which to write your essays).
• A watch (in case there’s no clock in your testing room). Do not bring a watch that beeps or has an alarm or a calculator; it will be confiscated by the proctor.

THINGS YOU MAY NOT BRING TO THE EXAM

• Cell phones, PDAs, MP3 players, pagers, or any other electronic or communication device.
• Books, compasses, correction fluid, dictionaries, highlighters, notes, or colored pencils.
• Scratch paper (notes can be made on portions of the exam booklets).
• Watches that beep or have an alarm.
• Portable listening or recording devices (even with headphones) or photographic equipment.
• Computers.
• Clothing with subject-related information.

Some exceptions to these rules are made by the College Board for students with disabilities.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

Students who seek special testing conditions to accommodate disabilities should have either a current Individualized Education Program (IEP) on file at their school or a signed letter from a doctor describing the disability. The following options are available to qualified students: large-type tests and Braille tests for those with poor or no vision (poor-sighted students may also have an aide read to them and take dictation for the essays); the right to take the exam at a different, more accommodating location; and the right to take the exam untimed. Take note: You must present documentation of your disability for your score report to indicate “Certified Disability.” Make sure your documentation is in order long before test day.

PROBLEMS ON TEST DAY

On rare occasions, the College Board writes a lousy question. Sometimes ETS misprints a question, misprints a page of the exam (or leaves it blank), or makes some other error. If, during the test, you believe that one or more of the questions on the test doesn’t work, you should contact the College Board as soon as possible after the test. Provide the test title, the question number, and a description of what you think was wrong with the question. But honestly, this is extremely unlikely to happen in a government exam—such errors almost invariably occur on math or science tests. If you do see a misprint, you should report it immediately to the proctor, and after the exam, to the College Board at the phone number, address, and e-mail address provided at the end of this chapter.

More common are problems in test administration. Maybe your proctor gave the directions incorrectly. For you, that should be no big deal, as you’ll know all the directions well before test day because you read this book. The big problem is a proctor who times the exam incorrectly, particularly if he or she gives you too little time (you could report an error if your proctor gave you too much time, but why would you want to?). In the case of a timing error, notify the school’s AP coordinator immediately. If the coordinator doesn’t help (maybe he or she is the proctor who screwed up the timing), go see the principal. If you wait too long, you may get stuck with the score you got on the mistimed exam.

That covers what happens when the College Board, ETS, or your proctor messes up. What about when you screw up? If you think (or know) that you blew the exam, you have until June 15 to contact the College Board and cancel your score. June 15 is also the date by which you have to contact the College Board if you want to withhold your grades from certain colleges or add schools to the list of those receiving your grades. Unless you’re reasonably certain you got a 1 on an AP exam, you probably shouldn’t cancel your grade.

Finally, here’s a list of things that will get you thrown out of the test, lead to your scores being canceled, and raise serious suspicions that you are a cheater.

• Leafing through the exam booklet before the exam begins.
• Trying to give answers to or receive answers from someone else during the exam.
• Working on the wrong section of the exam.
• Continuing to work on the exam after you have been instructed to stop.
• Tearing a page out of your test booklet or trying to sneak the entire exam out of the test site.
• Looking in a textbook, notebook, or encyclopedia during the exam.
• Behaving disruptively.

WHAT IS THE AP U.S. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS EXAM LIKE? HOW IS IT GRADED?

The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam is a two-part test. The chart below illustrates the test’s structure.

The test is designed to test an overview of U.S. government. It doesn’t give all subjects equal weight, however. Here’s how the test questions break down.

While most of the questions deal with the institutions of government, the questions are nearly evenly divided among the four institutions. There are no definition questions, although you need to know the definitions of words to understand the questions. The questions tend to deal with the dynamics of how government operates within a political environment. For example, you may be asked how interest groups attempt to influence policy making in Congress and the bureaucracy or how the president attempts to influence Congress through public opinion. The test writers want to know whether you understand the general principles that guide U.S. government and the making of public policy.

In addition to the multiple-choice questions, there are four mandatory free-response questions. You’ll have a total of 100 minutes to answer all of them. You should spend approximately 25 minutes per question, but be aware that you must manage your own time. Additional time spent on one question will reduce the time that you have left to answer another. Writing more than is necessary to answer the question will not earn you extra points.

The graders assign each of your free-response answers a numerical score. Weighing the average on the free-responses and the score on the multiple-choice questions each as 50 percent, the graders create a final score from a low of 1 to a high of 5. The chart below tells you what that final score means.

After you’ve read this book, take our practice tests. To score your multiple-choice questions, award yourself one point for every correct answer and credit 0 points to your score for every question you left blank. Remember that there is no longer a guessing penalty on the test. This will give you your raw score.

Here’s what that score would translate into on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam, assuming you performed as well on the essay questions.

Of course, if you follow our advice for how to write a good free-response essay, you could score higher on the free-response section than on the multiple-choice section and potentially increase your final grade by one point.

Recently, the College Board announced a major revision to a number of its AP programs, but not to the U.S. Government and Politics Exam, so you have nothing to worry about for this exam. These revisions are scheduled to roll out over the next few years, beginning with small-scale programs in French, German, and World History for the 2011–2012 academic year and continuing the following year with Biology, Latin, and Spanish. In the 2013–2014 academic year, the U.S. History Exam, one of most popular AP exams will receive a significant overhaul.

FINALLY…

A lot of the information in this chapter also appears in a free College Board publication called Advanced Placement: Bulletin for Students and Parents. It includes sample test questions and updated information about the exam. It also contains some test-taking suggestions. We at The Princeton Review think our suggestions are much better.

You should be able to get a copy from your counselor. The publication, as well as information and sample questions for individual subjects, is also available for download from the College Board website (www.collegeboard.com). Also check out the AP Central section of the site. If all else fails, you can request more information from the College Board. The phone number is 609-771-7300, and the e-mail address is [email protected].

2

BEING A GOOD
TEST-TAKER

Very few students stop to think about how to improve their test-taking skills. Most assume that if they study hard, they will test well; if they don’t study, they will do poorly. Most students continue to believe this even after experience teaches them otherwise. Have you ever studied really hard for an exam, then blown it on test day? Have you ever aced an exam you thought you weren’t well prepared for? Most students have experienced one, if not both, of these scenarios. The lesson should be clear: Your score on any test is influenced by many factors, and test material review time is just one of them.

This section will provide you with insights that will help you perform better on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam—and on other exams as well.

TEST ANXIETY

Everybody experiences some anxiety before and during an exam. To a certain extent, test anxiety can be helpful: Some people find that they perform faster and more efficiently under stress. If you’ve ever pulled an all-nighter to write a paper and ended up doing good work, you know the feeling.

However, too much stress is definitely a bad thing. Hyperventilating during the test, for example, almost always leads to a lower score. If you find that you stress out during exams, here are a few preemptive actions you can take.

• Eliminate as many surprises as you can before taking the test. Make sure you know where the test is being held, when it starts, what type of questions are going to be asked, and how long the test will take. Have all your test-taking supplies, such as pencils, pens, a watch, and ID, laid out the night before your exam. You don’t want to be worrying about any of these things on test day or, even worse, after the test has already begun.
• Take a reality check. Evaluate your situation realistically before the test begins. If you’ve studied well, remind yourself that you are prepared for the test. Remember that many others taking the test are not as well prepared, and (in your classes, at least) you are being graded against them, so you have an advantage. If you didn’t study enough, accept the fact that you will probably not ace the test. Don’t stress out or fixate on how much you don’t know. Make sure you get to every question you know something about. Your job is to score as high as you can by maximizing the benefits of what you do know. In either case, it is best to think of a test as if it were a game: How can you get the most points in the time allotted to you? Always pick questions you can answer easily and quickly before you answer questions that will take more time.
• Try to relax. Slow, deep breathing works for almost everybody. Take a few seconds, close your eyes, take a few slow, deep breaths, and concentrate on nothing but your inhalation and exhalation for a few seconds. This is a basic form of meditation, and it should help you clear your mind of stress and, as a result, better concentration on the test. If you’ve ever taken yoga classes, you probably know some other good relaxation techniques. Use them when you can (obviously, anything that requires leaving your seat and, say, assuming a handstand position won’t be allowed by even the most free-spirited proctors).

The best way to avoid stress is to study both the test material and the test itself. By reading this book, you are taking a major step toward a stress-free AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam. Congratulations!

PACING

A big part of scoring well on an exam is working at a consistent pace. The worst mistake test-takers make is that they come to a question that stumps them and, rather than just skip it, they panic and stall. Time doesn’t stand still when you’re working on a question you can’t answer, and it’s not unusual for students to waste five minutes on a single question because they are too stubborn to cut their losses and move on.

Don’t make that mistake. Tests are like marathons—you do best when you work through them at a steady pace. You can always come back to a question you don’t know. When you do, very often you will find that your previous mental block is gone, and you’ll wonder why the question perplexed you the first time around. Even if you’re still stumped, you won’t have wasted valuable time you could have spent on questions you do know.

The benefit of keeping a steady pace is particularly obvious on multiple-choice tests such as the SAT or Part I of the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam. On these tests, every question is worth the same amount toward your final score. When all the questions on a test are equally valued, no individual question is any more important than another. You should always skip questions that give you trouble until you’ve answered every question that you know the answer to.

Finally, you should set a realistic goal for your final score. If you simply try to get the best score you possibly can, you will probably overextend yourself. In trying to do too much, you will hurt your score with careless mistakes. Check with the schools you are applying to. Do you need a 3 to earn credit for the test? If you get a raw score of 36 (out of 60) on the multiple-choice section and do as well on the essays, you’ll get a 3. Beginning with the May 2011 exam, AP exams in all subjects will no longer include a “guessing penalty” of –¼ of point for every incorrect answer. Instead, students will be assessed only on the total number of correct questions. A lot of AP materials, even those you receive in your AP class, may not include this information. It is important to remember that if you are running out of time, you need to fill in all the bubbles before the time for the multiple-choice section is up. Even if you don’t plan to spend a lot of time on every question and even if you have no idea what the correct answer is, you need to fill something in. Only students who are shooting for a 5 should try to answer every question on the multiple-choice section; everyone else should go slower and spend more time on each question to avoid careless mistakes.

The following is an approximation of how to pace yourself on the AP test:

We’ll talk more about pacing on the multiple-choice section in the next chapter.

IN THE WEEKS BEFORE THE EXAM

There are a few things you should start doing any time after January 1 (but certainly before May 1). One of them is to read this book. Here are some others.

• Ask your teacher for copies of old AP U.S. Government and Politics Exams. The College Board releases an AP exam every few years. Your teacher may have worked with you on these released exams. If not, see if your teacher has copies of them. They are all available through the College Board.

  You should also visit the College Board’s website and download the free sample essay questions from past years. These can be found at www.collegeboard.com/​student/​testing/​ap/​prep_free.html.

  Make sure you get the most out of the released exams by understanding why you got some wrong. Go over your incorrect answers, and even your correct ones, with your teacher after school or during a free period. Note that the subject matter of many of the questions is similar from year to year. Doing well on a practice test, and understanding why you did well, is the best confidence-builder for the real thing.

• Keep up with current events by reading online newspaper articles. One excellent way to study the structure of the federal government and the American political landscape is to read articles in reputable newspapers. News aggregators like RealClearPolitcs.com link to articles and editorials in a number of different newspapers from all over the country and from all political perspectives. Spend a few minutes in the morning or after school reading these articles and look for brief descriptions and definitions of government institutions. From your reading, you can also collect a number of anecdotes for your free-response essays.
• Commit a little time every night to test preparation. A little studying every night is much better than a lot of cramming during the week before the exam. In early to mid-April, try to set aside 20 to 30 minutes three or four times a week to review this book, the textbook you used in class, your notes on your teacher’s lectures, and any other class materials. You can also surf the Web for government-related sites. There are thousands of them.
• When reviewing the material in this book don’t forget to use the index. It’s useful in the course of your studying when you want specific information and can’t remember where you read it—but there’s more to it than that. When you’ve just about finished with the book, take a look at the entries that have several page references; these are some of the most important subjects, and you would do well to review them again. Be sure to read through the glossary. You could also make flashcards to review important glossary and index terms.

IN THE FINAL WEEK BEFORE THE EXAM

In a best case scenario, you should not cram for the test. However, cramming is better than not studying at all. If it’s one week before the test and you haven’t started studying yet, you should devote as many hours as possible to studying.

If, however, you have been preparing, you should do the following:

• Maintain your usual routine. Try not to go to bed much later or earlier than usual. Don’t start a new diet or exercise program. In other words, stay the course.
• Do a general subject review. Stop concentrating on memorizing details. Focus instead on “big picture” issues, such as political, social, and economic trends. Stop asking yourself questions like, “What are the responsibilities of the House Judiciary Committee?” and start asking yourself questions like, “How many examples of the system of checks and balances can I come up with?”
• Read and become familiar with all the directions for the exam. They’re all in this book. Don’t waste valuable time during the exam trying to understand instructions. Know what you’re supposed to do on each section of the test long before test day.

ON TEST DAY

• Start the day with a reasonable, but not huge, breakfast. You’ll need energy for the exam. Have a nice breakfast, but nothing so filling that it will put you to sleep. Beware of coffee, tea, or anything else that will make you have to use the restroom during the test.
• Bring everything you need. You’ll need two number-two pencils (for the multiple-choice section), an eraser, a dark-blue or black pen (for the essay sections), and a watch. Do not bring a watch with an alarm or one that beeps; it will be taken away from you.
• Wear comfortable clothing.
• Bring a snack. A piece of fruit or a candy bar during the break can give you a much-needed energy boost. Some proctors don’t allow any food or drinks in the testing room, but many will let you eat during your break.

FINALLY…

Learn everything you can about the exam. The more you know, the less you will be surprised during the test, and the more easily and quickly the exam will go. The following chapters will tell you all about the multiple-choice and essay sections of the exam.

SUMMARY

• Start studying for the test a month or two in advance. Just 30 to 45 minutes of studying a few nights per week will make a huge difference.
• Ask your teacher for copies of old AP U.S. Government and Politics exams. Write some practice essays and review them with your teacher.
• Don’t change your regular routine in the week leading up to the test, but refocus your studies from details to “big picture” questions. Get a good night’s sleep before the test day.
• On test day, wear something comfortable. Have a nice and sensible breakfast. Bring pencils, an eraser, a pen, and a watch to the test. Also, bring a snack.
• Beat test anxiety. Prepare for the test so there will be few surprises on test day. Take deep, slow breaths to relax during the test.
• Maintain a steady pace throughout the exam. Don’t get hung up on any individual question. Set a target score and pace yourself to achieve your goal.

3

CRACKING THE
MULTIPLE-CHOICE SECTION

THE BASICS

The directions for the multiple-choice section of the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam are pretty simple. They read:

Directions: Each of the questions or incomplete statements below is followed by five suggested answers or completions. Select the one that is best in each case and then fill in the corresponding oval on the answer sheet.

In short, you’re being asked to do what you’ve done on many other multiple-choice exams: Pick the right answer, then bubble in your answer on a separate sheet of paper. You will not be given credit for answers you record in your test booklet (e.g., by circling them) but not on your answer sheet. The section consists of 60 questions, and you will be given 45 minutes to complete it.

The College Board also provides a breakdown of the general subject matter covered on the exam. This breakdown will not appear in your test booklet; it comes from the preparatory material the College Board publishes. Here again is the chart we showed you in Chapter 1.

Constitutional underpinnings

• the political and economic circumstances at the time of the framing of the Constitution
• the motivation of the framers
• the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation
• the strengths of the Constitution
• separation of powers
• the nature and political impact of federalism
• principles of democratic government
• system of checks and balances

Political beliefs and behavior

• the ideological beliefs people maintain regarding their government
• political socialization
• public opinion and its impact on policy
• how and why citizens vote as they do
• the methods of political participation
• the reasons citizens disagree over political beliefs and behavior

Political parties, interest groups, and mass media

• what parties do and how they operate
• how they are organized
• how they link citizens to government
• how they help make and use the rules of elections
• how electoral laws affect the outcome of elections
• what interest groups do and what makes them effective
• the role of PACs and their impact on the political process
• the types of mass media
• the purpose of the media
• the impact of the media on the political agenda

The institutions of government: Congress, president, judiciary, and bureaucracy

• the structure and function of the legislature, executive branch, judiciary, and bureaucracy
• the structural and political interrelationships of the institutions of government
• the connections between the national government, citizens, political parties, public opinion, elections, interest groups, and the states

Public policy

• the process of making public policy
• citizen participation in policy making
• the interactions between Congress, the courts, and the bureaucracy on policy making
• the impact of elections in policy making
• the participants in domestic and economic policy making
• the limitations of domestic and economic policy making

Civil rights and civil liberties

• substantive and procedural rights and liberties
• the impact of the Fourteenth Amendment on rights and liberties
• the consequences of judicial interpretation on rights and liberties

As you can see, the primary focus of the test is the nuts and bolts of the federal government. The test also emphasizes political activity—the factors that influence individual political beliefs, the conditions that determine how and why people vote, and the process by which groups form and attempt to influence the government. All these subjects, you should note, are important. As much as 30 percent (or as little as 10 percent) of your exam may focus on constitutional issues and civil rights.

TYPES OF QUESTIONS

The majority of questions on the multiple-choice section of the test are pretty direct. Here’s an example.

  1. A “pocket veto” can occur only when

(A) Congress amends a bill

(B) the president is out of the country

(C) a bill passes Congress with a greater than two-thirds majority in each house

(D) the Supreme Court has ruled that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional

(E) a bill reaches the president’s desk within 10 days of the end of a congressional session

Sometimes, the College Board makes the questions a little trickier. One way it does this is by phrasing a question in such a way that four answers are correct and one is incorrect. We call these questions “NOT/EXCEPT” questions because they usually contain one of those words (in capital letters, so they’re difficult to miss). Here’s an example.

  2. In the twentieth century, the Democratic Party traditionally received majority support from all of the following groups EXCEPT

(A) the wealthy

(B) African Americans

(C) Jews

(D) union members

(E) teachers

Another way is the Roman-numeral format question. This type of question can have more than one correct answer. Here’s an example.

  3. The increased use of the presidential primary since the 1960s has had the following effect(s)

    I. Weakened the power of the political parties

   II. Increased the power of political activists in the parties

  III. Increased the cost of running for political office

  IV. Increased the drama of the party convention

   V. Decreased the number of persons challenging incumbents

(A) I only

(B) I, II, and III only

(C) II and III only

(D) II and IV only

(E) III, IV, and V only

Once or twice during the multiple-choice section, you will be asked to interpret an illustration, often a map or a political cartoon. These are usually rather easy. The key is not to try to read too much between the lines. Here’s an example.

  4. The principle of government most relevant to the cartoon is

(A) judicial restraint

(B) checks and balances

(C) federalism

(D) executive privilege

(E) representative democracy

Finally, there will be one or two questions on the test asking you to interpret a graph or chart. Again, these are usually very direct, and the most important thing for you to do is not to overinterpret the data. The correct answer will be indisputably supported by the information in the chart. Here’s an example.

  5. Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the information presented in the chart above?

(A) Eisenhower was the most consistently popular president in the nation’s history.

(B) Kennedy received greater congressional support for his programs than did any other president during the period in question.

(C) Nixon’s lowest approval rating was the result of the Watergate scandal.

(D) The difference between Johnson’s highest and lowest approval ratings was the greatest for any president during the period in question.

(E) Eisenhower and Johnson were equally well liked by all Americans.

Answers to these and other drill questions appear at the end of this chapter.

HOW TO CRACK THE AP U.S. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS MULTIPLE-CHOICE SECTION

The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam is, by ETS standards, a straightforward test. Unlike the SAT, for example, on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam the questions and answers are not designed to trick you. The subject matter can be found easily in this textbook, often in the chapter summaries. You should, however, not be lulled into believing the test is easy because it covers material that can be readily obtained from reading the newspaper and watching television. This so-called “street knowledge” is not enough to ensure a passing grade on the exam. The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam is an academic test that requires knowledge from the textbook. Information acquired from contemporary sources such as newspapers and television will probably not be needed in the multiple-choice sections of the test. It will, however, be needed for the Essay sections of the test, particularly if you are asked for examples.

If you’ve paid attention in class, you should do well on this test. If you haven’t paid close attention, you may still be able to master the material if you review intensively. Use the subject review that appears later in this book as your guide. Either way, you will do better if you know what to expect of the test. On the next few pages, we’ll discuss some things that all AP U.S. Government and Politics multiple-choice sections have in common.

THE QUESTIONS ARE OF MIXED DIFFICULTY

The examination is made up of questions of varying difficulty. It is not unusual to have many questions on the examination that fewer than 50 percent of the students answer correctly. Some are so difficult that fewer than 25 percent of students answer them correctly. There are even some very easy questions, which the vast majority of students answer correctly. But watch out for the really difficult questions that may involve very technical issues, such as committee seniority or campaign finance reform.

QUESTIONS APPEAR IN A GENERAL ORDER OF DIFFICULTY

As you take the test, remember this general order of difficulty. You will probably sense that the questions are getting more difficult as you progress through the section. Knowing that the questions are indeed supposed to become increasingly difficult is one more way to be prepared for the test.

Although there are some easy questions and some difficult questions sprinkled throughout the exam—for example, on a recent exam one of the most difficult questions appeared in the first quarter of the test—questions toward the end of the section are, generally, more difficult than questions at the beginning of the section. Make this system work for you. You will be able to warm up on a few relatively easy questions before you see anything too scary. That said, everyone perceives questions differently, so don’t panic if you think the first few are difficult; you might have more luck with questions in the middle.

THERE ARE NO TRIVIAL PURSUIT QUESTIONS ON THIS EXAM

Here’s some more good news. The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam doesn’t ask about trivial matters. You will probably never see a question on the exam such as this one.

  6. The American equivalent of the British Exchequer is the

(A) House Finance Committee

(B) Internal Revenue Service

(C) United States Mint

(D) Office of Budget and Management

(E) Federal Reserve Board

To answer this question correctly, you would have to be fairly familiar with the British government. The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam does not require such knowledge. This question is atypical in another way as well: It does not have a varied selection of possible answers. Even if you had known that the British Exchequer has something to do with money and government, you could not have eliminated any of the incorrect answers on this question. On an actual AP test, at least a couple of these answers would have been completely unrelated to finance, and you could have eliminated them and guessed from among the remaining answers.

PROCESS OF ELIMINATION

It is more important to focus on eliminating incorrect answers than on finding the correct answers because that is the most efficient way to take a multiple-choice exam. Use Process of Elimination (POE) to whittle down the answer choices to one because incorrect answers are much easier to identify than the correct one is. When people look for the correct answer among the answer choices, they have a tendency to try to justify how each answer may be correct. They’ll adopt a forgiving attitude, but this is a situation in which savage brutality is needed. Eliminate incorrect answers. Terminate them with extreme prejudice. If you’ve done your job well, only the correct answer will be left standing at the end.

All this probably sounds pretty aggressive to you. It is. Good test takers take multiple-choice tests aggressively. They sift through the answer choices, discard incorrect answers without remorse, guess with impunity, and prowl the test searching for questions they can answer, all with the tenacity and ruthlessness of a shark. Alright, maybe that’s a bit overdramatic, but you get the point. So, eliminate as many answers as you can to increase your odds of getting difficult questions correct.

COMMON SENSE CAN HELP

Sometimes answers on the multiple-choice section contradict common sense. Eliminate those answers because common sense works on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam.

Think about which of the answer choices to the question below go against common sense.

  7. Which of the following best explains the way in which federal legislation is implemented?

(A) Most laws outline general goals and restrictions, which the federal bureaucracy interprets and translates into specific guidelines.

(B) The manner of implementing federal legislation is negotiated between a joint congressional committee and a presidential advisory committee.

(C) All of the regulations pertaining to a piece of legislation are contained within the legislation itself.

(D) After a bill is signed, all disputes pertaining to its implementation are decided by the congressional committee responsible for the bill.

(E) The details of implementing congressional legislation are worked out in the courts on a case-by-case basis.

Here’s How to Crack It

You should have been able to apply common sense to eliminate answers (D) and (E) pretty quickly. Congressional committees work on bills before they reach the floor for a vote, and this work takes up all their time. They would hardly have time to hear all disputes concerning bills that have already passed. Furthermore, such a system would violate the system of checks and balances, because the responsibility for interpreting laws belongs to the judiciary. All the same, the details of congressional legislation could never be worked out in the courts. There would simply be too many cases for the courts to be able to process them all. Similarly, answer (B) contradicts the principle of separation of powers. It is the executive branch’s responsibility to enforce the law; it is not required to confer with Congress on the manner in which it performs this task. Answer (C) is impractical. You have no doubt seen “photo ops” of politicians standing before the mountains of federal regulations on the books. Those regulations are created by the federal bureaucracy as guidelines for implementing legislation. They are not contained within the legislation itself. The correct answer, by Process of Elimination, is (A).

SUMMARY

• Familiarize yourself with the different types of questions that will appear in the multiple-choice section.
• Tailor your studying to suit the test’s most common topics. Don’t spend a lot of time studying civil rights and civil liberties until you have completely reviewed the workings of the federal government and the basics of political behavior.
• Rest assured that the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam tests a relatively small amount of information. Be confident: You can review this material fairly quickly and get a good grade on this exam.
• Remember also that most of the questions on this exam are of medium difficulty. The test does not bother with trivial matters or minute exceptions to general trends. The test writers want to know that you understand the general principles underlying U.S. government.
• Use Process of Elimination on all but the easiest questions. Once you have worked on a question, eliminated some answers, and convinced yourself that you cannot eliminate any other incorrect answers, you should guess and move on to the next question.
• Use common sense.
• Remember not to leave any questions blank. There is no “guessing penalty” on this exam!

ANSWER KEY FOR SAMPLE QUESTIONS IN THIS CHAPTER

1. E

2. A

3. B

4. C

5. D

6. B

7. A

4

CRACKING THE
FREE-RESPONSE SECTION

You may be surprised to see the words “free response” at the start of this chapter. No essay? What is a “free response,” anyway? The first thing to be aware of is that this response is hardly free. The College Board wants a very specific type of writing, and it is one that you might not be used to. Forget the idea of crafting a fine piece of writing that convinces the reader of your opinion. Instead, think “just the facts, ma’am.” Your basic goal here is to read the questions and answer them to the best of your ability.

You will have 100 minutes to answer four questions here, so be sure to budget your time well. Give as much detail as necessary to answer the question, but no more! Above all, don’t worry. So long as you know the basics of American government, this section should be a breeze.

WHAT ARE THE AP U.S. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS EXAM FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS LIKE?

The AP U.S. Government and Politics Free-Response section contains four free-response questions. Each counts equally. The entire free-response section counts as 50 percent of your examination grade. Even though the free responses are all mandatory, you may have some choices within a free-response question. For example, a question may look like this:

  1. Procedural due process rights have been expanded a great deal over the last half-century.

(a)   Define procedural due process and explain why it is important to the American legal system.

(b)   Explain the difference between procedural due process and substantive due process.

(c)   Choose two of the following cases and explain how they expanded procedural due process rights.

•   Mapp v. Ohio

•   Gideon v. Wainwright

•   Escobedo v. Illinois

•   Miranda v. Arizona

Choices within questions allow you to showcase what you know best, instead of having to write about many subjects, some of which you might not remember as well. Again, depth not breadth is the focus here. Think of this as a “data dump” where you can show off your knowledge and wow the grader. Note that you will not get a higher score for writing more than what the question requires. You cannot make up points lost in a previous free-response question, so be sure to focus on only the topic that the question asks about. If there is a choice within a question, make certain you choose the subject you know the most about. Be explicit. Also remember that if the question deals with a Supreme Court case, you shouldn’t worry about the background of the case. It is the ruling and the consequences that are important.

If you are confronted with a free-response question that you feel unprepared to answer, don’t panic. Skip it and come back to it later. Writing another free-response essay may get your juices flowing and prompt you to recall your knowledge of the first subject. Just remember to keep track of your time so that you have time to return to the question that you skipped.

Unlike the multiple-choice section of the test, you cannot be penalized for just attempting to write an answer. Therefore, never leave a free-response question blank. Write something about the subject, even if it is just basic knowledge you picked up from a magazine or a website.

The free-response essays are graded using an answer standard, to which only the graders have access. A certain number of points is given for each piece of information supplied correctly. The numerical grade of the essay is determined by adding the points earned for each part of the response.

Each free-response essay uses a different scoring standard. One essay could be graded using a total of five points, another a total of seven points, and another a total of ten points. While the total score for each question may differ, the value of each question is equal in determining the final score on the free-response section. Each of the four free-response questions is worth one-eighth of the total exam, or 12.5 percent.

A simple way for you to get an idea of the kinds of questions that might be asked, and the structure of an answer standard, is to visit the College Board website at www.collegeboard.com. In the section devoted to Advanced Placement, you will find AP U.S. Government and Politics free-response questions from the last five years, with the grading standard for each question. These are extremely helpful. They allow you to acquaint yourself with how the points break down and what the graders are seeking. Be sure to check them out.

Another way to understand the types of questions that may be asked is to look in the table of contents of a textbook. Test writers essentially take the concepts found in a few individual chapters and combine them into a question. For example, they may ask about the ways in which interest groups attempt to influence policy. Information about such a question will be found in the chapters on interest group politics, elections, and the branches of government. The test writers are trying to force you to synthesize many separate pieces of information into a coherent point of view. They are trying to get you to combine, analyze, and evaluate. Therefore, the question may be written like this:

  1. Interest groups can have both a positive and negative impact on American politics.

(a)   Describe one positive effect that interest groups have on politics.

(b)   Describe one negative effect that interest groups have on politics.

(c)   Choose one of the groups below and identify two methods it uses to affect public policy.

•   NRA

•   AARP

•   AMA

•   NOW

In the free-response section you will not be required to write a complete essay with a thesis statement, evidence, and conclusion. There simply isn’t time. This response is an opportunity to showcase your knowledge of U.S. government and politics, not a time to highlight your understanding of proper syntax and your hatred of dangling modifiers (though we hate them, too). You won’t be graded down if you do write a thesis statement, evidence, and conclusion, but this practice will waste precious time that you could have spent writing a more complete answer for what they do ask of you. Do exactly the tasks that the question asks of you. This may seem obvious, but may students get off track and neglect to address all facets of the questions with clear responses. If the question asks you to analyze data by explaining trends shown in a graph, do so. Make sure your analysis can be backed up by the data in the graph. If the graph question contains a part B (it often does), it will probably ask for an explanation of the data in the graph. This part of the answer will come from your knowledge of the subject. Because time is a factor, and you will be awarded no more points for extras, do nothing more than what the question asks.

An example of a stimulus-type free-response question may look as follows:

  2. Using the information in the figure and your knowledge of United States politics, complete the following tasks.

(a)   From the data in the chart, identify two trends that have occurred in the membership of the political parties in the past 40 years.

(b)   Based on your knowledge of American politics, explain what impact the two trends that you identified in part (a) have had on those running for political office.

  Part (a): Answer (Keep in mind that this is just an outline.)

•   The data shows that the number of Republicans has remained constant.

•   The data shows that the number of Democrats has declined.

•   The data shows that the number of Independents has increased.

•   The data shows that the two political parties are approximately equal in number.

•   The data shows that the Independents have come from the Democratic Party.

•   The data shows that there are now almost as many Independents as members of the two major parties.

  Part (b): Answer

•   Independents are people who belong to no party. They vote for the candidate they like best regardless of the party with whom the candidate is affiliated. Independents are usually upset with one of the parties because of the positions they have taken on particular issues. Independents tend to be centrists. Therefore candidates will try to appeal to Independents by taking centrist positions because they will probably decide the outcome of an election. This often makes it difficult to differentiate the policy positions of candidates. Perhaps this is one reason voters say it doesn’t matter who they vote for, which in turn can cause depressed voter turnout.

Note that the question in part (a) does not ask for a thesis statement. It simply asks you to analyze the data. Part (b) also does not require a thesis statement. It contains an explanation of the data and the impact of decreasing party affiliations on elections. You should now be able to see that the free-response essay on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam really is different from an essay that you might write in your normal English or History class: It doesn’t stress the importance of a thesis, supporting paragraphs, and conclusion. When answering a free-response question, you simply want to share as much information and as many strong, well-constructed examples as you can think of. Don’t stress yourself out worrying about the format and flow. Simply get the information from your brain onto the paper and show the grader that you have a strong grasp of U.S. governmental policies and precedents.

BE OPTIMISTIC

Both the exam writers and the graders realize that 25 minutes is not very much time to respond to a question. They understand that it will take about five minutes for you to understand the question and begin to organize your answer. Obviously, there is not enough time to give a very in-depth answer. Because of the time constraint, you will have to choose only those parts of your answer that give the strongest response to the question. The graders are not looking for the final word on the subject. Instead, they are checking to see whether you can

• address the question
• clearly explain the issues involved

These should be your goals in writing your AP U.S. Government and Politics free-response essays.

PLANNING AND WRITING YOUR FREE RESPONSE

There are two essential components to writing a successful timed free response. The first is to plan what you are going to write before you start writing. The second is to use a number of tried-and-true writing techniques that will make your essay better organized, better thought out, and better written.

BEFORE YOU START WRITING

Read the question carefully. Figure out what you are being asked. Then brainstorm for a minute or two. In your test booklet, write down everything that comes to mind about the subject; there is room on the back pages of the booklet and on the blank space at the bottom of pages. Look at your notes and consider the results of your brainstorming session as you decide what points you will argue in your response. Tailor your argument to the information, but don’t make an argument that you know is wrong or with which you disagree. If you do either of these things, your response will probably be awful. Finally, go through the results of your brainstorming. Some of what you wrote down will be “big picture” conclusions, some will be facts that can be used as evidence to support your conclusions, and some will be interesting material that, nonetheless, will not fit into a well-organized free-response essay and should be discarded.

Next, make an outline. The outline should be brief—just a few words for each paragraph. You should plan to write as many paragraphs as are appropriate for answering the question. For example, some free responses will require two paragraphs on relevant issues; others will need five. Sometimes the question or part of the question can be answered with a couple of paragraphs and a bulleted list. IF the question does not require a full essay, you should not write one.

AS YOU ARE WRITING

Observe the following guidelines:

• Keep sentences as simple as possible. Long sentences get convoluted very quickly and will give your graders a headache.
• Use appropriate political science terminology. Don’t overdo it, however, because it will look as if you’re trying to show off. Remember that good writing doesn’t have to be complicated; most great ideas can be stated simply. Never use a word if you are unsure of its meaning or proper usage. A malapropism may give your graders a good laugh, but it won’t earn you any points and will probably cost you.
• Write clearly and neatly. Here’s an easy way to put graders in a good mood. Graders look at a lot of chicken scratch; it strains their eyes and makes them grumpy. Also keep in mind that they have as little as two minutes to read each response. Neatly written essays make them happy. When you cross out, do it neatly. Write in black ink. If you’re making any major changes—e.g., if you want to insert a paragraph in the middle of your response—make sure you indicate them clearly.
• Define your terms. Most questions require you to use terms that mean different things to different people. One person’s “liberal” is another person’s “conservative” and yet another person’s “radical.” The folks who grade the test want to know what you think these terms mean. When you use them, define them. Take particular care to define any such terms that appear in the question. Almost all official College Board materials stress this point, so don’t forget: Define any term that you suspect can be defined in more than one way.
• Use structural indicators to organize your paragraphs. Another way to clarify your intentions is to organize your response around structural indicators. For example, if you are making a number of related points, number them (“First … Second … Finally …”). If you are attempting to compare and contrast two viewpoints, use the indicators “on the one hand” and “on the other hand” or “whereas.”
• Stick to your outline. Unless you get an absolutely brilliant idea while you’re writing, don’t deviate from your outline. If you do, you’ll risk winding up with an incoherent response.
• Back up your ideas with examples. Yes, we’ve said it already, but it bears repeating. Don’t just throw ideas out there and hope that you’re right. You will score big points if you substantiate your claims with facts. If you cannot recall real, specific examples, use hypothetical situations to illustrate your point.
• Try not to write just one or two paragraphs. A too-short response will hurt you more than will one that is too long.

HOW TO CRACK THE FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS

Answering the free-response questions on the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam is not very different from answering the essay questions you have been answering all your life. The keys to success are:

• Read the question carefully. Tailor your answer to the question. When you have written all your notes and your outline, and you are prepared to begin writing your response, reread the question to ensure your answer is right on target.
• Answer each part of the question directly. If one part of the question asks how Jefferson’s concern about term limitations is relevant today, you should probably have a sentence in your essay—and in a fairly prominent place such as the first paragraph or the first line in a subsequent paragraph—that reads “Jefferson’s concern is very relevant (or irrelevant) today.” Don’t be coy.
• Don’t panic. As you scan the four questions, you may well come to rest on the one that deals with a subject your teacher didn’t cover or you didn’t get around to studying. Don’t worry: Everyone finds some questions harder than others. To build your confidence, answer the question you find easiest before turning to the intimidating one.
• Watch your time. You need to average no more than 25 minutes per question. The biggest mistake you can make, with the exception of failing to respond to the question, is failing to leave yourself enough time to answer all four questions. It’s okay to spend as much as 30 minutes on a given question, but you’d better make it worth while, and you probably don’t want to do it on the first essay or you’ll feel rushed while writing the remaining three.
• If you draw a total blank on a question, take a deep breath and ask yourself what you do know about the topic. You may realize that you know more that you think. Try to figure out what the question is trying to get at or how you can approach it.
• If you are running out of time on your fourth free-response question, abbreviate and write partial sentences. The graders know that you may have to rush to finish the last question. Although, under ideal circumstances, you would write in complete, well-considered sentences, you may not have time to do so. Don’t panic; do the best you can, knowing that the graders will give you some leeway at the end of your response, especially if you are clear and coherent at the beginning and in the middle.

SUMMARY

• Read questions carefully. Look for the multiple parts of the question. Make sure you respond to every part of the question—the graders will be looking for your response to each part.
• Mark up the question. You may bracket the core of the question, underline the operative words such as identify, discuss, describe, and analyze, or circle limiters like, “since 1992,” “give one example,” and “list three.”
• Look out for questions that require a definition of a term. If they ask for a definition, write one.
• Although you are not writing a history essay, making chronological points can strengthen your writing in certain areas (for example, the development of civil rights law). Do not write a mere list of historical data points in chronological order. Political science relies on analytical writing to substantiate claims, so back up your statements with proof.
• Don’t start writing until you have brainstormed, chosen a thesis if required, and written a brief outline.
• Follow your outline. Stick to one main idea per paragraph. Support your ideas with facts.
• Write clearly and neatly. Don’t use sentences that are too long. Toss in a couple of political science terms that you know you won’t misuse. When in doubt, stick to simple syntax and vocabulary.
• Bring a watch to the exam and spend 25 minutes on each response. Write explicitly and without equivocation.
• Every piece of data that supports your argument should be linked to it. Do not just list information without relating it to the point you are trying to make.
• Do not use slang, do not editorialize (do not give your personal opinion), do not inject your own politics, do not write jokes or make comments, do not make vague references to authors, do not preach, and do not moralize.

PART II

AP U.S. Government
and Politics Review

5

THE CONSTITUTIONAL
UNDERPINNINGS

THE CONCEPTS

• Why did the Articles of Confederation fail?
• What was the immediate impact of Shays’s Rebellion?
• What motivated the Framers of the Constitution? Were they elitists or pragmatists?
• Why did the Framers create a republican form of government?
• Why did the Framers create a federal system of government?
• What is the purpose of checks and balances and the separation of powers?
• Why are plurality systems democratic but unstable?

THE TERMS

• Articles of Confederation
• Shays’s Rebellion
• New Jersey Plan
• Virginia Plan
• Great Compromise
• Three-Fifths Compromise
• federalism
• dual federalism
• Federalists
• Anti-Federalists
• Federalist Papers
• Bill of Rights
• judicial review
• representative democracy
• delegated powers
• reserved powers
• concurrent powers
• full faith and credit clause
• privileges and immunities clause
• extradition
• supremacy clause
• categorical grants
• block grants
• separation of powers
• checks and balances
• veto
• override
• amendment
• ratify
• establishment clause
• selective incorporation
• cabinet
• governor
• line-item veto
• pardons and reprieves
• bicameral legislature
• revenue sharing
• Northwest Ordinance
• confederation

ENLIGHTENMENT PHILOSOPHIES

The Framers of the Constitution lived in a unique time when new ideas on how government should be organized and run challenged conventional wisdom regarding the roles of people and their government. The Enlightenment was an eighteenth-century philosophical movement that began in western Europe with roots in the Scientific Revolution. The focus was on the use of reason rather than tradition to solve social dilemmas. The following Enlightenment philosophers contributed directly to the formation of thought that led to the creation of the American Constitution and government.

• Thomas Hobbes: Hobbes’s famous work Leviathan argued that if humans were left to their own devices, chaos and violence would ensue. In a state of nature, life would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” He argued that the best way to protect life was to give total power to an absolute monarch.
• John Locke: While Hobbes was concerned primarily with the protection of life, Locke went further and argued in his Second Treatise on Civil Government that liberty and property also needed to be respected. According to Locke, life, liberty, and property were natural rights granted by God; it was the duty of all governments to respect and protect these rights. If the government did not, Locke contended, the citizens have the right of revolution.
• Charles de Montesquieu: Montesquieu was a French philosopher who greatly influenced the founders. His De l’Esprit des Lois (The Spirit of the Laws) advocated for the separation of power into three branches of government.
• Jean Jacques Rousseau: Rousseau argued that the only good government was one that was freely formed with the consent of the people. This consent was shown in a powerful “social contract,” which was an agreement among people.

THE WEAKNESS OF THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION

The first government of the newly born United States of America was formed under the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the Constitution. These Articles were informally followed from 1774 to 1781 when they were ratified and so named. The government under the Articles achieved some notable accomplishments.

• It won the Revolutionary War.
• It established the Northwest Ordinance, creating methods by which new states would enter the Union.
• It negotiated the treaty that ended the Revolutionary War.
• It set the precedent of federalism, whereby the states and central government shared governing responsibilities.

However, the Articles of Confederation had insurmountable weaknesses that placed the newly independent states at risk. By 1787, trade between the states was in decline, the value of money was dropping, potential threats from foreign enemies were growing, and there was the real threat of social disorder from groups within the country. The inability of the state of Massachusetts to effectively deal with Shays’s Rebellion, a six-month rebellion in which more than 1,000 armed farmers attacked a federal arsenal to protest the foreclosure of farms in the western part of the state, was a major concern at the Constitutional Convention. The nation’s leaders began to see the necessity of a stronger central government, as Shays’s Rebellion frightened the statesmen and exposed the weakness of the Articles of Confederation.

The federal government under the Articles

• could not draft soldiers
• was completely dependent on the state legislatures for revenue—the federal government was not permitted to tax citizens
• could not pay off the Revolutionary War debt
• could not control interstate trade
• had no Supreme Court to interpret law
• had no executive branch to enforce national law
• had no national currency
• had no control over import and export taxes imposed between states
• needed unanimity to amend the Articles
• needed approval from 9 out of 13 states to pass legislation

These deficiencies of the Articles of Confederation were the direct causes for calling a convention. But amending the articles became so difficult that James Madison did not have difficulty persuading the other delegates that a complete rewrite was necessary. The result was the Constitution, and the convention came to be known as the Constitutional Convention.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

When the Framers of the Constitution met in Philadelphia in 1787, they were divided over their views of the appropriate power and responsibilities of government. Some saw the current government, formed under the Articles of Confederation, as weak and ineffective, while others believed that changes to the Articles would be infringements on the responsibilities of state governments and intrusions into the lives of citizens. Some historians (such as Charles Beard) see the convention as an elitist conspiracy to protect the wealth of the rich, while others see the convention as a meeting of political pragmatists who knew that by protecting everyone’s property and rights, they could best protect their own. Today, the generally accepted view is that the Framers were pragmatists.

The delegates agreed that a stronger central government was necessary but were fearful of the corrupting influences of power. How to control the federal legislature was a central theme at the convention. The large states seized the agenda at the beginning of the convention and proposed the Virginia Plan, a recipe for a strong government with each state represented proportionately to its population. The small states worried that a government dominated by the large states would be overly strong, so they proposed the New Jersey Plan, under which each state would be represented equally. The Great (or “Connecticut”) Compromise created the solution: a bicameral (two-house) legislature with a House of Representatives, based on population, and a Senate, with equal representation for all states.

Another major conflict arose over the representation of slaves. (Remember that slaves obviously could not vote then.) Northerners felt that slaves should not be counted when determining each state’s number of electoral votes, while Southerners obviously disagreed. The “solution” was the infamous Three-Fifths Compromise, in which the decision was made that slaves would count as three-fifths of a person when apportioning votes.

Under the Articles of Confederation there was no executive authority to enforce laws. The Framers of the Constitution corrected that problem by addressing the issue of a chief executive, or president. Under the Constitution, the executive is the enforcer of law and a second check on the power of the legislature. Before bills become law, they require presidential approval, and the president has the power to veto acts of the legislature. However, presidential power is not absolute. Congress can override a presidential veto if two-thirds of both houses of the legislature vote to do so.

In order to arbitrate disputes between the Congress and the president, between states, and between the states and the central government, the Framers created the Supreme Court.

Despite all the compromises that were reached at the convention, acceptance of the Constitution was by no means assured. It had to be submitted to the states for ratification. Supporters and opponents of the Constitution broke into two camps, Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of newspaper articles supporting the Constitution, collectively known as the Federalist Papers. These essays are the primary source for understanding the original intent of the Framers. They were designed to persuade the states of the wisdom of a strong central government coupled with autonomous political power retained by the states. One of the most famous and important articles is Federalist No. 10, which advocates for a large republic (and warns of the dangers of democracy). Interestingly, the Federalists opposed the creation of a Bill of Rights, as Hamilton feared that once citizens’ rights were written down explicitly, they would later be interpreted as a list of the only rights that people had. He also felt that the various states’ Bills of Rights were sufficient protections of individual rights.

The Anti-Federalists opposed the creation of a stronger national government, arguing that a Constitution would threaten citizens’ personal liberties and effectively make the president a king. Keep in mind that only 12 years prior, these people had declared independence from Britain, and many were fearful that a large government and a Constitution would recreate that same state of tyrannical control that they had just escaped.

The opposition to the Constitution centered around the lack of a Bill of Rights that would protect the rights of individuals from government infringement. Once the Federalists guaranteed that a Bill of Rights would be added to the Constitution immediately after ratification, opposition diminished, and the Constitution became the foundation of American government.

THE CONSTITUTION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF GOVERNMENT

The Constitution is vague and skeletal in form, containing only about 5,000 words. It was intended to be a blueprint for the structure of government and a guide for guaranteeing the rights of citizens. It was written to allow change, anticipating unknown needs of future generations. The branches of government have all grown and evolved since the ratification of the Constitution.

• The necessary and proper clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8) allows Congress to “make all laws” that appear “necessary and proper” to implement its delegated powers. This is also called the elastic clause. For example, there is nothing in the Constitution that creates the Federal Reserve System, which is the central bank for the United States. Neither is there any mention of a Cabinet in the executive branch. The Federal District Courts and the Courts of Appeals were both created by congressional elaboration.
• Executive power has expanded through the use of presidential practice. Executive orders, which have the same effect as law, bypass Congress in policy making and are not mentioned in the Constitution. Presidents use them as part of the enforcement duties of the executive branch. Executive agreements between heads of countries have many of the same elements as treaties. These agreements bypass the ratification power of the Senate but are not mentioned in the Constitution. An extreme example of an executive order is Executive Order 9066, in which Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered people removed from a military zone. It was no coincidence that these people were Japanese American and German American. This order paved the way for all Japanese-Americans on the West Coast to be sent to internment camps for the duration of World War II. Thousands of German Americans and Italian Americans were also sent to internment camps under executive order.
• When the Supreme Court decided the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803, it drastically increased its own power by granting itself the power to overturn laws passed by the legislature, also known as judicial review.
• Finally, custom and usage have changed the system to meet differing needs. The political-party system, with its organization, technology, and fund-raising capabilities, was created from custom and usage. The rules used in Congress were also created from custom and usage.

FEDERALISM

Central to the Constitution is the idea that the United States government is a federal government. The term federalism describes a system of government under which the national government and local governments (state governments, in the case of the United States) share powers. Other federal governments include Germany, Switzerland, and Australia. Contrast this with a confederation, a system in which many decisions are made by an external member-state legislation; decisions on day-to-day matters are not taken by simple majority but by special majorities, consensus, or unanimity—and changes to the constitution require unanimity. But let’s get back to federalism for now.

Under federalism, some government powers belong exclusively to the national government, some exclusively to the states, and some are shared by the two. Those powers that belong to the national government only are called delegated, expressed, or enumerated powers. Among them are

• printing money
• regulating interstate and international trade
• making treaties and conducting foreign policy
• declaring war

Powers that belong exclusively to the states are called reserved powers. According to the Tenth Amendment, these powers include any that the Constitution does not either specifically grant to the national government nor deny to the state governments. These powers are not listed in the Constitution; in fact, they are made up of all powers not mentioned in the Constitution. They include

• the power to issue licenses
• the regulation of intrastate (within the states) businesses
• the responsibility to run and pay for federal elections

Some powers are shared by the federal and state governments. These are called concurrent powers. Among them are the powers to

• collect taxes
• build roads
• operate courts of law
• borrow money

The Constitution specifies which powers are denied to the national government and which powers are denied to the states. Those powers are listed in the chart below.

The Constitution also obliges the federal government to guarantee the states a republican form of government and protection against foreign invasion and domestic rebellion. The federal government must also prevent the states from subdividing or combining to form new states without Congressional consent. The states, in turn, are required by the Constitution to accept the court judgments, licenses, contracts, and other civil acts of all the other states; this obligation is contained in the full faith and credit clause. The states may not refuse police protection or access to their courts to a U.S. citizen just because he lives in a different state; this provision appears in the privileges and immunities clause. Finally, the states usually must return fugitives to the states from which they have fled; this process is called extradition.

The supremacy clause of the Constitution requires conflicts between federal law and state law to be resolved in favor of federal law. State laws that violate the Constitution, federal laws, or international treaties can be invalidated through the supremacy clause.

The nature of federalism has changed over time. For the first part of the nation’s history, the federal and state governments remained separate and independent. The relationship between the national and state governments during this period is called dual federalism. What little contact most Americans had with government occurred on the state level, as the national government concerned itself primarily with international trade, the construction of roads, harbors, and railways, and the distribution of public land in the West.

The Federal Government
Does Not Have the Power to:

• Suspend the writ of habeas corpus, (which protects against illegal imprisonment), except in times of national crisis
• Pass ex post facto (retroactive) laws or issuance of bills of attainder (which declare an individual guilty of a capital offense without a trial)
• Impose export taxes
• Use money from the treasury without the passage and approval of an appropriations bill
• Grant titles of nobility

The State Governments
Do Not Have the Power to:

• Enter into treaties with foreign countries
• Declare war
• Maintain a standing army
• Print money
• Pass ex post facto (retroactive) laws or issuance of bills of attainder (which declare an individual guilty of a capital offense without a trial)
• Grant titles of nobility
• Impose import or export duties

As with all parts of the Constitution, the definition of federalism is in the eye of the beholder. Ideological States’ Rightists define federalism as a relationship in which the states retain most of the political power. Nationalists often see the federal government as being supreme in all matters and ultimately in control.

Most federal government programs, such as those to aid the poor, clean the environment, improve education, and protect the handicapped, are administered through the states. The federal government pays for these programs through grants-in-aid, which are outright gifts of money to the states. Nationalists prefer to tie strings to the grants, ensuring that the federal government maintains control over the money. States’ Rightists want no strings attached, leaving decisions about how the grant money is to be used to state and local governments, who they believe know best how to use it.

Nationalists like categorical grants, aid with strict provisions from the federal government on how it may be spent. Examples of categorical grants include Head Start, Medicaid, and the Food Stamp Program. States’ Rightists like block grants, which permit the state to experiment and use the money as they see fit. In the final analysis, however, the federal government can use a number of techniques, including direct orders and preemption, to force the states to abide by federal law. The federal government can also use a crossover sanction, which requires a state to do something before a grant will be awarded. An example would be to raise the drinking age to 21 before federal highway money to build state roads is released.

Advantages of Federalism

• Mass participation: Constituents of all ages, backgrounds, races, and religions can participate by voting on both local and national issues.
• Regional autonomy: States retain some rights and have choices about public policy issues such as gun control, property rights, abortion, and euthanasia.
• Government at many levels: Politicians are in touch with the concerns of their constituents.
• Innovative methods: States can be laboratories for government experimentation, to see if policies are feasible.

Disadvantages of Federalism

• Lack of consistency: Differing policies on issues like gun control, capital punishment, and local taxes can clog the court system and create inequality in states.
• Inefficiency: Federalism can lead to duplication of government and inefficient, overlapping, or contradictory policies in different parts of the country.
• Bureaucracy: Power can be spread out amongst so many groups, it can result in corruption and a stalemate.

SEPARATION OF POWERS

The Framers of the Constitution decided that no one faction of the government should be able to acquire too much power. To prevent this, they borrowed the concept of the separation of powers from the French political philosopher Charles de Montesquieu. The Framers delegated different but equally important tasks to the three branches of government. The legislative branch (Congress) makes the laws; the executive branch, led by the president, enforces the laws; and the judicial branch interprets the laws.

Separation of powers also prevents a person from serving in more than one branch of the government at the same time. A congressperson (legislative branch), for example, may not also be a judge (judicial branch), nor a cabinet member (executive branch). If a congressperson were appointed to one of these positions, he or she would first have to resign his or her seat in Congress.

THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES

The system of checks and balances is another constitutional safeguard designed to prevent any one branch of government from becoming dominant. The system of checks and balances requires the different branches of government to share power and cooperate with one another to accomplish anything of importance.

• Nomination of federal judges, cabinet officials, and ambassadors. The president chooses nominees for these positions. However, the president’s nominees must be approved by the Senate.
• Negotiation of treaties. The president is empowered to negotiate treaties. No treaty can go into effect, however, until it is approved by two-thirds of the Senate.
• Enactment of legislation. Only Congress may pass laws. However, the president has the power to veto, or reject, legislation. The president’s veto power forces the legislature to consider the president’s position on a law, and to negotiate with the president to prevent a veto. Congress can also check the president’s veto by overriding the veto, but to do so it must pass the same law with a two-thirds majority in both houses (a congressional override is difficult, but not impossible). If Congress succeeds in overriding the president’s veto, the legislation becomes law regardless of the president’s position. Finally, the courts may determine the constitutionality of the law. Thus, the courts have the power to overturn laws passed by Congress and approved by the president (only on constitutional grounds, however; judges may not overturn laws simply because they don’t like them).

AMENDMENT PROCESS

One reason that the Constitution has lasted more than 200 years is that it is flexible. Many of its provisions require interpretation, allowing the document to become more conservative or progressive as the times warrant. Furthermore, the Constitution can be changed through amendments (the addition of provisions to the document).

To amend the Constitution, a proposed amendment must be introduced to both houses of Congress and approved by a two-thirds majority in each. The amendment is then passed on to each of the 50 state legislatures. Three-fourths of the state legislatures must ratify (approve) the amendment for it to become part of the Constitution. The states themselves are allowed to determine how many votes are required to ratify an amendment. Most states require a simple majority of their legislatures, but seven states require either three-fifths or two-thirds majorities. Also, rather than use the state legislatures, Congress can mandate that each state use a ratifying convention, with delegates expressly elected to vote on the proposed amendment. This method was once used to ratify the Twenty-first Amendment, which ended Prohibition.

The Constitution allows for a second means of amendment. Two-thirds of the state legislatures could petition Congress to call a constitutional convention. Because no constitutional convention has ever taken place, nobody knows for certain how extensively conventioneers would be allowed to alter the Constitution. Could they rewrite it entirely, or would they be restricted to amendments mentioned specifically in their petitions for a convention? Fear that a constitutional convention could attempt drastic alterations has persuaded many state legislators to oppose any call for a convention. A recent movement for a convention to add a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution was narrowly defeated.

AMENDMENTS

THE BILL OF RIGHTS (DECEMBER 15, 1791)

The first ten amendments were added to the Constitution within three years of its ratification. These amendments are known collectively as the Bill of Rights. Originally written by James Madison, many provisions of the Bill of Rights have been expanded and clarified over the years.

The First Amendment

Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo said that the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights contains “the fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all of our civil and political institutions.”

• Freedom of religion. The government may not interfere with an individual’s right to practice his or her faith as described in the free exercise clause. Furthermore, as stated in the establishment clause, Congress may not establish an official church of the United States nor give a particular faith or sect preferential treatment over others. This constitutional provision is usually referred to as the separation of church and state.
• Freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Congress may not pass a law that prevents citizens from expressing their opinions, either in speech or in writing. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has placed some limits on these freedoms. Speech or writing intended to incite violence or used to intentionally slander or libel are not protected. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes articulated the “clear and present danger” test, in which the government has the right to interfere in free speech if it poses a threat to others, in the case of Schenck v. United States (1917). Nevertheless, criticism of the government and its politics is protected. When it comes to censoring the press, the government can almost never use prior restraint—crossing out sections of an article before publication. These strong protections for the press were established in the case of Near v. Minnesota (1973).
• Freedom of assembly and freedom to petition the government. The Constitution protects the people’s rights to assemble peacefully, to hold demonstrations, and to ask the government for changes in policy. Rallies and demonstrations that encourage or incite violence and those that do not seek official sanction to trespass on public property are not protected.

The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment to the Constitution, which protects the citizen’s right to bear arms, has led to a debate over whether the Constitution protects citizens’ right to bear arms under all circumstances, or only when those citizens serve in “well-regulated militias.”

The Third Amendment

The most antiquated of all the amendments, though not at the time of its creation, the Third Amendment forbids the quartering of soldiers and the direct public support of armed forces. It was a direct reaction to the British practice of using civilian support to conduct military operations. Still, it later had importance as it became part of the foundation of the right to privacy as established in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).

The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment places restrictions on government agencies regarding criminal or civil procedural investigations and does much to protect an individual’s “person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.” This amendment was most dramatically reviewed in the twentieth-century, as evidenced in Mapp v. Ohio (1961). Questions regarding the use of probable cause, traffic stop searches, and the use of search warrants have led to challenges regarding the interpretation of the exclusionary rule regarding evidence seized without proper procedures. In its original form, the exclusionary rule holds that all evidence unlawfully gathered must be excluded from judicial proceedings.

The Fifth Amendment

The Fifth Amendment does the most to protect an individual from the broad powers of the Federal government. It provides a guarantee of a grand jury when a suspect is held for a capital or other “infamous” crime. It eliminates the possibility of a person being maliciously prosecuted for the same crime again and again by prohibiting double jeopardy. It establishes the right of the government to seize property for public use under the auspices of eminent domain but only if such seizure can be “justly compensated.” Nor may defendants be forced to testify against themselves if on trial, thus prohibiting self-incrimination (commonly known as “pleading the fifth”). The most significant attribute of the Fifth Amendment is its mandate that the federal government not deprive an individual of “life, liberty, or property by any level unless due process of law is applied.”

The Sixth Amendment

This amendment allows persons accused of a crime to be prosecuted by an impartial jury in a “speedy” public trial. Individuals have the right to be informed of their charges (habeas corpus), to confront witnesses, to subpoena witnesses for their defense, and to have a lawyer for their defense.

The Seventh Amendment

Although statutory, or written, law has come to replace or supersede common law, which is law based on past court decisions, the Seventh Amendment allows for trial by jury in common-law cases.

The Eighth Amendment

The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail in federal cases. Yet its most significant challenges have arisen from the clause which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment.” Capital punishment is one of the most contentious issues of the twentieth century. At issue is whether it constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment.” Various Supreme Courts have taken different positions on this debate.

The Ninth Amendment

The Ninth Amendment reaffirms the principles of a limited federal government. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” means that rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution are still protected—everyone has the right to brush their hair, for example—even though that right is mentioned nowhere in the Bill of Rights. Although somewhat vague in its premise, the Ninth Amendment has led to the implied right to privacy and other questions regarding individual rights not identified or even understood at the time of the creation of the Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment

The Tenth Amendment defines the relationship between the states and the national government under the concept of federalism. It states that when powers are not defined or delegated by the Constitution, the states have reserved power to make their own individual judgments—so long as they do not infringe with the explicit rules of the Constitution and the federal government. State issues such as death penalty, speed limit, and drinking age are within the jurisdiction of the states to decide so long as they do not contradict the Constitution.

EARLY AMENDMENTS (1795–1804)

The Eleventh Amendment (1795)

This amendment was passed as a response to the Supreme Court ruling of Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), which held that states did not enjoy sovereign immunity from lawsuits brought by residents of other states. In order to overrule Chisholm, the Eleventh Amendment provides that states may not be sued in federal court by citizens of another state or country without the consent of the states being sued.

The Twelfth Amendment (1804)

Originally, under Article II of the Constitution, those selected as electors for choosing the president got to cast two votes. The candidate who got the highest number of votes won the presidency, while the runner-up got the vice presidency as a consolation prize. The Twelfth Amendment was created following the debacle of the election of 1800—a tie between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, who split the Republican vote. This amendment ensured that electors would now have to cast separate votes for the president and the vice president.

THE CIVIL WAR AMENDMENTS (1865–1870)

The Thirteenth Amendment (1865)

This amendment prohibited the institution of slavery except as punishment for a convicted crime, and was a direct result of the Union victory in the Civil War.

The Fourteenth Amendment (1868)

Remember, the Bill of Rights did not originally apply to state law. After the Civil War, Northerners pushed for a constitutional amendment that would prevent the South from denying equal rights to the newly freed slaves. The Fourteenth Amendment was designed to accomplish this purpose, stating that

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Fourteenth Amendment expanded the right to due process to all Americans; however, it did not immediately apply the protections of the Bill of Rights to all state laws. Instead, the Supreme Court has used the “due process” and “equal protection” clauses to extend most of the Bill of Rights protections but has done so on a case-by-case basis. This process of incorporating some of the Bill of Rights protections to state law is called selective incorporation.

The Fifteenth Amendment (1870)

The Fifteenth Amendment granted voting rights to males of all races, and was originally designed to extend voting rights to newly freed male slaves. Ultimately, the Supreme Court and southern states later narrowed, and in some cases eliminated, the provisions of this amendment during the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century. Voter rights were only later made secure by the passage of the Twenty-fourth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

PROGRESSIVE ERA AMENDMENTS (1913–1920)

The Sixteenth Amendment (1913)

Before the passage of this amendment, most revenue was gathered through tariffs that placed a large burden on the poor. The Sixteenth Amendment gave Congress the power to collect taxes on income, which allowed for the creation of a progressive income tax that fell more on the rich.

The Seventeenth Amendment (1913)

This amendment provided for the direct election of United States senators. Previously, senators had been selected by the state legislatures. The Seventeenth Amendment shifted the responsibility for choosing senators from the legislatures to the general voting public.

The Eighteenth Amendment (1920)

Known as the Prohibition amendment, this amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol in or out of the United States.

The Nineteenth Amendment (1920)

This amendment granted voting rights to all American women.

LATER AMENDMENTS (1933–1992)

The Twentieth Amendment (1933)

Before the passage of the Twentieth Amendment, there was a long gap in between the time that the outgoing president left and the time that he was succeeded by his replacement. This gap proved especially damaging to the nation as it was in the grip of the Great Depression and anxiously waiting for FDR to take the reigns. As a result, this amendment clearly defined the procedures regarding the specifics of presidential and legislative terms, and shortened the amount of time between presidential election and inauguration.

The Twenty-first Amendment (1933)

Prohibition had largely led to the rise of organized crime and widespread lawbreaking. The Twenty-First Amendment recognized the failure of this government experiment and repealed prohibition, allowing for the legalization of the sale of alcohol.

The Twenty-second Amendment (1951)

In response to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s unprecedented four presidential election victories, this amendment limited the president to two terms.

The Twenty-third Amendment (1961)

This amendment allowed the residents of Washington, D.C. to vote in presidential elections, bringing the total national electoral count to 538.

The Twenty-fourth Amendment (1964)

The Twenty-Fourth Amendment eliminated the racially discriminatory practice of forcing African Americans to pay poll taxes when attempting to vote in southern state elections.

The Twenty-fifth Amendment (1967)

Following the assassination of John Kennedy and given the age of his successor, Lyndon Johnson, this amendment provided clarity regarding the selection of a new vice president should the position become vacant. The Twenty-fifth Amendment also formally permitted the vice president to assume the presidency temporarily in the event of a presidential disability.

The Twenty-sixth Amendment (1971)

In response to the number of young people fighting in the Vietnam War, the Twenty-sixth Amendment lowered the voting age from 21 to 18.

The Twenty-seventh Amendment (1992)

This is a sleeper amendment that was passed more than 200 years after it was first proposed. If Congress votes itself a pay increase, that increase cannot take effect until after the next election.

INFORMAL CHANGES TO THE CONSTITUTION

Some changes to the Constitution have been initiated either by changes in custom or interpretation of the document. Sometimes, these informal changes gradually give way to more formal changes. For example, when George Washington became president, he served two terms and elected not to serve a third term. Every president after Washington continued this custom until Franklin Roosevelt was elected president four times. Because of Franklin Roosevelt’s four terms in office, the Twenty-second Amendment to the Constitution was proposed and ratified. In this case, an informal custom became a formal change.

THE “UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION”

Certain deeply ingrained aspects of our government are not specified in the Constitution. These traditions are called the unwritten Constitution. Judicial review—the power of the Supreme Court to declare laws and executive actions unconstitutional—for example, is not mentioned in the Constitution. The principle was established by Chief Justice John Marshall in 1803 and has been observed ever since, so it has become as real and integral a part of U.S. government as are those principles described in the Constitution.

Other prominent examples of the unwritten Constitution are as follows:

• Political parties and political conventions. The Framers of the Constitution disliked political parties and had hoped they would not develop in the United States. Parties did arise, however, and soon became a fixture of the U.S. political landscape. Political conventions, at which delegates choose their party’s presidential candidate and draw up the party’s platform (a list of its political objectives), have played an important role in U.S. politics since the early 1800s.
• The Cabinet. The president’s Cabinet is a group of advisors made up of the heads of various executive departments of the government. The Constitution mentions the executive departments but does not require the president to meet with them as a group to seek their advice. George Washington established the tradition and every president since has followed suit.

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

The Constitution does not stipulate the form state governments must take. The states are instead free to form whatever governments they choose, provided that the government is defined by a state constitution and that the constitution is approved by Congress. However, most state governments are structured after the federal government.

All states have an executive branch led by a governor, whose duties to the state are similar to the president’s duties to the nation. Governors direct state executive agencies, which oversee areas such as education, roads, and policing. They command the state National Guard and may grant pardons and reprieves. Most have the power to appoint state judges, with the “advice and consent” of one of the state’s legislative bodies. Governors have veto power over acts of the state legislature.

All states but one have bicameral legislatures modeled after the House of Representatives and the Senate (Nebraska has a unicameral legislature.). In the same way that Congress enacts federal law, the state legislatures enact state law. The legislatures have the power to override the gubernatorial veto (the word gubernatorial means relating to the governor). Governors have many of the same executive powers as presidents. However, many governors may use a line-item veto to reject only parts of bills. Presidents were denied this power by the Supreme Court under the ruling that a federal line-item veto would take too much power away from the legislative branch (see this page).

All states also have state judiciaries to interpret state law. These judicial systems consist of trial courts and appeals courts, as does the federal judiciary. They hear both criminal cases (in which an individual is accused of a crime) and civil cases (in which disputing parties can sue to receive compensation).

SUMMARY

• Remember that the Articles of Confederation were ultimately too weak to serve as a viable governing constitution for the new nation.
• Know the important philosophers that influenced the Framers: Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau.
• The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia resulted in a new governing document that sought to balance the autonomy of the states with a stronger federal government.
• The vagueness of some sections of the Constitution along with elements like the elastic clause make the document adaptable to changing times.
• The United States, through the Constitution, was the first nation to practice federalism: a balance of power between the states and the federal government.
• In keeping with the principles of Montesquieu, the Founders created a government split into three branches and gave each branch the power to check the other two.
• Try to remember all 27 Amendments by era: the Bill of Rights, the early amendments, the Civil War Amendment, the Progressive Era Amendments, and the later amendments.
• Many powers that are not formally declared in the Constitution have been taken on by the president and Congress—you should be aware of this “unwritten Constitution.”
• Know a bit about how state and local governments function and how they interact with the federal government.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. Shays’s Rebellion is significant because it

(A) led to the overthrow of British rule

(B) scared American elites, leading to the adoption of the Constitution

(C) caused the American colonies to join together in the face of a threat from the French

(D) led to the enactment of slavery in the South

(E) narrowly avoided overthrowing the government of Vermont

  2. Which of the following was NOT a problem with the Articles of Confederation?

(A) There was no strong federal army to prevent revolutions.

(B) The Articles were almost impossible to amend.

(C) Each state was taxing trade with other states.

(D) States were establishing ties with foreign powers.

(E) The articles did not adequately protect the freedom of the states.

  3. The issue of the representation of slaves was decided by the

(A) Three-Fifths Compromise

(B) Connecticut Compromise

(C) Commerce and Slave-Trade Compromise

(D) Bill of Rights

(E) Articles of Confederation

  4. The principle of American government that establishes concurrent state and national governments is known as

(A) separation of powers

(B) limited government

(C) federalism

(D) checks and balances

(E) judicial review

  5. The Virginia Plan would have created a

(A) legislature dominated by the small states

(B) legislature dominated by the big states

(C) legislature controlled by the slave states

(D) legislature that balanced control between the large and small states

(E) constitutional monarchy

6

PUBLIC OPINION
AND THE MEDIA

THE CONCEPTS

• What is public opinion?
• What is the public agenda, and how is the agenda shaped?
• How is public opinion measured?
• What role does the media play in shaping public opinion?
• What effect does the media have on individual political beliefs and voting behavior?

THE TERMS

• saliency
• intensity
• stability
• public opinion
• random sampling
• exit polls
• Gallup poll
• political socialization
• liberal ideology
• conservative ideology
• news media
• public agenda

Public opinion, simply put, is how people feel about things. Pollsters measure the public’s opinion of everything from television programs to commercial products to political issues. Networks, companies, and politicians commission these polls because they seek the approval of the public.

Obviously, public opinion is not uniform: Even the most popular television shows attract a minority of all Americans. Furthermore, many programs are designed to receive favorable ratings from a specific subgroup of society rather than from the public at large. Networks, for example, seek high ratings from young, middle-class audiences, as these are the audiences most sought after by advertisers. Because advertisers are less interested in senior citizens, networks seek their approval less aggressively.

The same holds true for political issues. Most Americans—the general public—care more about the political issues that affect their day-to-day lives directly. A political issue does not have to interest the majority of Americans, then, to be considered important by politicians. If an issue is of enough importance to a smaller group—the issue public—to cause those voters to become more politically active, that issue may well become an important political issue. Furthermore, very few politicians seek the approval of the general public as a whole. With the exception of the president, all politicians have much smaller constituencies, and they measure the public opinion of these constituencies in order to appeal to them. Members of the House of Representatives, for example, are interested primarily in the concerns of their home districts, which are often quite different from the concerns of the general public.

CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC OPINION

Those who measure public opinion are not just interested in the direction of public opinion—that is, how the public is feeling at a given moment. They also want to know how strongly the public feels and how likely people are to change their minds. That is why they try to gauge the following characteristics of public opinion:

• Saliency. The saliency of an issue is the degree to which it is important to a particular individual or group. For example, Social Security is an issue with high salience for senior citizens. Among young voters, Social Security has a much lower salience.
• Intensity. How strongly do people feel about a particular issue? When the intensity of a group’s opinion is high, that group can wield political influence far beyond their numbers. For example, the majority of Americans have favored some form of gun control for decades. However, the intensity of that opinion is not high, and most Americans consider other issues when they vote. The National Rifle Association (NRA) represents a minority position. However, the intensity of their opposition to gun control is high. As a result, its members are likely to decide how they will vote based primarily on a candidate’s position on gun control. This, in turn, has made the NRA one of the nation’s most powerful lobbying organizations.
• Stability. Public opinion on issues changes over time. Some dimensions of public opinion, such as support for democracy and a controlled free-market economy, remain relatively stable. Others can change quickly, as was the case during the last two years of George H.W. Bush’s administration. During the Gulf War (January 1991), President Bush recorded the highest approval ratings of any president since 1945. Less than two years later, the majority of Americans showed their disapproval of his performance as president by voting against him.

In the United States, public opinion is measured regularly through elections. Elections measure public opinion indirectly, however, because votes for—or against—candidates can rarely be translated into clear and specific opinions. Referenda measure the public’s opinion on specific issues but do so infrequently (a referendum submits to popular vote a measure passed by a legislative body). Public opinion is measured most frequently and directly by public opinion polls.

POLLS MEASURE PUBLIC OPINION

Public opinion polls are designed to determine public opinion by asking questions of a much smaller group. Pollsters achieve this through random sampling, a method that allows them to poll a representative cross-section of the public. When polling by phone, pollsters use a machine that dials numbers randomly. When conducting exit polls at polling places on election day, they target voting districts that collectively represent the voting public and randomly poll voters who are leaving the voting place. This method prevents bias, which may occur if pollsters were to approach only those voters who seemed most friendly or anxious to participate. When performed correctly, polls can measure the opinions of 300 million Americans by polling a mere 1,500 of them.

For a poll to accurately reflect public opinion, its questions must be carefully worded. A poll that asks, “Do you approve or disapprove of the death penalty?” would likely yield a very different response from one that asks, “Would you want the death penalty imposed on someone who killed your parents?” Most pollsters try to phrase questions objectively. Polls generally ask multiple-choice questions, which are closed-ended, as opposed to open-ended questions (such as, “Explain why you approve or disapprove of the death penalty”). Closed-ended questions yield results that are more easily quantifiable, providing a more accurate read of the direction and intensity of public opinion.

Even with those controls, polls cannot be 100 percent accurate. Polling organizations know how accurate their polls are and include this information with the poll results. The accuracy is measured as a sampling error and appears as a percentage with a plus and minus sign to the left (example: ±4 percent). The sampling error tells how far off the poll results may be. Suppose a poll indicated that 60 percent of Americans favored the death penalty. If that poll had a sampling error of ±4 percent, the actual percentage of Americans favoring the death penalty could be anywhere between 56 and 64 percent. Generally, the more respondents a poll surveys, the lower the sampling error.

The best-known polls are the Harris poll and the Gallup poll. Many major newspapers and television networks conduct public opinion polls, as do academic and public interest institutions.

WHERE DOES PUBLIC OPINION COME FROM?

Public opinion is made up of the views of individuals. Individuals develop their political attitudes through a process called political socialization. Why, and when, do they change? What factors influence a person’s political beliefs?

The first factor that influences individual political beliefs is family. Most people eventually affiliate with the same political party as their parents. Children’s political beliefs are also greatly affected by the moral and ethical values they learn from their parents. Political values learned in childhood stay with many Americans throughout their entire lives. Also important is their location—people born in rural states may develop political views that are more socially conservative than those of city dwellers.

As children grow, other factors influence their political socialization. In school they learn about history and government and are exposed to the political perspectives of teachers and peers. Religious institutions have a similar influence on many Americans. Mass media such as television, radio, magazines, and the web further influence political attitudes. In general, however, youth is a time when many Americans pay relatively little attention to and have little interest in political issues. This is because most political issues have little direct impact on their day-to-day lives.

Those who progress to higher education often find themselves questioning their social and political assumptions for the first time. As a result, college can be a time of radical change in an individual’s political beliefs. This is particularly true of students at campuses that are heavily politicized and that lean strongly in one political direction, either conservative (such as Texas Christian University) or liberal (such as Reed College). Studies have shown that students retain throughout their lives many of the political attitudes they acquire in college.

As individuals reach adulthood, real-life experiences become the primary influence on their political beliefs. Family responsibilities and property ownership tend to make people more conservative. Conversely, individuals who experience bias based on their earning power, race, or gender may grow more liberal or more cynical about government. Adults continue to be influenced by participation in religious organizations, by the attitudes of their peers, and by what they learn through the news media.

POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES

The terms liberal and conservative in the previous paragraph refer to the predominant ideologies in the United States. An ideology is a coherent set of thoughts and beliefs about politics and government. The three most common political ideologies in the United States are the following:

• Conservative. Conservatives stress that individuals should be responsible for their own well-being and should not rely on government assistance. As a result, they tend to oppose government interference in the private sector. They also oppose most federal regulations, preferring that the market determine costs and acceptable business practices (laissez-faire economics). Social conservatives, who make up a powerful wing of the conservative movement, do support government action on social issues. In a 2009 Gallup poll, 40 percent of Americans considered themselves to be conservatives.
• Liberal. Liberals believe that the government should be used to remedy the social and economic injustices of the marketplace. They tend to support government regulation of the economy. They also support government efforts to redress past social injustices through programs such as affirmative action. Most liberals believe the government should strictly enforce the separation of church and state, and therefore oppose school-sponsored prayer and proposed bans on abortions, which they perceive as motivated by religious beliefs.
• Moderate. The beliefs of moderates do not constitute a coherent ideology. Instead, moderates view themselves as pragmatists who apply common sense rather than philosophical principles to political problems. Moderates once made up the largest part of the American public, but with the financial crisis of 2008–2009, the number went from more than 50 percent to 35 percent of the American public.

Compared with citizens of other Western democracies, Americans have fewer main ideological groups. The many extreme political parties that exist in Europe, ranging from right-wing nationalists to left-leaning communists, are practically nonexistent in the United States. Furthermore, perhaps because of the paucity of viable groups, Americans readily vote outside of their self-professed political beliefs. In 2008, for example, 20 percent of self-identified conservative voters chose the more liberal Barack Obama over conservative Republican candidate John McCain.

Americans who are strongly ideological tend to be the most politically active citizens. They are more likely than other Americans to join political organizations and participate in political activities, such as rallies and boycotts. One result of this phenomenon is that candidates in the presidential primaries must perform a balancing act. To win the primaries, they must first appeal to the more ideological party members. Then in the general elections, candidates must move back to the political center or risk alienating the general voting public.

See the next chapter for a more detailed explanation of political beliefs by party.

DETERMINING FACTORS IN IDEOLOGICAL AND POLITICAL BEHAVIOR

Although there is no one-to-one correlation between people’s backgrounds and their political beliefs, people who share certain traits tend to share political beliefs. Here are some of the factors that influence people’s ideological and political attitudes.

• Race/ethnicity. Racial and ethnic groups who disproportionately populate the lower income levels tend to be more liberal than other Americans. Blacks and Hispanics are more likely than other Americans to support liberal social programs, for example. There are exceptions to these rules, however: Cuban Americans, for one, tend to be very conservative.
• Religion. Among the various religious groups in the United States, Jews and African American Protestants are generally the most liberal. Catholics also lean toward the political left, although many are conservative on social issues. Devout white Protestants tend to be more conservative. This is particularly true in the South, where white Protestants who attend church regularly are among the nation’s strongest supporters of the Republican Party.
• Gender. Women tend to be more liberal than men. They are more likely to vote Democratic, more likely to support government social welfare programs, and less likely to support increases in military spending.
• Income level. Americans in higher income brackets tend to be more supportive of liberal goals such as racial and sexual equality. They also support greater international cooperation. However, they tend to be less sympathetic to government social welfare goals and are fiscally conservative. Poorer Americans, conversely, are generally more conservative on all issues except those concerning social welfare.
• Region. Regional differences arise from different economic and social interests. In the heavily unionized Midwest, for example, Democratic candidates and goals are generally successful (making these “blue states”). In the more religious South, conservatism is predominant (making these “red states”). The ethnic and racial mix of the East Coast has made it the most liberal region of the country. The West Coast, toward which many Americans continue to migrate, is the most polarized, with strong liberal and conservative contingencies scattered up and down the coast. Liberals tend to congregate in the cities; elsewhere, small town and more rural voters are generally conservative.

PUBLIC OPINION AND THE MASS MEDIA

The news media play an important role in the development of public opinion. News media include all of the following:

• news broadcasts on television, radio, and the Internet
• newspapers
• news magazines, such as Time and Newsweek
• magazine broadcast programs, such as 60 Minutes and 20/20
• newsmaker interview programs, such as Meet the Press and Larry King Live
• political talk radio
• websites, blogs, and online forums, such as Huffington Post or Politico

These media provide most Americans with their most extensive exposure to politicians and the government. In many ways, they act as an intermediary between the people and the government, constantly questioning the motives and purposes of government actions and then reporting their findings to the public.

Throughout American history, public exposure to news media has consistently increased, both through higher literacy rates and through the expansion of news sources available in print, broadcast, and online. As a result, the media have played an increasingly significant role over the years in shaping public opinion.

The most important role the media play is in setting the public agenda. By deciding which news stories to cover and which to ignore, by returning to some stories night after night while allowing others to die after a few reports, the news media play an important part in determining the relative importance of political issues. This power of the media is limited by the public’s inherent interest in a story, however. Prior to American involvement in Bosnia, constant coverage of the crisis there did little to raise public awareness of or interest in the story, because many Americans perceived the crisis as too remote to be of interest. In general, the process of setting the national agenda is a dynamic one. The media generally try to report stories they believe will interest the public, and often there is a domino effect that as interest grows, coverage increases, and the story becomes more important.

Less clear is whether the media have the power to alter public opinion. It is generally believed that the media affect public opinion only when news coverage is extensive and is either predominantly negative or positive. For example, a constant barrage of negative images broadcast from Vietnam in the 1960s is credited with having turned many Americans against the war.

The news media can also alter public opinion when it is volatile: Studies have demonstrated, for example, that public approval of the president is quite volatile and changes depending on whether news coverage of the president is positive or negative. In most other instances, however, the media do not greatly impact public opinion. This is in part because the news media cover many stories simultaneously, thus diluting their ability to influence public opinion on any single issue. It is also due in part to the fact that most Americans choose those news media that reinforce their political beliefs. For example, conservative magazines such as the National Review are read almost exclusively by conservatives; liberal magazines, such as The Nation, are read primarily by liberals and progressives.

ARE THE NEWS MEDIA BIASED?

Critics from both ends of the political spectrum claim that the news media interject their political beliefs in their reports. Conservatives cite polls that have consistently shown that news reporters are more likely to hold liberal views and vote Democratic than are average Americans. Liberals point out that the major news media are owned by large, conservative companies, such as General Electric (NBC) and Disney (ABC). They argue that these companies exert pressure on the networks to downplay or ignore stories that reflect badly on the companies or the economic and political forces that support them.

Many studies have shown that there is less ideological bias in news reporting than is claimed by critics, either in the stories news organizations choose to report or in the way they report them. Over the course of American history, the news media have in fact grown markedly less biased. Most newspapers in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were openly partisan; today, many news organizations attempt to maintain journalistic integrity by remaining as objective as possible.

Commercial concerns reinforce this trend toward objectivity. Biased reporting may appeal strongly to one segment of the population, but it would just as surely alienate another segment. Seeking to offend the fewest possible audience members, most news organizations attempt to weed out bias and represent both sides of every story in their reports.

This does not mean, however, that the news media achieve complete objectivity. News organizations must make hundreds of decisions each day about what to report and how prominently to report it. Many local newspapers, for example, ignore all but the most major international stories, not because they are not newsworthy but rather because their readers are generally uninterested in such stories. Network news broadcasts shy away from more complex stories, both because of time constraints and out of fear that they may bore viewers and listeners. A primary source of media bias, then, is the media’s need for an immediate audience appeal.

Time and space constraints also result in bias in news reporting. Time and space concerns affect all news organizations, but they are most acutely felt by television news programs, which report up to 20 stories during their 18 minutes of broadcast time (some half-hour programs feature as many as 12 minutes of advertising!). News broadcasts increasingly use short sound bites to summarize information, with presidential candidates’ sound bites decreasing in length from about forty seconds (in 1968) to about 7.3 seconds today.

Finally, news reports can be biased by the sources that reporters use for their information. Reporters in Washington, D.C., must rely heavily on politicians and government sources for information, for example. The effect of this reliance is complicated. On one hand, reporters try to not offend their government sources with uncomplimentary reports, because they will need to return to those sources for future stories. Furthermore, there is the danger that reporters in Washington will become too close to the people and events they cover, resulting in bias. On the other hand, reporters must maintain their credibility and so must demonstrate their independence. They cannot consistently file favorable reports on the subjects they cover and expect to remain credible to the viewer. Furthermore, surveys have demonstrated that reporters are more skeptical about the motives of politicians than average Americans are. This skepticism is reflected in their reporting. This may in part explain why public confidence in the government has decreased as the news media have grown more prominent.

Most modern politicians understand the power of the media and, accordingly, attempt to influence coverage. They stage events that yield appealing photographs (photo ops) and provide voluminous documented information in support of their positions (press releases). They plan appearances on shows with specific audience demographics that they are seeking, such as The Daily Show and The Colbert Report if they are seeking the youth vote. One famous photo-op was President George W. Bush’s speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003. A banner reading “Mission Accomplished” hung behind the president as he spoke, and it caused much controversy, as that was the final day of combat operations in Iraq. Many politicians felt that the banner was irresponsible and misleading. Attempts to manipulate media reports have grown more frequent and more sophisticated in recent years. Many politicians have studied the masterful way in which Ronald Reagan handled press coverage and have attempted to copy his successes.

SUMMARY

• Public opinion is measured by looking at saliency, intensity, and stability.
• Data about what people think come from polls, and many politicians base their decisions on polling data.
• Political socialization is the term used to describe how people learn about politics as they grow and mature.
• There are three basic political ideologies in America: conservative, liberal, and moderate.
• Know which factors tend to lead to which ideologies. A black woman in Chicago is more likely to be liberal than a white man from the rural South.
• The media plays a major role by placing certain policies and news events in the spotlight. This is also known as creating a public agenda.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. The strength of the public’s feelings about an issue is known as

(A) intensity

(B) saliency

(C) stability

(D) intransigence

(E) zealotry

  2. Which of the following is generally NOT a source of political socialization?

(A) Family

(B) School

(C) Life experiences

(D) Indoctrination by the two major political parties

(E) Religion

  3. A liberal would probably support

(A) lower taxes

(B) deregulation of industry

(C) government subsidized health care for the poor

(D) restrictions on the right to abortions

(E) a ban on gay marriage

  4. A conservative would probably support

(A) higher taxes

(B) scaling back laws that regulate industry

(C) affirmative action

(D) increasing access to abortions

(E) increasing the power of bureaucracies like the Environmental Protection Agency

  5. Which of the following is generally NOT a factor in determining ideological behavior?

(A) Race/Ethnicity

(B) Religion

(C) Gender

(D) Region

(E) Birth order

7

POLITICAL PARTIES,
INTEREST GROUPS, PACS, AND
527 GROUPS

THE CONCEPTS

• What coalitions make up the two main political parties in the United States?
• Why do third parties so often fail in U.S. politics?
• What effect has dealignment had on political parties?
• Are there serious policy differences between Democrats and Republicans?
• Who supports the two parties and why?
• How does the Constitution control special interests?
• How have interest groups helped to democratize the U.S. political system?
• Why are interest groups a threat to democracy?
• What role do interest groups play in setting the political agenda?
• What techniques do PACs use to get their messages across?
• How do interest groups achieve and exert their influence?

THE TERMS

• political parties
• two-party system
• primary elections
• bolter parties
• doctrinal parties
• single-issue parties
• Independent candidates
• platform
• national convention
• soft money
• split-ticket voting
• party dealignment
• party realignment
• divided government
• critical election
• coalition
• amicus curiae briefs
• class action suits
• influence peddling
• Federal Election Campaign Act
• political action committees (PACs) and 527 Groups

In the previous chapter we reviewed how individuals develop their political beliefs. Few political acts, however, are the work of a single person. Rather, most politically active people work within groups to achieve common political goals. The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam expects you to know about four types of political groups. They are political parties, interest groups, political action committees (PACs), and 527 groups. This chapter reviews everything you need to know about the organization and activities of these groups.

POLITICAL PARTIES

As we’ve mentioned, few successful political accomplishments are the work of one person. More often, such a person joins with other like-minded individuals to form organizations that try to influence the outcomes of elections and legislative struggles. Political parties are unique among these groups in that they play a formal role in both of these processes. Although they are not mentioned in the Constitution—in fact, the Framers of the Constitution disliked political parties and hoped to prevent them—political parties became a mainstay of U.S. elections by the year 1800. Parties arose in the United States as a means of uniting those who shared political ideals, enabling them to elect like-minded representatives and pursue similar legislative goals. To those ends, parties endorse candidates for office and assist in their election efforts. In return for this support, parties expect candidates to remain loyal to goals defined by the party leadership.

The United States has two major political parties: Democrats and Republicans. This two-party or bipartisan system is reinforced by the nation’s electoral system. U.S. election rules, which have been agreed upon by members of the two parties, also make it difficult for all but the two major parties to win a place on the ballot, further strengthening the two-party system.

PARTY CHARACTERISTICS

Don’t forget these facts about political parties.

• Parties serve as intermediaries between people and the government.
• Parties are made up of grassroots members, activist members, and leadership.
• Parties are organized to raise money, present positions on policy, and get their candidates elected to office.
• Parties were created outside of the Constitution—they are not even mentioned in the document.

The major purpose of political parties is to get candidates elected to office. In the past, candidates were chosen by the party hierarchy, with little or no public input. However, since 1960, more states have passed laws requiring parties to select candidates through state-run primary elections. These primaries have reduced the power of political parties. Candidates must raise their own money for primaries, campaigning for their party’s nomination with little to no support from the party itself. If the parties don’t control the money, they can’t control the candidates. This levels the playing field, but multiple candidates for the nomination can splinter the party membership.

THIRD PARTIES

New parties are occasionally formed in the United States. Unless and until these parties reach the level of a major party, they are called third parties. Third parties form to represent constituencies that feel disenfranchised from both of the major parties. These so-called splinter or bolter parties usually unite around a feeling that the major parties are not responding to the demands of some segment of the electorate. The Reform Party, under whose banner Ross Perot ran for president in 1996, was an example of a splinter party whose constituency was fed up with politics as usual.

Sometimes third parties form to represent an ideology considered too radical by the mainstream parties. These doctrinal parties reject the prevailing attitudes and policies of the political system. The Socialist Party and the Libertarian Party are examples. Single-issue parties are formed to promote one principle. The American Independent Party, which sponsored the segregationist candidacy of George C. Wallace in 1968, is an example. Third parties can have a major impact on elections. The Green Party, which favors strict environmental policies, more government social programs, and controls over big business, ran Ralph Nader for president in 2000. Nader’s candidacy took votes from Al Gore, thus tipping the scales in favor of George W. Bush.

Third-party candidates should not be confused with Independent candidates. Independent candidates run without party affiliation. It is very difficult for Independent candidates to overcome the money and organization of the two major parties. Eugene McCarthy, an anti-Vietnam War candidate in 1968, and John Anderson, a fiscal conservative and social liberal in 1980, are two examples.

WHY THIRD PARTIES FAIL

The failure of third parties to elect presidential and other candidates to office is a direct result of an American political system designed to support only two major parties. National campaigns in countries using equal, single-member, plurality voting-district systems (like the United States) require huge sums of money and vast organizations. Also, in American presidential elections, almost all states have a winner-take-all system for electoral votes; the candidate who receives the most votes, even if it is only by one, wins all of the electors in the state. Because the losers get no electoral votes, the electoral count usually does not accurately reflect the popular vote. During the 2000 presidential election (which featured the Florida voting controversy), Al Gore won the popular vote by about 500,000 votes nationwide, but George W. Bush was found to have won the Florida electorate, giving him all of Florida’s 25 electoral votes and ultimately, the presidency.

FUNCTIONS OF MODERN POLITICAL PARTIES

Political scientists identify three major subdivisions of political parties.

• The party among the electorate. Voters enroll in and identify with political parties. They generally vote for candidates who represent their party.
• The party in government. Government officials belong to political parties. They act together to pursue common goals, although regional and ideological differences sometimes subvert their efforts.
• The party organization. A group of people who are neither elected officials nor average voters, the party organization is made up of political professionals who recruit candidates and voters, organize campaign events, and raise money to promote the party.

Political parties perform all of the following functions:

• Recruit and nominate candidates. The parties are the major players in electoral politics. They seek out candidates to run in their primary elections. They also create the rules by which candidates seek their nominations. In nearly all elections, nomination by one of the major parties is a prerequisite to victory. For example, in the 2008 Democratic primary, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton fought it out until Obama had enough delegates to secure the nomination, at which point the Democratic party formally announced him as their candidate.
• Educate and mobilize voters. Political parties fund propaganda campaigns to persuade voters to choose their candidates. They send mailings, hold rallies, and run advertisements. They target regions in which their support is strong and campaign to persuade voters in those regions to vote on election day.
• Provide campaign funds and support. The national parties have committees dedicated to raising funds for House and Senate campaigns. State parties also raise funds for candidates for both state and national office. Although most candidates rely primarily on their own personal campaign support staff, they also need the help of the state or national party organizations.
• Organize government activity. Parties act as an organizing force in government. The House and Senate organize their leadership and committee systems strictly along party lines, as do state legislatures.
• Provide balance through opposition of two parties. Each party serves as a check on the other by constantly watching for and exposing weakness and hypocrisy. The minority party (provided a single party controls both the White House and the Congress) performs the role of the loyal opposition, constantly critiquing the performance of the party in power.
• Reduce conflict and tension in society. The two-party system promotes compromise and negotiation in two ways: by encouraging parties to accommodate voters and encouraging voters to accept compromises in policy. The Republican Party, for example, includes both religious social-conservatives and libertarians. To assemble winning coalitions, the party must somehow appease both groups. The groups, in turn, must be willing to compromise if they wish to prevent the Democrats from prevailing.

U.S. political parties are not hierarchical. The national party organization and each of the state and local organizations are largely autonomous and serve different functions; one does not take orders from the other.

Party committees are organized by geographic subdivisions. Locally, committees at the precinct, town, ward, and electoral district levels coordinate get-out-the-vote drives, door-to-door canvassing, and leaflet distribution. These party committees are staffed mostly by volunteers, and their work is largely concentrated around election time. The next largest geographic grouping is the county. County committees coordinate efforts in local elections and organize the efforts of committees on the precinct level. They also send representatives to each polling place to monitor voting procedures. State committees raise money and provide volunteers to staff campaign events. They provide support to candidates for both state and national offices. National legislative elections, however, are also the responsibility of the powerful congressional district and senatorial committees. These committees, chaired by incumbents and staffed by professionals, are part of the national party organization. They are most likely to become involved in these legislative elections when the possibility exists of gaining or losing a seat. Because incumbents usually run for reelection and are often reelected easily, the congressional and senatorial committees are active in a minority of election efforts during each electoral cycle.

The national party plans the national conventions held every four years to nominate a presidential candidate. It sponsors polls to keep party members informed of public opinion and manages issue-oriented advertising and propaganda.

ARE PARTIES IN DECLINE?

Some political scientists believe that the parties are no longer as powerful or as significant as they once were. Prior to 1968, one party typically controlled both the executive and legislative branches of government. Since that year, however, there have been only a few years of one-party control of these branches (1977 to 1980, 1992 to 1994, 2002 to 2005, and from 2008 to 2010). Americans are voting a split ticket (see this page) more frequently than ever before. They are more likely to consider the merits and positions of a particular candidate than to merely consider his or her party affiliation. As a result, no one party dominates government, and officials with different political agendas are elected to work together. Split-ticket voting leads to divided government, when one party controls Congress and the other controls the White House. An example of this was during the 110th Congress (2007–2008) when Democrats held the majority of the House and Senate, and there was a Republican in the White House. This can create policy gridlock because these two branches are often at odds with each other. Conversely, it can cause them to work together in the creation of moderate public policy. Lastly, it encourages party dealignment because voters do not align with their parties as uniformly as they once did.

Increasingly, modern candidates have taken control of their own election campaigns, relying less on party support than did past candidates. They are now able to appeal directly to the public through television. This has left the parties—which once wielded great power over the electoral process—with less power. In their place, media consultants have become the chief movers and shakers in political campaigns.

PARTY COALITIONS

Political parties consist of combinations of groups, which consist of combinations of individuals. The larger the coalition the more likely the candidate will win. Party candidates and party positions on policy are designed to attract more groups of voters, putting together a winning coalition.

In the presidential elections of 2004 and 2008, the Republican coalition included the following:

• disaffected conservative “Bluedog” Democrats
• veterans’ groups
• religious conservatives
• pro-lifers
• opponents of gay rights
• missile-defense supporters
• opponents of affirmative action
• Cuban Americans
• supporters of the development of natural resources on public lands

In the same elections, the Democratic coalition included the following:

• disaffected moderate Republicans
• pro-choicers
• African Americans
• labor unions
• intellectuals
• people with lower incomes
• city dwellers
• non-Cuban Latinos
• feminists
• Jewish people
• environmentalists

While there are always exceptions to the rule, the two parties tend to rely on these groups as a base of support. Regionally, it appears that the east and west coasts and the upper Midwest are more Democratic, while the South and lower Midwest are more Republican.

IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PARTIES

While there are general ideological differences between the two parties, there are also a number of similarities. Neither party, for example, questions the validity of the nation’s capitalist economic system.

Although both parties tend to be centrist, there are nevertheless differences in the ways the two parties view the role of government. The greatest ideological differences are between the liberals in the Democratic Party and the conservatives in the Republican Party, the so-called party bases. While appealing to the independent centrist voter during election campaigns, each party counts on its base to get out and vote. Party leaders must use great care in choosing policy positions so they do not lose their party base. They must also avoid alienating the moderates of the party by taking extreme left or right positions.

Democrats tend to be

• less disposed to spend on defense.
• less disposed to use vouchers, or other public funds, to let students attend private schools.
• more disposed to spend money to advance social-welfare programs.
• more disposed to use government money for public education.
• more disposed to spend money on government-run health programs.
• more disposed to grant tax relief to targeted groups such as the lower and middle classes.
• against private ownership of assault weapons and for broader regulations on the ownership of firearms.

Republicans tend to be

• more disposed to spend on defense.
• more disposed to use vouchers for private schools and to give government aid to parochial schools.
• more disposed to grant tax relief to everyone, including the wealthy and corporations.
• less disposed to spend money on social-welfare programs.
• less disposed to spend money on government-run health programs.
• less disposed to regulate firearms.

PARTY REALIGNMENT

Party realignment occurs when the coalitions making up the two parties fall apart, such as when many of the groups that make up the majority party defect to the minority party. Realignments are very rare and usually occur as a result of some major traumatic event, such as an economic depression or a war. They are signaled by what is called a critical election, when a new party comes to dominate politics. The last realignment took place in 1932, as a result of the Great Depression, when the Republican Party became the minority party and the Democratic party became the majority party, with overwhelming numbers of Democrats being elected to every branch of government at every level. Realignments occur over a period of time and show permanence. The New Deal coalition of the 1930s lasted for decades. There have been no realignments since the 1930s.

The trend today seems to be toward dealignment. Dealignment is usually a result of party members becoming disaffected as a result of some policy position taken by the party. These disaffected party members join no political party and vote for the candidate rather than the party he or she belongs to. Since the 1960s, membership in the Democratic party has declined while the number of voters self-identifying as independents has increased. During the same time period, the number of Republicans has remained constant. The two major parties are now nearly equal in party membership. This is a classic example of dealignment. (That said, the number of registered Democrats has increased since the 2006 mid-term elections and the presidential campaign of Barack Obama.)

INTEREST GROUPS AND LOBBYISTS

Interest groups are organizations dedicated to a particular political goal or to a set of unified goals. Group members often share a common bond, either religious (Christian Coalition), racial (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), or professional (American Medical Association). In other cases, they simply share a common interest, such as the environment (Sierra Club) or political reform (Common Cause). In either case, they are similar to political parties in that they try to influence the outcome of elections and legislation. Unlike political parties, however, they do not nominate candidates, nor do they normally try to address a wide range of issues.

When interest groups try to influence legislators, we say they are lobbying for a bill or issue. The term originated with the historical practice of early lobbyists; they waited in the lobby of the capitol so they could catch legislators coming in and out of session. Today, most lobbyists are highly paid professionals. A number are former legislators, whose experience and friendships in the capitol make them particularly effective.

There are literally thousands of interest groups in the United States. Most groups fall under one of the following categories:

• Economic groups. Economic groups are formed to promote and protect members’ economic interests. They include peak business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents the interests of all businesspeople. Other groups represent specific trades and industries; among these are the American Farm Bureau Federation and the American Nuclear Energy Council. Labor groups such as the AFL-CIO and the United Auto Workers represent union members. Professional groups include the American Medical Association and the American Bar Association. Most economic groups have existed a long time and have developed strong ties with legislators and bureaucrats. They are also very large, highly influential, and extremely well funded, and either represent or employ large constituencies. As a result, they are usually the most powerful interest groups in Washington, D.C.
• Public interest groups. Public interest groups are nonprofit organizations that are generally organized around a well-defined set of public policy issues. Consumer groups usually work to promote safer products and more informative labeling; the most prominent of these groups is Public Citizen, led by Ralph Nader. Environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, advocate preservation of wildlife and wilderness areas. Religious groups such as the Christian Coalition attempt to influence public policy in such a way as to promote or protect their beliefs. Other groups promote causes such as women’s rights, minority rights, and political reform. Single-issue groups like the National Rifle Association and the National Right to Life Committee are often among the most powerful public interest groups because of the intensity of their supporters. Single-issue constituents are more likely than other voters to use a single issue as a litmus test for candidates. Thus, a candidate who advocates gun control runs the risk of losing the votes of all 3 million NRA members.
• Government interest groups. Most states and many cities and other localities maintain lobbying organizations in the nation’s capital. A separate group represents the nation’s governors, and yet another represents mayors. Most foreign governments and businesses lobby the government as well.

HOW INTEREST GROUPS INFLUENCE GOVERNMENT

Interest groups use a number of tactics to disseminate information and persuade Congress, the president, the judiciary, and federal bureaucrats. Those tactics include the following:

• Direct lobbying. Representatives of the interest group meet privately with government officials to suggest legislation and to present arguments supporting their positions.
• Testifying before Congress. Interest groups provide expert witnesses at committee hearings.
• Socializing. Social events in Washington, D.C., are often political events as well. Interest groups hold social functions and members attend other functions to meet and forge relationships with government officials.
• Political donations. Interest groups provide financial support to candidates and parties that champion their causes. Those that are forbidden to do so by law—corporations, trade groups, and unions—may do so by forming political action committees (PACs) for that purpose.
• Endorsements. Many groups announce their support for specific candidates. Some groups rate legislators on the basis of their voting records; a high rating constitutes an implicit endorsement of that candidate.
• Court action. Interest groups file lawsuits or class action suits to protect and advance their interests. They will also submit amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in lawsuits to which they are not a party so that judges may consider their advice in respect to matters of law that directly affect the case in question.
• Rallying their membership. Public interest groups often engage in grassroots campaigning by contacting members and asking them to write, phone, or e-mail their legislators in support of a particular program or piece of legislation. In addition, members may engage in demonstrations and rallies promoting their cause.
• Propaganda. Interest groups send out press releases and run advertisements promoting their views.

LIMITS ON LOBBYING

Several laws limit the scope of lobbyists’ activities. Most are ineffective, but stronger efforts to regulate lobbying run the risk of violating the First Amendment right to free speech. The 1946 Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act was intended to allow the government to monitor lobbying activities by requiring lobbyists to register with the government and publicly disclose their salaries, expenses, and the nature of their activities in Washington, D.C.

Other laws prohibit, for limited amounts of time, certain lobbying activities by former government officials. These laws are meant to counteract the appearance of influence peddling, the practice of using personal friendships and inside information to get political advantage. Former legislators must wait one year before lobbying Congress directly, for example. However, they may lobby the executive branch immediately after leaving office. Some groups complain of a “revolving door” that pushes former federal employees into jobs as lobbyists and consultants. A limit similar to that of the former legislators also applies to former executive officials. It prevents them from lobbying for five years after they leave the agency that employed them. These limits were determined in Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the case that equated donations with free speech. In this ruling, the Supreme Court upheld federal limits on campaign contributions and ruled that donating money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech.

In January of 2010, the Supreme Court changed many of the campaign finance rules in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The court ruled that corporations have a First Amendment right to expressly support political candidates for Congress and the White House. The ruling struck down restrictions that had prevented corporations from spending company money directly on campaign advertising right before an election. In the near future, this ground-breaking case will surely cause many changes in the financing of election campaigns. It is still important to learn how and why learn how and why these groups function by reading the following sections.

Finally, federal laws prohibiting campaign contributions from corporations, unions, and trade associations can be sidestepped through the formation of a political action committee or PAC.

POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES (PACS)

The 1974 Federal Election Campaign Act allows corporations, unions, and trade associations to form political action committees as a means of raising campaign funds. Certain restrictions apply to PACs: They must raise money from at least 50 contributors; they must donate to at least five different candidates; they may not donate more than $5,000 per year to any single candidate or more than $15,000 to a national party per year. Corporate, union, and trade PACs must raise money from employees and members and may not simply draw it from their treasuries.

Corporations, unions, and trade associations are not the only groups that form PACs. Many other interest groups form PACs to collect and distribute contributions, as do legislators (these PACs are called leadership PACs). Federal law limits the amount donors may contribute to candidates ($2,300), national parties ($28,500), and individual PACs ($5,000). Furthermore, the sum of all such contributions may not exceed $108,200 over two years. These numbers are accurate for the 2008 election cycle, but are scheduled to increase slightly for each future cycle.

527 GROUPS

A 527 group (named after the section of the tax code that allows them) is a tax-exempt organization that promotes a political agenda, although they cannot expressly advocate for or against a specific candidate. The term is generally used to refer to political organizations that are not regulated by the FEC (Federal Election Commission) and are not subject to the same contribution limits as PACs. They avoid regulation by the FEC because 527s are “political organizations” but are not registered as “political committees” subject to campaign finance law contribution limits. Sounds confusing, huh? The line between issue advocacy and candidate advocacy is a huge source of contention and disagreement. Examples of 527s include Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, College Republican National Committee, and The Media Fund. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as the McCain–Feingold Act) changed soft money rules that make establishing new 527s a more attractive option than traditional PACs. 527 groups have become a way for outside organizations to get around the hard money limits of McCain-Feingold.

SUMMARY

• Though they are not mentioned in the Constitution, political parties have become an integral part of American government. They may embrace a wide variety of ideologies, but ultimately both parties share the same goal: to be elected by any means necessary.
• American history has been marked by numerous third parties that have challenged the prevailing duopoly. All have died, but if it is popular enough, a third party may influence the two major parties to adopt its ideas.
• Parties serve many functions in American democracy: They recruit and fund candidates, educate voters, provide a loyal opposition, and run the government—all while mitigating societal tension.
• When we look at parties, they often turn out to be broad coalitions of disparate ideologies and groups. The Republican Party, for example, blends Libertarians who are hostile to government regulation with religious conservatives who want government to play a greater role in enforcing public morality.
• Generally speaking, Democrats tend to be in favor of government regulation of industry, redistribution of government money to the poor, and social freedom. Republicans tend to want to empower business to free itself from government rules, encourage people to earn money with assistance from the state, and want more social and moral controls on society.
• Interest groups are large organizations with strong policy goals, but they are different from political parties in that they do not change their ideologies. These groups try to control the political process by hiring lobbyists to influence legislators and by giving them money as well.
• When labor unions or corporation want to fund candidates, they do so by forming Political Action Committees, or PACs. PACs provide a means to funnel money to a candidate of choice and are regulated by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
• 527 groups are not regulated by the FEC, and the nature of these groups is a great source of contention. They have become a way for organizations to avoid hard money limits, and their spending has ballooned in recent years, despite efforts to limit and regulate outside money in elections.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. Which of the following could be defined as a “splinter” party?

(A) The Libertarian Party

(B) The Socialist Labor Party

(C) The Communist Party

(D) The Reform Party

(E) The Green Party

  2. Which of the following is NOT a function of American political parties?

(A) Serving as the loyal opposition

(B) Fomenting armed rebellion

(C) Selecting and funding candidates

(D) Educating the public on issues

(E) Governing the nation

  3. Who of the following people would be most likely to be a Democrat?

(A) A Cuban American

(B) An evangelical Christian

(C) A white Southerner

(D) A Mexican American

(E) A pro-life advocate

  4. Which of the following is NOT generally a method that interest groups use to influence the government?

(A) Bribery

(B) Direct lobbying

(C) Testifying before Congress

(D) Political donations

(E) Endorsements

  5. Political Action Committees (PACs) were formed to allow unions and corporations to

(A) run their own members for political office

(B) funnel limited amounts of money to candidates of their choice

(C) funnel unlimited amounts of money to candidates of their choice

(D) have a voice in government policy meetings

(E) sit down together to work out their differences

8

ELECTIONS

THE CONCEPTS

• Does the media place too much emphasis on irrelevant issues in presidential campaigns?
• Why do incumbents win at such high rates?
• Why is voter turnout so low in the United States?
• What is the impact of primary elections, and who votes in them?
• Why do political parties have such a difficult time holding their coalitions together?
• Why are soft money contributions considered a threat to the election process?
• Why did the Supreme Court have a problem with the imposition of spending limits on PACs?
• Has the Federal Election Campaign Reform Act succeeded in fulfilling the intent of the legislation?
• What accounts for the so-called gender gap?

THE TERMS

• nominations
• general elections
• closed primary
• open primary
• blanket primary
• plurality
• runoff primary
• super-delegates
• federal matching funds
• Super Tuesday
• front-loading
• Federal Election Commission
• brokered conventions
• electoral college
• winner-take-all system
• mandate

The federal government holds elections every two years. Each election gives voters the chance to select a new representative in the House of Representatives. Every other election allows them to vote for president. Each of a state’s two seats in the Senate is contested every six years; as a result, state voters select a senator in two out of every three federal elections.

To cut expenses and to encourage voter turnout, states hold their elections at the same time as federal elections. Thus, voters choose not only federal officials at election time, but also state legislators, judges, the governor, and local officials. They may also be asked to vote on referenda and state bond issues.

Thus, many officeholders are chosen and many issues decided during each election. When the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam asks about elections, however, it nearly always focuses on the presidential election. This chapter will do the same.

There is one exception to this rule. The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam always asks at least one question about the incumbent advantage. Be sure you know the following two facts, as they will almost certainly be tested on the AP exam: 1) representatives who run for reelection win approximately 90 percent of the time; and 2) while incumbent senators have a tremendous electoral advantage, House incumbents have an even greater advantage. Senators must run statewide, and they almost always face a serious challenger. On the other hand, House members run in their home districts, where constituents are often overwhelmingly of one party due to gerrymandering (partisan redrawing of congressional district borders). In such races, victory in the primary election virtually guarantees victory in the general election. In fact, each year a number of House incumbents run for reelection unopposed.

THE ELECTION CYCLE

Elections consist of two phases: nominations, during which the parties choose their candidates for the general elections, and general elections, during which voters decide who will hold elective office.

The majority of states (39) use primary elections to select presidential nominees. All states use some form of primary election to select legislative and state nominees. These elections are usually held between early February and late spring of an election year, with the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary enjoying the coveted “first-in-the-nation” position. Each state sets its own rules for these elections, and there is considerable variation in primary procedures from state to state. There are several types of primaries.

• Closed primary. This is the most common type. In a closed primary, voting is restricted to registered members of a political party. Voters may vote only for candidates running for the nomination of their declared party. Democrats choose among the candidates for the Democratic nomination, while Republicans choose among Republican hopefuls.
• Open primary. In open primaries, voters may vote only in one party’s primary, but they may vote in whichever party primary they choose. Voters select the party primary in which they wish to participate in the privacy of the voting booth. Critics argue that open primaries allow voters to sabotage their opponents’ primaries by crossing party lines to vote for the candidate least likely to win the general election. This is likely to happen only when there are no close contests in one party, however.
• Blanket primary. Blanket primaries use the same procedure as the general elections. In blanket primaries, voters may vote for one candidate per office of either party. Only Alaska and Washington state use this primary system.

In primary voting for legislators and state officials, the candidate who receives a plurality (greatest number of votes, but not more than half the total votes cast) or majority (more than half) in each primary is declared the winner. Some states require the winner to receive a minimum percentage of the vote, however. If no candidate receives the required share of votes, a runoff primary is held between the top two. Runoffs occur most often when many challengers vie for an open office, especially when none of them are well known.

In primary elections for the presidency, voters also choose delegates pledged to a particular presidential candidate. Winning delegates attend their party’s national convention. Some states select presidential convention delegates at state caucuses and conventions. This process begins with local meetings of party members, who select representatives to send to statewide party meetings. Compared with primaries, the state caucus and convention process usually attracts fewer participants. Those who participate tend to be more politically active and better informed than typical voters.

The Democratic Party uses a third method to choose some delegates to its national convention. It grants automatic delegate status to many elected party leaders, including congresspersons and important state leaders. These super-delegates generally support the front-runner. Critics complain that the super-delegates dilute the importance of the primary elections by making it easier for the party elite to control the nominating process. The Republican Party does not have super-delegates. To promote diversity within the delegate pool, the McGovern-Fraser Commission was created in 1968. It recommended that delegates be represented by the proportion of their population in each state.

General elections for federal office are held on the first Tuesday of November. Elections in which the president is being chosen are called presidential elections. Those that occur between presidential elections are called midterm elections.

FIRST STEPS TOWARD NOMINATION

Nearly all elected officials first receive the endorsement, or nomination, of one of the two major parties. Nominees usually have extensive backgrounds in government. Some presidential candidates are current or former members of the Senate. Many have served as governors. Gubernatorial experience allows candidates to claim executive abilities, because governors serve many of the same government functions in their states as the president does in the federal government. Governors also have the advantage of being able to run as Washington outsiders, as opposed to Senators, who usually have extensive federal experience (and whose voting records are often used against them). At a time when public distrust of Washington is high, outsider status can be a significant benefit. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush successfully exploited this factor in their presidential campaigns. And, although he was a Senator, Barack Obama found success by campaigning as an outsider in 2008, as well.

On occasion, the major parties will pursue a candidate with little or no government experience. Such candidates are invariably popular and well-respected figures, often from the military. Dwight Eisenhower was such a candidate.

A presidential run is an all-consuming endeavor that must begin up to two years before the first primary. As a result, most candidates devote themselves to the effort full-time. Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan both left their governorships before running for the presidency; Bob Dole retired from the Senate in 1996 to commit himself more fully to his campaign. Others have remained in office and run successful campaigns. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush are two candidates who remained governors while successfully seeking their party’s nomination. Presidents running for reelection and vice presidents seeking the presidency benefit from the prestige of their offices.

Those considering a run for the presidency must first seek support among the party organizations. They must especially seek the aid of influential donors to the party because elections are extremely expensive. Candidates spend much of the early stages of the nomination process meeting with potential donors, establishing PACs to raise funds (more about fund-raising below), and campaigning for the endorsements of important political groups and leaders. This entire process is often referred to as testing the waters. Many campaigns fail at this stage, long before the public is ever aware of them, due to lack of interest among the political elite.

In the year before the first primaries, potential candidates attempt to increase their public profile. They schedule public appearances and attempt to attract media coverage by taking stands on current issues and discussing the goals of their projected presidencies. Candidates are particularly vulnerable to the media during this period. Since the public knows little about most potential candidates, negative reports or media spin can quickly scuttle a campaign (see Howard Dean in 2004). As primary season begins, candidates try to raise as much money as possible, and to garner as many votes in the primaries as possible, in an effort to win the nomination. Candidates who can’t raise their own money and don’t get enough votes are quickly forced out of the race. The candidates also begin to assemble campaign personnel—advisors, political consultants, public relations experts, speechwriters, fund-raisers, lawyers, and office administrators—who will help manage the campaign.

Recently, very wealthy candidates have attempted to run for the presidency without needing, or using, federal matching funds. Ross Perot in 1992 and Steve Forbes in 1996 used their own money to campaign, but both campaigns failed. Ross Perot’s 1992 campaign spent more money than the Democrat and Republican candidates combined.

FINANCING CAMPAIGNS

A successful presidential campaign requires much more than an appealing candidate. It needs a huge supporting staff, jets and buses, and the resources to hire consultants, pollsters, and advertising agencies. It should come as no surprise, then, that one of the most important skills a candidate can possess is the ability to raise money.

Presidential candidates who meet certain prerequisites may receive federal funding. Primary candidates who receive more than 10 percent of the vote in an election may apply for federal matching funds. These funds essentially double all campaign contributions of $250 and less by matching them. To receive matching funds, candidates must agree to obey federal spending limits: In 2008, the limit was $42.05 million for the primary elections and $84.1 for the general election. Any candidate who receives less than 10 percent of the vote in two consecutive primaries loses his eligibility for matching funds until he wins more than 10 percent of the vote in another primary.

The federal government funds the general election campaigns of the two major presidential candidates, provided those candidates agree not to accept and spend other donations (an exception is made for up to $50,000 of the candidate’s own money). 2004 was the first election in which both major party nominees declined public matching funds during the primaries. Independents do not receive federal funding for their campaigns. (In 2008, John McCain accepted matching funds. Barack Obama did not.)

Despite attempts at campaign finance reform, the trend toward high levels of election spending has continued through the 1990s and into the first decade of the twenty-first century. In the 2004 election, George W. Bush raised a whopping $272.5 million and John Kerry raised $250.3 million, making it the most expensive presidential race in history. Both candidates refused matching funds to avoid all spending limits. Future candidates may raise even more now that corporations and unions can donate directly and without limit.

There is currently no public financing of congressional campaigns, and there are no spending limits for congressional candidates. There are, however, limits on the amounts that individuals and political committees may donate to candidates. These limits, established by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) and enforced by the Federal Election Commission, are as follows:

Many Americans believe that the current campaign finance system has a corrupting effect on government. Efforts to change the system, however, run into several obstacles. The Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo (1976) that mandatory spending limits on campaigns violate candidates’ First Amendment rights to free expression. Furthermore, the system currently benefits incumbents, in that the incumbent’s job description is basically the stuff of reelections: meetings, events, talking to voters, photo-ops, and so on. Accordingly, legislators are reluctant to make changes because changes would make their reelection more difficult. The permissible donations listed in the above table all will change if campaign finance reform is enacted.

PRIMARY SEASON

By January 1 of election year, candidates are campaigning widely among the public. From this point on, candidates participate in debates, campaign from state to state delivering their “stump speeches” (so called because campaigning is often referred to as “stumping”), and choreograph media events—in an effort to draw positive media coverage of their campaigns.

The earliest primaries (New Hampshire’s is a prime example) provide a great boost to the campaigns of whoever wins, increasing the candidate’s media exposure and making all-important fundraising chores easier. Major financial contributors usually desert the campaigns of the losers in early primaries. Furthermore, candidates who receive less than 10 percent of the vote in two successive primaries lose their eligibility for crucial federal matching funds. As a result, those who fare poorly in early primaries usually have to drop out of the race long before the majority of delegates have been selected.

Because early primaries have grown increasingly important in recent years, many states have pushed forward the date of their primary elections. Many southern states even hold their primaries all on the same day in early March (called Super Tuesday). Large states such as New York and California have moved forward their primaries in hopes of having a greater influence on which candidates win the nominations. Political analysts refer to this strategy as front-loading, and the result has been to place increased pressure on candidates to succeed early. Critics argue that it unnecessarily forces voters to choose early in the election process, before they have gotten a chance to know the candidates well.

Primary elections and state caucuses continue into late spring. In most recent elections, however, the party nominee has been decided long before the last elections. John McCain’s nomination in 2008 is an example of that very phenomenon.

NATIONAL CONVENTIONS

After the primary season has ended, both parties hold national conventions to confirm their nominee. When no candidate has received the pledge of a majority of convention delegates, conventions decide who the nominee will be; such conventions are called brokered conventions. The parties have designed their primary systems to prevent brokered conventions, which can divide the party and cost it the election.

One of the main purposes of a national convention, in fact, is to unify the party. Primary elections can damage each party, as candidates attack each other and thereby expose rifts within the party membership. Another main purpose of conventions is to make a show of party unity for political gain. Both parties’ conventions are nationally televised and are widely covered by the news media. Not surprisingly, most of what occurs on the convention stage is choreographed to appeal to the party faithful and undecided voters watching at home.

That does not mean that conventions are placid affairs, however. Conventions are the site of many political negotiations, as different factions of the party attempt to win concessions in return for their full support during the general election. There are often intense battles over the party platform, a statement of purpose and party goals, which, ironically, has little concrete significance. The conventions also offer some political drama, as nominees sometimes wait until the convention to announce their choice of running mates.

The greatest impact conventions can have on general election results is negative. In 1968, for example, rioting outside the Democratic convention in Chicago created a bad impression among voters, especially when contrasted with the unified display at the Republican convention in Miami weeks later. In 1992, ultraconservatives were able to control key elements of the Republican convention. The image the convention created was one of an angry and activist party, which frightened voters and hurt President Bush’s reelection campaign. Under normal circumstances, however, conventions usually help their candidates considerably. Polls taken immediately after conventions show the candidates’ approval ratings up significantly. This rise in public approval is called a post-convention bump.

Nonetheless, it is important to note that national conventions have been altered dramatically in the last century. Until about mid-century, conventions and convention delegates actually selected and nominated the candidate. With the adoption of primary elections, conventions have been transformed into mere coronations with the nominees generally being determined before the convention begins (as with Obama and McCain in 2008).

THE GENERAL ELECTION AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

The remaining candidates continue to campaign for the general election in much the same way as they campaigned during the primaries: holding rallies, participating in debates, running campaign advertisements, and pursuing positive media coverage. There are several key differences between the primaries and the general election. First, during the primaries, candidates run against members of their own party. Because primary candidates are often in general agreement about big-picture issues, their campaigns focus instead on the subtler differences between them. During the general elections, candidates often emphasize the general policy and philosophical differences between the two parties. Put simply, a candidate courts his or her political base during the primary season and then moves toward the center in the general election to win undecided votes in hopes of securing the majority.

Second, candidates planning their campaign strategies must consider the nature of the electoral college. This institution was created by the framers of the Constitution as a means of insulating the government from the whims of a less educated public. Critics feel the electoral college system is antiquated, but no one has yet successfully proposed an amendment to change it. Presidential elections therefore continue to be determined not by the final popular vote but rather by this institution. Each state is given a number of electors equal to the sum of its federal legislators (senators plus representatives). The winner of the presidential election in each state wins all of that state’s electors² (which is why it is often referred to as a winner-take-all system).

The electoral college system places greater emphasis on election results in large states. Victory by a single vote in California wins a candidate all of that state’s 54 electoral votes; a similar margin of victory in Vermont yields only three electoral votes. Despite the number of votes at stake in the large states, candidates will often devote the bulk of their time to “swing” states—areas in which polling indicates a close race. This is the reason that during the 2008 presidential election, states like Ohio, Michigan, and New Hampshire were inundated with political ads while large states whose voters generally go with one party, such as New York, California, and Texas, were relatively quiet. Finally, candidates consider each other’s electoral strategies in planning their campaigns. In 1968, the Democratic Party relied on the support of its Southern base. Republican Richard Nixon realized that this support was weakening and campaigned aggressively in the region. Nixon’s “Southern strategy” worked in enough Southern states to swing the election to the Republicans.

MEDIA INFLUENCE ON ELECTIONS

With nearly 100 million voters participating in the general election, it is clear that candidates cannot come into direct contact with even a small portion of the electorate. Instead, they must rely on the media to get their political message across.

• News media provide many voters with daily campaign information. While most news programs occasionally report on the candidates’ positions on the issues, they concentrate on the candidates’ standing in the polls, or the horse race aspect of the election. This is because news directors prefer information that can be communicated quickly and that changes regularly, such as public opinion poll results. In contrast, candidates’ positions on issues are often complex. Furthermore, they rarely change. Therefore, news programs may report such information once during an election, but they do not report it repeatedly as they do poll results. As a result, the attention of the network news audience is focused on the campaign game rather than on the candidates’ political agendas.
• Campaign advertisements provide another, more controlled look at the candidates. Through advertising, candidates attempt to build a positive image with the public. In many cases, they also try to belittle their opponents through negative advertising. Negative advertising works best when the public knows little about a candidate. In 1988, for example, Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis was the subject of several effective negative advertisements. Although he led in the polls prior to the ads, Dukakis’s support was weak, as most voters knew little about him. The negative advertisements were effective in destroying Dukakis’s lead by portraying him as weak, incompetent, and soft on crime.

ELECTION DAY

There are nearly 200 million Americans of voting age. Of them, nearly 150 million are registered to vote. On a presidential election day, however, fewer than 100 million participate. Voter turnout is even lower for midterm elections: Typically less than 40 percent of all eligible voters participate in them. American voter turnout rates are among the lowest of all Western democracies.

Certain patterns are detectable in American voters’ behavior. The likelihood that an individual will vote corresponds closely to his or her level of education: The more educated a person is, the more likely he or she is to vote. Age is also a factor: Turnout rates are highest among Americans over the age of 40, and lowest among those under the age of 20.

Voter turnout is also influenced in part by how close a race is. Voters are less likely to vote when they believe they know who will win the election. Such was the case in 1996, when many Americans were certain that Bill Clinton would be reelected. Remember, however, that many federal and state offices are up for grabs on election day. A closely contested race in any of those elections can be enough to motivate voters to participate.

On election day, the media report not only election results but also the results of exit polls that break down the vote by age, gender, race, income level, region, and nearly every other demographic imaginable. They do so in an effort to determine the meaning of the results. Why did voters choose one candidate over another? How satisfied were voters with the choices presented them? Were the voters sending a clear message—a mandate—or not? Winners search the results for evidence of a mandate. In 1992, Bill Clinton interpreted his victory as a mandate for a more active and progressive federal government. Several failures—on efforts to integrate homosexuals in the military and to establish nationalized health care—demonstrated that voter mandates are not always so clear. The voters’ message has become more difficult to discern as split-ticket voting—voting for a presidential candidate of one party and legislators of the other—has grown more common.

SUMMARY

• Elections consist of two phases: nominations and the general election. Most nominations are made through party primaries. These can be open, closed, or “blanket.”
• Candidates need the backing of the major parties along with a compelling back story before they can hope to make a strong campaign for national office.
• Campaign finance was restricted by a complicated web of regulations defined by the election laws of the 1970s along with the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, but new laws were passed in 2010.
• Before the general elections, the candidates need to win their party primaries, which often involves energizing the base. Later, candidates may have to repudiate some of the more radical statements they made to court primary voters in order to win more moderate voters in the general election.
• Nominating Conventions used to be where the party nominees were selected, but now they are symbolic coronations of the candidate who has already been selected though the primary process. Still, delegates assemble, cheer, and argue over the drafting of the party platform.
• Presidential candidates must win each state’s electors, which is done by getting a plurality of all the voters in that state. This method causes candidates to spend most all their time in “swing” or “battleground” states and can also result in the winner of the popular vote losing the election (as was the case with Al Gore in the election of 2000).
• After all the voting is done, pollsters, the parties, and the media try their best to determine why the people voted the way they did. Exit polls and surveys are the tools used to decipher these factors.

¹ Political committees that do not meet legal requirements of a PAC (e.g., donations from at least 50 contributors).

² The two exceptions are Maine and Nebraska, which give two electoral votes to the candidate who wins a plurality of the statewide vote, and one vote to the winner of each of the state’s congressional districts. In 1996, Maine had four electoral votes, Nebraska had five.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. In an open Republican primary

(A) only Republicans can vote

(B) only Democrats can vote

(C) only Republicans and Democrats can vote

(D) only Independents can vote

(E) every registered voter can vote.

  2. In a given election cycle, a political action committee (PAC) may contribute to a candidate no more than

(A) $2,000

(B) $3,000

(C) $4,000

(D) $5,000

(E) $6,000

  3. At a nominating convention, the position that the political party will take is decided by the

(A) Platform Committee

(B) Committee on Permanent Organization

(C) Credentials Committee

(D) Rules Committee

(E) Ideology Committee

  4. In order to win the election for the presidency, a candidate must

(A) receive a majority of the votes in the electoral college

(B) receive a majority of the popular vote

(C) receive a plurality of votes in the electoral college

(D) receive a plurality of the popular vote

(E) receive a unanimous vote from the electoral college

  5. Which of the following people is most likely to vote in a general election?

(A) a 25-year-old high school dropout

(B) a 65-year-old professor

(C) a 19-year-old college student

(D) a 16-year-old high school student

(E) a 30-year-old college graduate

9

INSTITUTIONS OF
GOVERNMENT

CONGRESS

CONCEPTS

• Why do congressional incumbents have an advantage over challengers?
• Why did the Supreme Court strike down majority-minority voting districts?
• Why does Congress continue to maintain the seniority system?
• What is it about the way Congress operates that promotes factionalism?
• Why has it been argued that Congress contributes to the fragmentation of policy making?
• Why do we hate Congress but love our congressperson?
• Why would members of Congress vote against campaign finance reform?
• Why would members of the Senate engage in a filibuster?
• Why is the House Rules Committee so important?
• How does politics enter into the nomination process for independent agencies and the judiciary?
• What impact has the high cost of campaigning had on the legislative process?
• What are the powers of the leaders in the House and Senate?

TERMS

• census
• reapportionment
• gerrymander
• congressional district
• oversight
• House Rules Committee
• filibuster
• cloture
• pork barrel
• earmarks
• conference committee
• standing committee
• joint committee
• select committee
• pocket veto
• line-item veto
• pigeonhole
• discharge petition
• Speaker of the House
• president pro tempore
• majority leader
• minority leader
• bills of attainder
• ex post facto laws

CONGRESSIONAL STRUCTURE

Congress is the bicameral (two-house) legislature responsible for writing the laws of the nation. Congress also serves other functions, such as overseeing the bureaucracy, consensus building, clarifying policy, legitimizing, and expressing diversity. It is made up of a House of Representatives of 435 members and a Senate of 100 members.

Every 10 years a census is taken by the federal government to count the population to determine the number of each state’s congressional districts. Each state must then redraw its congressional boundaries to ensure that each district is equal in population. Congressional redistricting is done by each state legislature. Therefore, the political party in control of the state legislature controls how the districts are drawn. As much as is legally possible, the legislature will gerrymander the district boundaries to give the majority party an advantage in future elections. This is true in every state with the exception of Iowa, which uses an independent commission to form districts. In some states, such as Alaska and Wyoming, the populations are so small that the entire state becomes a congressional district; all states are guaranteed at least one seat in the House.

CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS

Elections for all the 435 seats of the House of Representatives occur every two years. House members must reside in the district they represent, be a citizen of the state, and be at least 25 years old. Election to the House takes place within each congressional district. The constituencies of representatives are relatively small compared with those of senators, and the House incumbent election rates are very high, averaging more than 90 percent. Many House members have safe seats and are not seriously challenged for reelection.

Elections for one-third of the Senate occur every two years, with a senator’s term lasting six years. Every state is guaranteed two senators, elected on a staggered basis in statewide elections. Senate elections are generally more competitive, expensive, high profile, and generally draw candidates from other elected offices.

Important Voting Rights Court Cases

Smith v. Allwright (1944). The denying of African Americans the right to vote in a primary election was found to be a violation of the Fifteenth Amendment.

Wesberry v. Sanders (1963). Ordered House districts to be near as equal as possible—enshrined the principle of “one man, one vote.”

Buckley v. Valeo (1976). The court ruled that giving money to a political campaign was a form of free speech and threw out some stringent federal regulations on fund-raising and election spending.

Shaw v. Reno (1993) and Miller v. Johnson (1995). Race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries.

U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton (1995). States cannot set term limits on members of Congress.

Bush v. Gore (2000). Florida recount in the election of 2000 was ruled to be a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause.

CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS AND REPRESENTATION

Descriptive representation means that the elected legislature should reflect the demographic characteristics of the constituency. Minorities and women have always been underrepresented in Congress and state legislatures, which is the reason that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 encouraged states to take measures to increase minority representation in Congress. Into the early 1980s little progress had been made. Women, Latinos, and African Americans continued to be underrepresented. In 1982 Congress amended the Voting Rights Act to encourage states to create majority-minority districts, concentrating African American and Hispanic populations into distinct congressional districts. These districts were created to make it more feasible for minority candidates to get elected.

Following the 1990 census, many states redrew their congressional districts, which resulted in increasing African American representation by 50 percent and Hispanic membership by 70 percent. Various districts were drawn to conform to the Voting Rights Act. However, the shape of these districts was sometimes quite bizarre. North Carolina District 12, for example, stretched in a narrow band 160 miles down Interstate Highway 85. A Duke University professor joined with four other white plaintiffs to challenge the constitutionality of District 12. In Shaw v. Reno (1993), the Supreme Court surprised many with a split decision. The Court invalidated the district in question because its boundaries were neither contiguous nor compact and were drawn with the intent to discriminate through the use of racial gerrymandering. The Court ruled that any racial gerrymandering by the state required a compelling state interest, and it did not see such a compelling interest in this district. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has heard other redistricting cases like this one, and has upheld the redistricting or simply declined to take the challenge.

North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas legislators have been accused by critics of playing dirty politics. African American and (to a lesser degree) Hispanic voters are overwhelmingly Democrat. (Cuban Americans in Florida tend to vote Republican.) Critics claim that Republican-controlled state legislatures were not motivated by any sense of duty. Instead, they stand accused of trying to remove racial-minority Democrats from other districts to ensure that more Republicans get elected. The political trade-off was to create a guaranteed Democratic district but at the same time gain more Republican seats from the surrounding districts. To isolate minorities in the district is known as “packing.” To divide them across many districts is “cracking.”

To add to the representation controversy, population shifts in the last 20 years have given additional seats in the House to Southern states while reducing the number from other regions. In addition, suburban representation has increased, at the expense of both rural and urban areas.

Finally, Congress draws its members primarily from the legal and business worlds. Almost half of the House and more than half of the Senate have a legal background. The reason seems to be that lawyers have many of the prerequisites needed for a successful run for Congress: interest and experience in the law, prominence within the community, and the personal wealth to at least partially fund an election campaign.

CONGRESSIONAL POWERS

The Framers had a fear of the power inherent in legislatures. Because of that fear, the Constitution spells out the responsibilities of the legislature in more detail than those of the executive and judicial branches. To further guard against legislative usurpation (control of one house over the other), both houses have unique but complementary powers. The delegated powers, which require both houses to work in concert with each other, include taxing, borrowing money, regulating commerce, raising an army, creating and making rules for the federal courts, establishing naturalization laws, establishing post offices, providing for a militia, and making any law that is deemed necessary and proper for carrying out these powers.

Each house also has unique powers. Only the House of Representatives may initiate tax laws and spending bills. It is the House Ways and Means Committee that oversees taxing and spending legislation. The Senate has only amending powers on revenue bills.

The Senate’s unique powers include confirmation of presidential nominations to the federal courts and ambassadorships to foreign countries. The Senate must also ratify all treaties signed by the president.

There are also restrictions on congressional actions. Congress may not pass bills of attainder (laws that find people guilty of a crime and sentence them to prison without a trial) or ex post facto laws (that punish people for actions that occurred before the behavior was made criminal) and may not levy export taxes or grant titles of nobility. These same prohibitions apply to states.

THE NON-LEGISLATIVE TASKS OF CONGRESS

Congress’s primary responsibility is to fulfill the legal needs of the nation by writing laws. However, Congress also performs other equally important functions. These include the following:

• Oversight. Through its committees and subcommittees, Congress reviews the work of the federal agencies. This helps check the executive branch. It investigates charges of corruption and waste, and it holds hearings where experts and citizens discuss the government’s problems and suggest solutions. All committee chairs have the power to subpoena (legally compel) witnesses to appear and testify. It is also the role of the Senate to confirm the members of the president’s cabinet as well as to approve nominees for all positions in the federal court system.
• Public education. Committee hearings and floor debates increase public awareness of government and societal problems. Floor debates over gun control, tax cuts, Social Security reform, health care reform, and sending armed troops abroad all help to focus national attention on important issues.
• Representing constituents within the government. As representatives of their electorates, members of Congress not only vote on laws but also help constituents in their dealings with the government. They receive and can act on complaints about federal services, sponsor voters who seek scholarships or federal contracts, and solicit constituents’ suggestions about how to improve the government. In performing this last task, some members of Congress consider themselves delegates whose job it is to mirror the views of their home districts. Others see themselves as trustees who should consider their constituents’ views but should ultimately use their best judgment as experts when deciding how to vote.

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

The legislative process is, by design, slow and complicated. This is to prevent Congress from acting hastily. The Framers intended for the process to foster compromise. The result has been that the final versions of bills are often radically different from initial versions. Without compromise there would be no legislative process.

As many as 10,000 bills are introduced on the floor of Congress each year. Some are written by members of Congress and their staffs; others are drafted by the executive branch and are introduced by a sympathetic member of Congress. Many are suggested or written by interest groups and their lawyers. Regardless of who authors a bill, a bill can only be proposed by a member of Congress. Whoever introduces a bill is called the sponsor of the bill.

The legislative process requires the two houses to work cooperatively with each other. All bills must pass both houses in exactly the same form. While the bills must be the same, the debate and voting processes in the two houses differ. Because there are 435 members of the House of Representatives, the process by which bills are debated is limited. The Senate, which is smaller, has fewer rules governing the legislative process.

Unlike the Senate, the House has a Rules Committee, which is responsible for determining how long a bill will be debated and, whether to allow an open or closed rule for amending the bill. Open rules allow amendments, closed rules prohibit amendments. When Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives in 1994, they promised most bills would be debated under open rules. Allowing 435 members an opportunity to add amendments to bills became so cumbersome, however, that the House leadership returned to the closed rule process. Because the Rules Committee controls crucial aspects of the legislative process, it is considered the most powerful committee in the House. The Rules Committee can kill a bill by delaying a vote or by making it easy for opponents to add killer amendments. The Rules Committee can also bring bills up for an immediate floor vote.

While the House strictly controls debate, the Senate does not. There are no time restraints placed on senators. A filibuster is a tactic used to delay a vote on a bill and tie up the work of the Senate, usually by a Senator making a speech that continue for hours on the Senate floor. A filibuster can also happen without actual continuous speeches, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. The only way to end a filibuster is to vote for cloture, but this requires the votes of 60 members, which is difficult to get when the two parties are evenly represented.

The Senate has no closed rules for amending legislation. Amendments, called riders, do not have to be relevant to a bill. This allows individual senators an opportunity to add amendments, such as “pet” issues or projects for their home state, or to prohibit the actions of executive agencies. “Pet project” riders designed to bring federal money to a home state are called pork barrel. “Bringing home the bacon” is one of the reasons incumbent reelection rates are so high. The members of both houses love pork-barrel legislation. Earmarks—provisions within legislation that appropriate money to a specific project—appear in appropriation bills and authorization bills. There are a few groups that monitor earmarking in the U.S. Congress.

After debates, bills usually end up passing the House and Senate in different forms, so both versions are sent to a conference committee. The members of these conference committees come from the respective committees of the two houses that wrote the bill. The conference committee tries to negotiate a compromise bill, acceptable to both houses of Congress. Once a compromise version has been written, the bill is returned to the two houses for a vote. Failure to pass a bill from a conference committee will kill a bill. If the bill is passed in both houses it is sent to the White House for the president’s signature.

The president has options. If he does nothing for 10 days, the bill becomes law without his signature. If a congressional session ends during those 10 days, the president must sign every bill into law. If he doesn’t, the bill will be pocket vetoed, requiring the bill go through the entire legislative process again. If there are more than 10 days left in a congressional session, and a president wants to prevent a bill from becoming law, he may veto the entire bill. The president must then give his reasons in writing and return the bill to the house of origination.

At that point, Congress has choices. The two houses may make the required changes, or they may attempt to override the president’s veto by a two-thirds vote. If the bill passes both houses by the required two-thirds vote, the bill becomes law without the president’s signature. If the house of origination (where the bill was originally introduced) does nothing with the presidential veto, the bill is dead.

In 1996, Congress gave the president the line-item veto, empowering the president to veto individual parts of a bill. The constitutionality of the line-item veto was immediately challenged in the Supreme Court (Clinton v. New York City). The Court struck down the line-item veto as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the president.

Congress has also attempted to give itself veto power over the actions of the president. In specific instances, Congress would write legislation giving the president broad powers to act but reserve to itself the right to void presidential actions by a vote of one or both houses. This legislative veto was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha (1983). The only form of veto mentioned in the Constitution is that used by the president.

LEGISLATION BY COMMITTEE

Most of the legislative business of Congress occurs in committees. Who serves on which committee and what position they hold is determined by a number of factors. The majority party of each house holds all the committee chairs. The majority party will also hold a majority of the seats on each committee, effectively controlling all the business of the committee. On the important committees, the majority usually holds two-thirds of the committee seats.

Generally, the committee member of the majority party with the most seniority becomes the chair and the senior member from the minority party becomes the ranking member. The ranking member becomes chair if the minority party becomes the majority party. This happened in 2001 when a member of the Republican-controlled Senate left the Republican Party to become an Independent. All Democrat ranking members of Senate committees became the chairs, while the Republican chairs became the ranking members. The same principle applies in the House of Representatives.

Committee assignments in the House and Senate are determined by the House and Senate leadership and a caucus of the two political parties. Members of Congress attempt to get on the committees that will allow them to do the most constituent service and help them get reelected. For example, representatives and senators from farm states try to get assigned to agriculture committees.

Committees serve as mini-legislatures, performing the tasks of investigating and debating bills that, due to time constraints, could never otherwise receive the consideration of Congress. Often, the congressional committee assigns the bill to an even smaller group, called a subcommittee, for initial consideration. Recently, there has been a proliferation of subcommittees. Subcommittees often determine how money is spent and have therefore become very powerful.

The fate of a new bill depends on much more than its content. The membership of the committee and subcommittee that first considers the bill is crucial. Bill sponsors attempt to draft bills in such a way as to steer them toward sympathetic committees. Supporters of a bill must also decide which house of Congress should consider their bill first, because with the exception of revenue bills, federal bills may originate in either house. Supporters attempt to have the bill introduced in the house more sympathetic to their cause to build political momentum.

The House has more committees than the Senate. House members, however, tend to become more specialized because they serve on fewer committees. As a result, they are considered to have more expertise than senators. There are four types of committees in Congress.

• Standing committees are permanent, specialized committees. Examples include the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Senate Armed Services Committee. There are 20 standing committees in the House and 17 in the Senate.
• Joint committees are made up of members of both the House and the Senate. These committees are normally used for communicating to the public or for investigations but generally do not send bills to the floor for votes.
• Select committees are temporary committees organized in each house for some special purpose. These committees usually carry out investigations for the purpose of writing special legislation. The House Watergate Committee and the Senate Select Committee on Unfair Campaign Practices are examples from the Nixon era. The work of these committees eventually led to campaign reform.
• Conference committees are temporary and include members from the committees of the two houses who were responsible for writing a bill. These committees try to negotiate compromise bills, which are then submitted to the two houses for an up or down vote without amendments. Once a compromise bill has been negotiated, the conference committee disbands.

Most bills die almost immediately in a subcommittee due to lack of interest from committee members; unless a committee member takes a special interest in a bill, the bill will either be quickly rejected or ignored until it dies a natural death at the end of the congressional session.

Committees and subcommittees function by calling interested parties and expert witnesses who have some information to give. Lobbyists often testify as expert witnesses. Congress can subpoena reluctant witnesses, forcing them to appear in hearings and can grant immunity to compel them to testify. Once their investigations have concluded, committees begin amending and rewriting sections of bills in meetings called markup sessions.

Committees will sometimes refuse to vote a bill out, hoping to keep it from being considered by the house. A bill stuck in a House or Senate committee is said to be pigeonholed. The parliamentary mechanism to force a bill out of committee for a floor vote is called a discharge petition.

Committees have responsibilities in addition to writing laws. For example, they are responsible for the oversight of many bureaucratic agencies and departments. Heads of regulatory agencies, which are responsible for enforcing the laws, often appear to give testimony before congressional committees with oversight jurisdiction. If the agency has not followed the intent of the law, the agency head will be in for a rough time.

Committees also hear testimony from agency heads pleading for money and personnel. Congressional budget cutting and agency reorganization can have a profound impact on an agency’s ability to carry out its responsibilities. This is one way that Congress can use the budget to shape policy.

CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP

The House

The leader of the House of Representatives is the Speaker, who is chosen by the majority party in a special election. The Speaker is powerful because he or she can direct floor debate and has influence over committee assignments and over the Rules Committee. The Speaker can also control which bills go to which committees. The majority leader of the House keeps party members in line and helps determine party policy and the party’s legislative agenda. The minority leader keeps the minority party members in line and helps determine the minority party’s legislative agenda. The House majority and minority whips also help their respective party leaders keep the members loyal to the party’s legislative agenda. They coordinate members of each party and help garner support for propsed legislation.

The Senate

The vice president is the president of the Senate, and this is his only constitutionally delegated responsibility. However, the vice president is rarely on the floor of the Senate and only votes to break a tie. When the vice president is absent during Senate sessions, the president pro tempore is the presiding officer. The president pro tempore is largely an honorary position and is usually given to the most senior member of the majority party of the Senate. The majority leader has the real power in the Senate because he or she controls the legislative agenda and acts as a power broker and policy initiator. The minority leader can act as a power broker but usually cannot initiate policy and control the agenda.

WHY DO THEY VOTE THAT WAY?

Congresspersons are always cross-pressured to influence their vote. These pressures come from their own party and from the opposition. It also comes from the president through jawboning (trying to influence) and from their colleagues by logrolling (“you help me on this bill, and I’ll help you on yours”). PACs try to influence votes through contributions, as do constituents and interest groups. Personal ideology and religious beliefs can also impact their judgment. The most important factor in determining the vote of a congressperson is party affiliation. Members of Congress usually—but not always—vote with their parties.

NOTABLE LEGISLATION

National Growth, Expansion and Institution Building

• Northwest Ordinance (1789). This law is one of the few successes of the Articles of Confederation; it provided clear guidelines for the settlement of new territories and provided a path to statehood.

Regulation of Government and Industry

• Pendleton Act (1883). Eliminated the spoils system of patronage in selection for government jobs and set up an exam-based merit system for qualified candidates.
• Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1896). This law provided Congress with authority to regulate and break up monopolies—known as “trusts”—in the United States.
• Hatch Act (1939). Permitted government employees to vote in government elections but forbade them from participating in partisan politics.
• Air Quality Act (1967). The beginning of a series of acts to regulate impacts on the environment.
• Federal Election Campaign Acts (1971–1974). These laws created the Federal Election Commission and required disclosures of contributions and expenditures and limitations on contributions and presidential election expenditures.
• War Powers Act (1973). Limited President’s power to use troops overseas in hostilities, put a time limit on use and gave Congress final power to withdraw troops.
• Budget and Impoundment Control Act (1974). Established Congressional budget committees and the Congressional Budget Office, and gave Congress the power to prevent the president from refusing to fund Congressional initiatives (known as “impoundment”).
• Freedom of Information Act (1974). Declassified government documents for public use.
• Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Bill (1985). Set budget reduction targets to balance budget. Failed to eliminate loopholes.

Rights and Freedoms

• Espionage Act (1917), Sedition Act (1918). Severely curtailed the civil liberties of Americans during wartime and greatly increased the power of the federal government in controlling public activity.
• Immigration Act (1924). This law stringently limited the number of immigrants admitted into the United States and set strict quotas for entry.
• Civil Rights Act (1964). Title II banned discrimination in public places on the basis of race, color, national origin, or religion. Title VII prohibited employment discrimination based on gender.
• Voting Rights Act (1965). Suspended literacy tests, empowered federal officials to register voters, prohibited states from changing voting procedures without federal permission.
• Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967). Banned age discrimination in jobs unless age is related to job performance.
• Civil Rights Act (1968). Banned housing discrimination based on race.
• Title IX Education Act (1972). Prohibited gender discrimination in federally funded education programs.
• Americans With Disabilities Act (1990). Protected civil liberties of disabled Americans and mandated “reasonable accommodations” to public facility use.
• National Voter Registration Bill, (1993). Also known as The Motor Voter Act, this law allowed people to register to vote when applying for driver’s licenses.
• The Patriot Act (2001). In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress granted broad police authority to the federal, state, and local government to interdict, prosecute, and convict suspected terrorists. This law is formally known as the USA-PATRIOT Law, an acronym for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.”

Government Aid to the People

• New Deal Legislation (1933–1939). Legislation that expanded the role of government in the economy and society. Created entities like Social Security, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. These laws also dramatically expanded the role and size of the federal government.
• Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (1996). The Welfare Reform Act signaled a change in the role of the federal government in the relationship with the states. This law sought to increase the role of personal responsibility in welfare recipients and shifted many responsibilities for welfare provision to state governments.
• Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002). Often known as the McCain-Feingold Bill, this law banned soft money contributions to national political parties and raised hard money limits to $2,000. In a controversial decision in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), the Supreme Court struck down several provisions in the law, especially those related to contributions made by corporations to political campaigns.

THE PRESIDENT

CONCEPTS

• How do presidents use their formal and informal powers to get their legislative agenda passed?
• How can Congress curb the foreign policy making powers of the president?
• How does the president use the appointment power to ensure that policies are carried out?
• What techniques can presidents use to promote their legislative agenda in the face of divided government?
• What impact does the White House staff have on policy making?
• Why would Congress give the president a line-item veto?
• Do executive agreements go against the intent of the Framers of the Constitution?

TERMS

• executive agreements
• Commander in Chief
• Gulf of Tonkin Resolution
• War Powers Act
• Chief of Staff
• Office of Management and Budget
• cabinet
• impeachment
• secretaries

THE FORMAL POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY

The powers delegated in the Constitution to the executive branch are in Article II, section 2, but they are less specific than the formal powers of Congress. The broadly defined powers were intended to give flexibility but have instead resulted in greatly expanded power.

The president is responsible for enforcing the laws, handling foreign policy, and serving as the ceremonial head of state. He is also the administrative head of the government. He can force Congress into session, must brief Congress on the “state of the nation,” and can veto legislation and grant reprieves and pardons. But regardless of these expansive powers, he must cooperate with Congress because the powers of the presidency are intermingled with the powers of the legislature. The president’s appointments of federal judges, Supreme Court justices, ambassadors, and department secretaries all require Senate approval. The president negotiates treaties, but they must be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. Because Senate ratification is sometimes difficult to achieve, the broad powers of the president to initiate foreign policy now include executive agreements (which do not require Senate approval). These are agreements between heads of countries; under international and U.S. law they are as binding as a treaty. However, they usually deal with more routine, administrative matters.

THE PRESIDENT AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF

The president also serves as commander in chief of the armed forces. But the framers created a complex institutional situation regarding armed conflict. Only Congress has the power to declare war, but only the president can make war. In the nuclear age, the power of Congress to declare war could very well be obsolete. Because missiles can destroy cities within minutes of launch, congressional debate of the pros and cons of declaring war seems impractical, if not silly. While the United States has been in numerous wars since 1945, no declarations of war have been made.

While the president is the chief strategist and director of the military forces of the United States, he is at the mercy of Congress for the money to wage war. However, once the president has committed troops in conflict, it is inconceivable that Congress would refuse to fund the weapons needed for the military. For members of Congress such an action would mean political suicide and probably lead to a constitutional crisis within the U.S. government.

In a national crisis, the other branches of government and the American people look to the president for leadership. Initially, presidents will have strong support for their policies. This helps explain why Congress, in 1964, passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, giving the president the broad powers to commit unlimited numbers of troops for an unlimited length of time in the Vietnam conflict. President Johnson was unable to bring that war to a conclusion. Strong criticism of his handling of the war led to a general lack of support for his policies, undermining his ability to govern. The same thing happened to President Carter when he was unable to successfully end the Iranian hostage crisis. George H.W. Bush was president during the Gulf War. His ability to quickly bring the war to a conclusion while suffering relatively few casualties resulted in the second-highest approval rating of any president, at 89 percent.

In the post–Vietnam War era, Congress has attempted to place controls on the war-making powers of the president. Congress passed the War Powers Act in 1973 in an attempt to force the president to seek congressional approval before making war. The act specifically limits the president to 10,000 troops for 60 days, with 30 additional days to withdraw the troops, unless Congress grants an extension or declares war. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the War Powers Act, and Congress has never invoked it, although whenever the president commits troops overseas, members of Congress have threatened the president with imposition of the War Powers Act.

THE INFORMAL POWERS

The presidential powers that are not enumerated in the Constitution are referred to as the informal powers, and they are sometimes more important than the formal ones. How well presidents use the informal powers can determine the success of their presidencies.

Presidents are supposed to be morale builders. President Carter’s failure to improve the morale of the country contributed to his reelection defeat. President Reagan was a master at morale building, and this characteristic helps explain why he remained popular with the American people.

Presidents serve as legislative leaders and coalition builders. Failure to set and lead the legislative agenda and build coalitions in Congress can doom presidents, particularly when there is divided government (when one or both houses of the legislature are controlled by the opposition party). George H.W. Bush became the “foreign policy president” when he was unable to get his domestic policy agenda passed in a Democrat-controlled Congress. Ronald Reagan and his advisers were experts in building coalitions with Republicans and Southern conservative Democrats. This coalition of Republicans and southern Democrats gave Reagan his legislative agenda.

Perhaps the president’s most important informal powers are as a policy persuader and communicator to Congress and the American people. Clinton and Reagan were superior communicators. The ability of a president to communicate well with the American people is a very powerful tool for pressuring Congress. Communicating with Congress is also important. Having the congressional leadership down to the White House for lunch and a photo opportunity is another way that presidents try to persuade members of Congress to pass their legislative agenda.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

The Executive Office of the President helps carry out the president’s administrative responsibilities. It is made up of more than half a dozen agencies involved in the day-to-day operations of the White House and is basically divided into three areas: domestic, foreign, and military affairs. It is staffed by hundreds of personnel located in the White House and the Executive Office Building. All are directly responsible to the president or his designees.

• The Chief of Staff is the top aide to the president. He or she is a person in whom the president has complete trust and is probably a longtime associate and friend. Considered one of the most powerful persons in Washington, the Chief of Staff is responsible for managing the Executive Office and can control access to the president, thus potentially controlling the information that the president receives. Some presidents, such as Bill Clinton, permitted easy access; others, such as Richard Nixon, tended to insulate themselves. Whoever the president chooses as Chief of Staff can have a tremendous impact on presidential effectiveness. Clinton’s first Chief of Staff, Thomas McClarty, a Washington outsider and Clinton friend, ran an undisciplined White House, prone to many errors. He was replaced by a Washington insider, former Congressman Leon Panetta, who established order and discipline, emerging as a key policy player in the Clinton administration.
• The National Security Council is headed by the National Security Advisor, who has direct access to the president in matters relating to military and foreign policy. The NSC has been involved since the late 1940s in the decision-making process during national emergencies. President Kennedy used the NSC during the Cuban missile crisis, President Reagan during the Iran-Contra affair, and President Bush during the Gulf War. Unlike the State Department, the NSC is largely free from congressional oversight. For this reason, it has become one of the most favored institutions for many presidents.
• The Domestic Policy Council assists the president in formulating policies relating to energy, education, agriculture, natural resources, economic affairs, health and human resources, welfare reform, drug abuse, and crime.
• The Office of Management and Budget is responsible for preparing the budget of the United States and can be used to control and manage the executive agencies for the president. The OMB has enormous power because of its ability to allocate money to the cabinet departments through the budget process of the executive branch. Increasing or decreasing a department’s budget affects how it carries out its responsibilities.
• The Council of Economic Advisors is responsible for helping the president make national economic policy. The Council is usually made up of the economists and advises the president on policies that are designed to increase prosperity.
• The U.S. Trade Representative is responsible for negotiating complex trade and tariff agreements for the president. Trade agreements such as GATT and NAFTA are negotiated by the Trade Representative on behalf of the president, with the guidance of the White House.

THE CABINET

The cabinet is not mentioned in the Constitution but was created through custom and usage. Each cabinet department was instituted by an act of Congress to help administrate the responsibilities of the executive branch.

Each cabinet secretary is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Secretaries can be dismissed at the president’s will. Cabinet secretaries are supposed to run their departments and carry out the president’s policies. Those who disagree with presidential policy are expected to resign. Secretaries tend to be lightning rods to be used for deflecting criticism and are responsible for explaining and promoting presidential policies. Over time, secretaries tend to represent their own departments more than the president’s policies. They are expected to fight for their department’s budget, jurisdiction, and personnel. This creates competition and friction between departments and accounts for why presidents usually do not hold full cabinet meetings. Presidents just don’t have the time or inclination to listen to the bickering and arguing between department heads.

Still, despite these institutional shortcomings, cabinet secretaries do rule over vast departmental bureaucracies—each containing numerous powerful government agencies. With the recent addition of the Department of Homeland Security, there are now 15 cabinet departments. After the September 11th attacks, it was felt that a cabinet-level department was necessary to counter possible threats to the United States, and more than 22 agencies were consolidated into the new department, making it the third-largest executive branch department. Agencies as disparate as the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly the INS), the Coast Guard, and the Secret Service were consolidated to shape a coherent agenda to protect the United States against potential attacks. The Department of Homeland Security has four functions: to protect the borders; to support local agencies like police and fire departments; to detect chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons; and to analyze intelligence. Homeland Security is the first top-level government position created since the Energy Department was formed in 1977 and the first large-scale government reorganization since Harry Truman created the Department of Defense in 1947.

IMPEACHMENT

The Constitution gives Congress the power to remove the president from office for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The Constitution does not define high crimes and misdemeanors, leaving those definitions to politicians. The only direction in the Constitution is that the House of Representatives impeaches the president (or brings the charges) by a simple majority vote, and if the impeachment passes, the Senate holds a trial with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding. Removal of the president requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate. The entire process in Congress has been developed as a result of guesswork, custom, and usage.

Because the definition of an impeachable offense is left to the House, impeachment is a highly charged political process. Most constitutional scholars place the standard for impeachment as an act against the government or the Constitution, but there seems to be political disagreement over what standard should be used. Conservatives seem to have one standard, while liberals seem to have another. Every impeachment, or near-impeachment, has divided the Congress along party lines, and some scholars have accused members of Congress of using the process to try to undo the result of an election.

No president of the United States has been removed from office. The Senate failed to remove Andrew Johnson for his violation of the Tenure in Office Act by one vote. This act was later invalidated by the Supreme Court. Richard Nixon resigned as a result of the Watergate scandal. He knew that the Senate would convict if given the opportunity to vote. The impeachment of President Clinton for lying under oath was very political. All parties knew before the trial began that there was little chance of a Senate conviction. Clinton’s defenders claimed that while Clinton’s behavior had been improper and had brought dishonor to the Office of the President, his conduct had not risen to the level of an impeachable offense.

Federal judges are appointed for life and can be removed only by the impeachment process. Only seven federal judges have ever been removed by the Senate. One of them is Alcee Hastings, who was impeached for bribery and perjury, and is now a member of the same House of Representatives who voted for his impeachment.

THE JUDICIARY AND THE LAW

CONCEPTS

• What circumstances are required for a case to be brought before the Supreme Court?
• How do politics enter into Supreme Court decisions?
• Why can it be said that all judicial decisions are activist?
• Why can it be said that a president’s strongest legacy is found in the judiciary?
• What control does Congress have over the judiciary?

TERMS

• equal justice
• due process
• adversarial system
• presumption of innocence
• civil law
• criminal law
• grand jury
• plea bargains
• reasonable doubt
• settlement
• preponderance of evidence
• original jurisdiction
• appellate jurisdiction
• senatorial courtesy
• judicial restraint
• judicial activism
• judicial review
• Marbury v. Madison
• writ of certiorari
• justiciable
• standing
• briefs
• amicus curiae
• oral arguments
• unanimous opinion
• majority opinion
• concurring opinion
• dissenting opinion

AMERICAN LEGAL PRINCIPLES

Although the United States plays host to the interlocking systems of state and federal law, a few underlying principles make up the foundation of our legal system. They are: equal justice under the law, due process of law, the adversarial system, and presumption of innocence.

All who appear in court in the United States must be treated as equals. The Founders were very concerned that the new nation avoid the hierarchical legal systems that plagued many other nations and, as a result, enshrined many amendments in the Constitution that establish equal justice under the law. For example, whenever jurors hear a criminal case, they are instructed not to privilege the testimony of a police officer over that of a defendant.

Due process can be divided into two types: substantive due process and procedural due process. Substantive due process law deals with the question of whether laws are fair. Fairness is determined by looking at the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment. A law that made it illegal for people with blue eyes to ride motorcycles would constitute a violation of substantive due process. Procedural due process law is concerned with the question of whether laws are fairly applied. This might seem less important than substantive due process, but procedural issues are actually at the heart of our legal system. If suspects in certain types of crimes were held for ten years before they ever had a trial, this would be a violation of procedural due process, because the law guarantees everyone a speedy trial. Even if a nation has laws that are fair and just, if they are not applied fairly, they are meaningless.

Strange as it may seem to those of us raised in the United States, many nations do not require both sides of legal cases to be respresented by advocates. This inquisitorial system, as it is known, is alien to the United States, where we use the adversarial system. As you can probably guess from the name, this principle is based on the premise that the best way to work out questions of fact is to have two sides—or adversaries—debate the burden of guilt or liability in a situation. Some critics say that this system creates too many conflicts—particularly in areas such as family law and divorce, and recommend an increased role for mediators who seek rapprochement and can make legally binding decisions.

In his Commentaries on the Laws of England, English jurist and professor William Blackstone said, “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer,” and this number became known as the Blackstone ratio. Benjamin Franklin expanded this, writing “that it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.” In both England and America, the idea that the accused are innocent until proven guilty—the presumption of innocence—is one of the bedrock principles of the legal system. As a result, the burden of proof is on the prosecutor in criminal cases, and if there is any reasonable doubt as to a person’s innocence, juries are instructed to acquit.

TYPES OF LAW

In the United States, most legal cases involve either civil law or criminal law. The distinction between these two types of law is very important, and knowing the differences and similarities can help a great deal when taking the AP exam.

Anyone who watches television police or law dramas has at least some familiarity with the trappings of criminal law. This type of law deals with serious crimes that harm individuals or society. If physical violence is involved, then the action will probably end up in the criminal justice system, but fraud and extortion are also crimes. In criminal law, a suspect is arrested and must be indicted. This is done (in most states and at the federal level) by a grand jury: a group of 24 to 48 jurors who decide only one thing—whether a trial should commence. Since the grand jury is not deciding guilt or innocence, an accused person does not have many protections at the grand jury level. In fact, defense attorneys are not even allowed to address grand juries. Once the accused is indicted, that person then has the option of plea bargaining with the prosecution to agree to a less serious crime and sentence. Something like 95 percent of all criminal cases end in plea bargains. Still, many cases go to trial. Here it is important to note that in criminal trials, the state (at the state level) or the United States (at the federal level) is the party opposing the accused person. Even if your loved one has been killed, it is not you versus the accused killer, but the government against the accused killer—the government acts as the prosecution. This reflects the basic Lockean premise that when we enter into a society or community, we cede our fundamental right to vengeance and punishment to the state in exchange for protection. Since the presumption of innocence is so important to our legal system, the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Criminal trials are held before petit juries (these are what most of us think of as simply “juries”) that are composed of twelve people. The decision of the jury is known as the verdict, and a guilty verdict can only be returned if all twelve jurors vote to convict. A split jury is known as a “hung jury” and results in a mistrial.

Chances are that you haven’t seen a thrilling television drama about civil law, but that shouldn’t detract from its importance. The civil law system is what determines the results of disputes over things like contracts, property, custody of the kids, or an issue of liability. Unlike in criminal law cases, the government is only involved in a civil case if it happens to be the party being sued. There is no prosecution; instead, a plaintiff squares off against a defendant. If a person thinks that they have been wronged, they issue a complaint in civil court. If that complaint is answered, that is, if a judge or jury thinks the complaint has merit, then the case moves forward. As with plea bargaining in criminal law, civil law also has a mechanism to avoid trial—the settlement. In a settlement, the parties negotiate and the issue becomes how much each party is willing to give up to end the lawsuit. If no settlement can be reached, the case goes to trial. Since the stakes in civil law are not nearly as high as in criminal law—a defendant cannot be jailed or executed—the burden of proof is lighter. In order to win a case, a plaintiff need not prove that he is right beyond reasonable doubt. Instead, he merely needs to show that a preponderance of evidence favors his side of the case. This is the equivalent of proving that 51 percent of the evidence points his way. Juries are also used in civil cases, but many states do not require twelve members; some allow as few as five or six. Winning can mean either the payment of monetary damages or equity—in which the loser may be forced to stop doing something that was annoying or harmful to the winner.

STRUCTURE AND JURISDICTION

The federal courts are responsible for interpreting and settling disputes arising out of federal law. State courts are responsible for interpreting and settling disputes arising out of state law. It is possible for a citizen to commit a single act that violates both state and federal law; trading in drugs and tax evasion are two examples.

There are three levels of federal courts: the Federal District Courts, which have original jurisdiction, the Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, which hear cases on appeal from the District Courts, and the Supreme Court, which hears appeals of cases dealing with constitutional questions from the Circuit Courts and, in rare instances, original suits between states. The Supreme Court also has original jurisdiction in cases involving foreign ministers, which is intended to prevent states from deciding such cases.

The Supreme Court does not have a jury. It is considered a collegial court because its decisions are made by the nine justices. When the Court acts in appellate jurisdiction, it can only decide issues of law, never the facts of a case.

There are 91 Federal District Courts, created by Congress to fulfill its delegated responsibility of creating courts inferior to the Supreme Court. Federal District Courts decide both civil and criminal cases in original jurisdiction. The trial court that determines guilt or innocence is the court of original jurisdiction. These courts hear evidence and can use juries to decide the verdict. District Courts can also decide liability in civil cases where monetary losses have occurred. Civil cases can also have juries. It is always possible for a defendant to ask a judge to decide a case, but a judge can refuse the request and force the defendant to have a jury trial. (The Constitution guarantees a jury trial but not a trial decided by a judge.)

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals, which hear cases on appeal from the Federal District Courts or from a State Supreme Court. In these cases someone has to claim that a federal constitutional right has been violated. The Circuit Courts decide issues of law, never issues of fact. Circuit courts have no juries. The decisions of these courts are made by panels of appointed judges. In almost every case, the Circuit Court of Appeals is the court of last resort because the Supreme Court rarely agrees to hear cases appealed from the Circuit Courts. Additionally, most Supreme Court judges rise from the Circuit Courts.

THE POLITICS OF THE JUDICIARY

All judges in the federal judiciary (only those on the Supreme Court are called justices) are appointed by the president for lifetime terms. Appointees must go through a confirmation process in the Senate. To maintain judicial neutrality and integrity, impeachment is the only method of removal.

The appointment process has become very political. Some presidents have required potential appointees to fill out a judicial questionnaire to determine their political and judicial ideology. Nominees are almost always of the same party as the president. In nomination hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, members of both parties try to determine how potential judges would rule in cases dealing with issues such as abortion rights, affirmative action, or school prayer. The American Bar Association is asked to evaluate a nominee’s qualifications and interest groups often present their opinions. Senators in a state where an appointee will sit have traditionally exercised senatorial courtesy—they submit a list of acceptable names of nominees to the president. Presidents usually choose a nominee from the list submitted.

Liberals and conservatives often argue over a nominee’s judicial philosophy or level of judicial activism. The central point of the argument is whether the nominee is more or less inclined to second-guess a legislative enactment. As the conservatives see it, the courts are the least democratic branch of government (because judges are appointed, not elected), and when they overturn an act of a legislature they are overruling the will of the people, as expressed in the most democratic branch of government (the legislature). Judges who are reluctant to overturn the acts of a legislature are said to practice judicial restraint. Liberals often see judges as constitutional interpreters who should reflect current values. A judge who has no qualms about overturning a legislative action is considered a judicial activist. Compromise over these two positions is sometimes very difficult to achieve. The nomination of Robert Bork to be a Justice of the Supreme Court was defeated by liberals because of his judicial philosophy. Clarence Thomas was confirmed by the closest Senate vote in U.S. history, over concerns related to his conservative judicial philosophy, lack of experience, and the allegation that he sexually harassed an aide.

PROCESS BY WHICH CASES REACH THE SUPREME COURT

The process that the Supreme Court uses to hear cases is not part of the Constitution. The process is a result of custom and usage, time and tradition.

The Supreme Court will not grant an appeal until all opportunities have been exhausted in the lower appellate courts. In the vast majority of cases, the Court refuses to hear the appeal because it agrees with the lower court decision. However, the Court may choose to review the decisions of lower courts. If four justices agree to this review, the court issues a writ of certiorari, a legal document used to request the lower court transcripts of a case.

The Supreme Court will rule only in cases that are real and adverse, which means that the case must involve an actual legal dispute. Such cases are said to be justiciable. Disputes over political issues cannot be decided by courts—political disputes are not justiciable. The Supreme Court cannot give advisory opinions. It can only rule in an actual legal case involving litigants. In other words, the Court will not rule on hypothetical cases.

The Court also places limits on who may bring cases before it. Simply disliking or disagreeing with a law is not sufficient to bring a case. The petitioner (the person who brings the case) must have some vested interest in the outcome of the case. Such petitioners are said to have standing.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

The Constitution does not specifically grant the Supreme Court the right to judge the constitutionality of laws. That power was established by the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). This extremely important power is called judicial review and was established by John Marshall, the fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (he served from 1800 to 1835). Marshall was a Federalist who worked to increase the powers of the federal government over the states.

Under Marshall, the Court made several other rulings concerning the role of the Court and the relationship of the federal government to the states. They include the following:

• Fletcher v. Peck (1810). The first case in which the Court overturned a state law on constitutional grounds. Fletcher established the Court’s right to apply judicial review to state laws. Previously, judicial review had only been applied to federal law.
• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). The Court ruled that the states did not have the power to tax the national bank (and, by extension, the federal government). This decision reinforced the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which states that the Constitution “and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”
• Gibbons v. Ogden (1824). The Court ruled that the state of New York could not grant a steamship company a monopoly to operate on an interstate waterway, even though that waterway ran through New York. The ruling increased federal power over interstate commerce by implying that anything concerning interstate trade could potentially be regulated by the federal government.

HOW THE COURT HEARS CASES

Once the Supreme Court decides to take a case, a complicated legal dance swings into motion. Both sides of the case submit summaries of their arguments and legal foundations for them. These summaries are known as briefs. At the same time, interest groups affiliated with both sides of the case submit their own briefs to the Supreme Court. These amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs constitute an effort to sway the justices to one side or the other and can be quite influential in determining the outcome of the case.

Every year from October to April, the court hears oral arguments for the cases it has chosen to take. In oral arguments, lawyers for each party have a half-hour each to stand before the nine justices and present their arguments. Often, the federal government will take one side or the other, and in these cases the solicitor general gets a portion of that half-hour to argue on the government’s behalf. The solicitor general is the second-ranking member of the justice department (after the attorney general) and typically makes many appearances before the high court—so much so that the solicitor general is sometimes called the “tenth justice.” After the oral arguments, the justices meet for a highly secretive conference. At this point, all the justices cast votes, and opinion-writing duties are handed out. There are four different types of opinions: unanimous, majority, concurring and dissenting. A unanimous opinion, as was the case in Brown v. Board of Education, is when all the justices agree—this opinion carries the most force in future legal cases and when legislatures draft new laws. When the justices split, the opinion with the most votes is the majority opinion, and it is the opinion that decides the result of the case. Sometimes justices may vote with the majority but take issue with its legal reasoning; these are called concurring opinions. Those justices in the minority on an opinion can write a dissenting opinion, questioning the reasoning of the winning side. Though these dissents have no immediate significance, if the ideological composition of the court changes, they can sometimes become the legal foundation for future majority opinions.

THE BUREAUCRACY

CONCEPTS

• To what degree is the bureaucracy able to maintain political neutrality?
• How do iron triangles and issue networks foster democratic principles?
• How does Congress control the bureaucracy?
• How does the bureaucracy act to implement the intent of Congress?
• How do regulatory agencies work to protect society?
• How do presidents control their policy preferences through the bureaucracy?

TERMS

• regulatory agency
• bureaucrat
• Federal Reserve Board
• iron triangle
• alliance (issue) network
• civil service system

The bureaucracy is responsible for ensuring that the policies and programs enacted by Congress and the executive departments are carried out. Because the bureaucracy is responsible for executing the laws, providing for defense, and administering social programs, it is considered part of the executive branch of government. To ensure impartiality, bureaucratic agencies are supposed to function above partisan politics and also ensure that the laws are administered without prejudice.

There are approximately four million bureaucrats who are salaried employees of the federal government, about 2.7 million civilians, and 1.4 million in the military. About 30 percent of the civilian employees work for the Defense Department, while about 15 percent work for various social agencies, including Social Security and welfare. No bureaucrat is elected. The 15 cabinet secretaries and the heads of independent agencies are appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate. Most of the hundreds of thousands of civilian employees who work for the government work for one of the 15 executive departments or one of the other “cabinet level” agencies considered by the White House to be part of the cabinet (such as the Director of Management and Budget or the Director of the Drug Control Office). These other cabinet level offices are not actual cabinet departments.

The largest department, the Department of Defense, is administered by the Secretary of Defense, who must be a civilian and reports directly to the president. Each of the five military services is headed by a uniformed chief of staff, and the five chiefs work together as the Joint Chiefs of Staff, headed by a chairman. The Joint Chiefs and their chairman are responsible for carrying out defense policy and report directly to both the Secretary of Defense and the president. The military is therefore subject to civilian control.

BUREAUCRATIC STRUCTURE

The bureaucracy is organized as a hierarchy of 15 pyramids, representing the 15 executive branch departments:

• Department of State
• Department of the Treasury
• Department of Defense
• Department of Justice
• Department of the Interior
• Department of Agriculture
• Department of Commerce
• Department of Labor
• Department of Health and Human Services
• Department of Housing and Urban Development
• Department of Transportation
• Department of Energy
• Department of Education
• Department of Veterans’ Affairs
• Department of Homeland Security

At the top of each pyramid is the secretary of the department, who is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Directly subordinate to the secretary is the undersecretary, who is appointed by the president without Senate confirmation. Because secretaries and undersecretaries are presidential appointments, they are replaced at the end of a president’s term. The position of undersecretary attracts young professionals. Because the pay is low compared with private industry, and the position is temporary, undersecretaries often use the appointment to step up to better positions in the private sector.

Below the secretaries are the personnel of the Senior Executive Service, including both appointees and non-appointees. Senior Executive Service appointees do not need Senate confirmation. These career officials are supposed to be responsive to the policy goals of the White House and help bureaucrats implement the policy preferences of the chief executive.

Each of the 15 departments is broken down into smaller units. These smaller units are called bureaus, offices, or services and are responsible for dealing with either a particular clientele or a specific subject. Examples are:

• The Bureau of Land Management (Department of the Interior)
• The Federal Bureau of Investigation (Department of Justice)
• The Internal Revenue Service (Department of the Treasury)
• The Immigration and Naturalization Service (Department of Homeland Security)
• The Federal Aviation Administration (Department of Transportation)

Government Corporations

Government corporations are hybrid organizations. They are a cross between a private business corporation and a government agency. Corporations are supposed to have freedom of action and flexibility and produce at least enough revenue to support themselves. Amtrak, the government corporation created to provide railroad passenger service, is an example. Unfortunately, Amtrak has never made a profit and must ask Congress for subsidies to keep itself from declaring bankruptcy and ending passenger rail service in the United States.

Originally created as a cabinet position, the United States Postal Service has become a government corporation. The intent of Congress was to create a mail delivery system that pays its own way without government assistance. Because of electronic messaging systems and competition from package delivery companies, the post office has had to increase its fees to stay solvent.

More successful, but at times controversial, is the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which produces and airs both television and radio programs. Funding for the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) comes from both private and government subsidies. Most of its programming is related to public affairs, news, and cultural themes. The controversy often occurs when groups object to the content of programs. Still others object to the government being involved in any service that could be provided by private sector corporations.

REGULATORY AGENCIES AND COMMISSIONS

Government entities that are not within the 15 cabinet departments fall into two categories: the independent agencies and the regulatory agencies, sometimes called independent regulatory commissions. While independent agencies are generally run-of-the-mill bureaucracies with broad presidential oversight, regulatory commissions are given an extraordinary degree of independence to act as watchdogs over the federal government. Congress and the president are not supposed to become enmeshed in the workings of regulatory commissions. The safety regulations for nuclear power plants or securities exchange should not be regulated by politics.

In contemporary societies, the difficulties and complexities of writing legislation are often beyond the abilities and expertise of lawmakers. The result is that legislation is often written in general terms with many gaps that need to be filled in by the agency with jurisdiction. Independent agencies who have the responsibility for filling in these gaps and writing rules are referred to as quasi-legislative agencies. Those responsible for rule enforcement and punishing violators are quasi-judicial agencies.

Members of Congress do not have the education to deal with the scientific details that are often required to implement legislation. For example, House and Senate members who sit on committees that deal with environmental issues do not generally have advanced degrees in chemistry. It is the experts who work in the enforcing agencies who have that knowledge. Compounding the problems for Congress are the many competing interests that surround every major issue. Environmentalists have their agenda, while the petroleum industry, electric utilities, and lumber interests have theirs. Even the regulating agency with jurisdiction has its own agenda. These competing interests often delay or prevent legislation. This is the clash of the special interests.

In an age of science and technology, it is the faceless bureaucrat the public knows nothing about who often has the answers for Congress. These bureaucrats, on the one hand, are asked for advice and expertise, and, on the other hand, are often ignored because of the pressures from interest groups. Working within the regulatory commissions, they are the people responsible for writing and enforcing rules that regulate the environment, the economy, or industry. If they fail to implement the intent of Congress they are criticized by Congress and the parties regulated, usually for being too restrictive with their rules and too strict in their enforcement policies.

Examples of regulatory agencies include the following:

• The Federal Trade Commission is responsible for preventing fraud in the marketplace by preventing price fixing and deceptive advertising.
• The Securities and Exchange Commission protects investors by regulating stock markets and policing corporations to prevent false and misleading claims of profits in an effort to increase stock prices.
• The Nuclear Regulatory Commission controls how electric power companies design, build, and operate nuclear reactors.
• The Federal Communications Commission is responsible for assigning broadcast frequencies, for licensing radio and television stations, and for regulating the use of wireless communication devices.
• The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for ensuring the health of the American people by inspecting the food supply for contaminants and spoilage. The agency is also responsible for regulating the sale of over-the-counter drugs and patent medicines.
• The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is responsible for preventing price fixing and price manipulation in electric utilities, interstate oil and gas pipelines, and natural gas suppliers.
• The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is responsible for ensuring workers are employed in a safe work environment. For example, OSHA can regulate the type of ventilation in a factory, as well as the type of clothing worn and tools used.

Case Studies

Considered to be one of the most controversial government bureaucracies, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created in 1970 as an independent body. Its mission is the enforcement of the environmental laws passed by Congress. One of the agency’s first responsibilities was to enforce the 1970 Clean Air Act. The intent of the law was to reduce automobile pollution and increase automobile gasoline mileage. The automobile industry lobbied hard to defeat the bill and claimed they could not meet the requirements of the law by the time specified. They were granted extensions and eventually complied, although trucks and SUVs are still exempt from the law.

The Clean Air Act was amended in 1990 as a result of scientific evidence indicating that the refrigerants used in air conditioners were instrumental in depleting the ozone layer. The EPA successfully pressured chemical companies and air-conditioning manufacturers to find alternatives to the ozone-destroying chemicals. The EPA has also been successful in reducing the pollutants that cause acid rain.

Clean air is not the EPA’s only problem. It is responsible for enforcement of the Endangered Species Act. This highly controversial law is intended to protect endangered wildlife habitats from human encroachment. To implement this goal, environmental impact statements are required whenever construction projects are planned. If there is any possibility that an endangered species could be adversely affected, the EPA has the power to prohibit construction. The EPA’s ban on lumbering in areas of the Pacific Northwest, the habitat for the spotted owl, and its decision to block the construction of a dam in Tennessee because of the endangered snail darter fish are two examples. In the Tennessee dam case, Congress overruled the decision of the EPA, even though the Supreme Court had sided with the EPA to stop construction. In addition, Congress further weakened the EPA’s enforcement powers by amending the Endangered Species Act to permit exemptions in the future. The EPA can sometimes become a foe of Congress, which originally gave the EPA its mandate to act.

Another agency that provokes political contention is the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC). Created by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the EEOC is responsible for enforcing the antidiscrimination laws of the United States. This commission has been susceptible to political pressure from both Congress and the White House. It is the EEOC’s responsibility to implement affirmative action programs for minorities, to bring suits in cases of racial or sexual discrimination, and to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. The head of the EEOC is a presidential appointment and is supposed to carry out the policies of the president. If the law conflicts with presidential policy, the EEOC has a problem.

The critics of affirmative action claim the policy is a form of reverse discrimination. Feeling pressure from voters, Congress, and the president, the EEOC first promoted affirmative action, then discouraged the policy. The attempts by this agency to implement the will of Congress have been complicated because both Congress and the White House seem to change their mind at will.

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires the EEOC to enforce laws against employers who discriminate against disabled employees or job seekers. In addition, part of the Disabilities Act requires that public buildings and large businesses be accessible to the disabled. Critics claim that this attempt at helping the disabled live normal lives has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and the cost is too high in relation to the number of persons benefited.

Who Runs Regulatory Agencies?

Independent regulatory agencies are run by panels of administrators called Boards of Commissioners. These commissioners are appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate. The terms of these commissioners usually overlap the term of the appointing president. The staggered term is intended to minimize political pressure from the White House. Depending on the commission, terms can range from 3 to 14 years.

Perhaps the best known regulatory board is the Federal Reserve Board (the Fed) because its policies directly affect the buying power of the public. The Fed accomplishes this by regulating banks, the value and supply of money, and interest rates. Its members serve 14-year terms. Its chairman serves a four-year term. The previous head, Alan Greenspan, has served both Democrat and Republican presidents. Today, the Fed is run by Ben Bernanke—a Bush appointee.

Because the Fed is an independent agency, its policies can sometimes conflict with the policies of the president. In 1993, in the first weeks of the Clinton administration, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan told the president that the condition of the economy was worse than the previous Bush administration had told the American people. In addition, the national debt, as bad as it was perceived to be, was actually even greater than anyone realized. Clinton wanted an economic stimulus tax cut to get the economy out of recession. Greenspan told the president a tax cut should not be pursued, and if the White House went forward with the plan, the Fed would raise interest rates. Clinton was forced to break his campaign pledge to lower taxes. Even though the chairman and the president disagreed over economic policy, the president was powerless to do anything about it. In time, the Greenspan policy helped to get the economy out of the recession and into the longest economic boom in American history. Things went so well that Clinton reappointed Greenspan as chairman. Greenspan’s legacy would later come into question as a result of the economic collapse of 2008–09.

WHO CONTROLS THE BUREAUCRACY?

Because most boards of commissions and regulatory agencies are appointed by the president with Senate consent, political considerations always play a part in the appointment process. However, presidents come and go with great regularity, as do the appointed governing boards and commissions. It is the rank and file bureaucrats who are permanent, and they do not like political meddling.

While in office, presidents do have the power to promote their supporters and to use the budget to increase or decrease the influence of an agency. Reducing an agency’s budget reduces its staff, which reduces its effectiveness. Increasing the agency’s budget can have the opposite effect. Presidents can also reorganize an agency.

Congressional power over the bureaucracy is greater than that of the president. The Senate can affirm or reject presidential appointments. Congress can also abolish an agency or change its jurisdiction if it is unhappy with policy implementation. Finally, it is the Congress, through the appropriations process, that has the final say over how much money agencies will receive.

RULE SETTING, ALLIANCE BUILDING, AND IRON TRIANGLES

The regulatory agencies carry out their responsibilities by setting rules and regulations that industry must follow. Setting regulations is a participatory process in which industry becomes actively involved in determining the rules. Agencies welcome public participation by holding public hearings for testimony and advice. In most instances, the law requires agencies to consult with industry before rules and regulations can go into effect.

The rule-making process has fostered the creation of iron triangles. Typically iron triangles are informal alliances made up of three groups: 1) a particular industry and its lobbyists (for example, weapons manufacturers), 2) the congressional committee dealing with that industry (the Armed Services Committees of the Senate and House), and 3) the agency that actually is affected (in this case, the Pentagon). The groups that make up an iron triangle work together to formulate and implement policy in their area of interest. Lobbyists representing industry promote their special-interest agenda by claiming it is in the best interest of the American people. For example, drug companies may lobby the Food and Drug Administration to speed up the certification process for a medication because it will benefit the sick faster. Patients and drug companies will pressure Congress, which then pressures the FDA. These are powerful arguments, but speeding up the process can cause the FDA to overlook something dangerous about the medication.

Special interests also contribute money to congressional campaigns, and large contributors are never shy about asking for help from congressional representatives, who are asked to help put pressure on regulators, or at a minimum, to listen to the arguments that the special interests put forward for their cause.

Political scientists have recently seen a more complex political process at work. When issues affect many groups, pro and con coalitions of interest groups, members of Congress, and bureaucrats form a close working relationship. This political process is called either an alliance network or an issue network and is far more complicated than a simple three-part iron triangle.

For example, if a large factory was a polluter but had marginal profits, it would probably fight expensive environmental regulations. Compliance might drive the company into bankruptcy. But more is at stake than just the company. There are jobs involved and secondary industries that supply the raw materials for production at the company. A local government, which relies on the tax revenues from the company, also has something at stake. Environmental groups are going to be involved. This complicated situation would certainly result in the creation of issue networks for the purpose of influencing the regulatory agency’s decisions.

After all the opportunities for input and debate have been exhausted, the regulatory agency writes and publishes the rules (this is its quasi-legislative function). If the industry still objects to the regulation, it can seek remedies in the courts by suing the regulatory agency. In the above example, if the company is forced to comply with the environmental laws, it could appeal the decision to the courts.

Because regulatory agencies invite so much controversy, there has been a recent trend toward deregulating the marketplace (removing government restrictions and regulations). Those in favor of deregulation claim that the competition of the marketplace is all the regulation that is needed. The deregulators say that regulation is too expensive and time-consuming and involves too much unnecessary red tape. They note that over the past 25 years, the Civil Aeronautics Board, which was responsible for regulating the airline industry, and the Interstate Commerce Commission, which regulated railroads and the trucking industry, were successfully phased out with little negative impact on consumers.

THE CIVIL SERVICE AND MAINTAINING NEUTRALITY

Today, the majority of government jobs are filled through the competitive civil service system. This system was established in 1883 with the passage of the Pendleton Act, a law that ended the “spoils system,” or the practice of handing out government jobs in exchange for political support. The Office of Personnel Management acts as the bureaucracy’s employment agency. OPM administers the civil service examination, publishes lists of job openings, and hires on the basis of merit. The intent is to create a competent, professional bureaucracy instead of one based on the “spoils system.” A Merit Systems Protection Board investigates charges of agency corruption and incompetence and is supposed to protect “whistle blowers.”

To ensure bureaucratic neutrality, Congress passed the Hatch Act in 1939. This law permitted bureaucrats the right to vote but not the right to actively campaign for political candidates, work for parties, or run for office. The act’s revision of 1993 is less restrictive, allowing bureaucrats to join political parties, make campaign contributions, and display political advertising in the form of buttons and bumper stickers. Bureaucrats still cannot run for public office at any level, solicit campaign funds from subordinates, or make political speeches.

SUMMARY

• Remember that Congress is a bicameral (two-house) legislature, split into the Senate (in which all states receive equal representation) and the House of Representatives (in which representation is proportionate to population).
• The number of House seats a state gets is based on its population as determined by a census. Once the number of seats is determined, the state legislature draws the districts—often using partisan gerrymandering to ensure a majority for one party or the other.
• Congress has numerous powers that range from creation of all law, to funding all executive agencies, to declaring war. It is the first institution defined in the Constitution, and most scholars think that the Founders intended it to be the most powerful of the branches.
• How does a bill become a law? It is introduced to the House or Senate, referred to a committee, amended and debated, reintroduced to the general House and Senate, debated and amended once more, harmonized with its counterpart that has traveled through the other legislative body, voted on again and signed by the president.
• Given the large size of both houses of Congress, committees do most of the work of legislating. Committees can be standing, select, or joint, and are often further divided into subcommittees.
• The House is led by the speaker, while the Senate has two ceremonial leaders (the vice president and the president pro tempore) and one actual power broker—the majority leader.
• This chapter has a ton of laws. Try to remember them by using the four categories: (1) National Growth, Expansion, and Institution Building; (2) Regulation of Government and Industry; (3) Rights and Freedoms; and (4) Government Aid to the People.
• The president is the chief executive of the nation and is responsible for enforcing all laws. Over the years, the power of the presidency has grown dramatically—often at the expense of Congress.
• Even though the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, the nature of modern warfare has given the president control of this area. Though Congress does have tools to stop a wartime president, using them would generally be tantamount to political suicide.
• Being a good president often means going beyond the powers explicitly listed in the Constitution. Mastery of these “informal powers”—like consensus building or boosting the morale of the nation—often determines presidential greatness.
• The president relies a great deal on the Executive Office of the President (EOP)—his personal staff, which is ensconced within the west wing of the White House. The EOP is also home to a number of agencies that serve the president and are largely free from Congressional oversight.
• America has 15 cabinet departments, and each contains a huge array of agencies and bureaucracies designed to help enforce the law of the land. The cabinet secretaries are supposed to advise the president, but due to conflicting loyalties most presidents have kept them out of the loop and relied on the EOP and other informal advisors when making policy decisions.
• If a president has committed “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” he can be impeached by a majority vote in the House and then removed from office with a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
• Remember that America has two legal systems: state and federal, and all people are under the jurisdiction of both. The federal system was created by the Constitution—all federal judges are appointed by the president and approved by the Senate, and the nation is divided into 91 federal districts.
• The Supreme Court rules on some very divisive social issues, and the battle to appoint new members has gotten more intense. Increasingly, presidents are looking to appoint younger and more ideological candidates who share their political philosophies.
• The Supreme Court is America’s court of last resort and gets most all of its cases through appeals from lower courts or by granting writs of certiorari which cause cases to jump straight to their chambers.
• Though it is not mentioned in the Constitution, the Court’s most important power is judicial review: the ability to strike down any state or federal law that is unconstitutional. This power was established in the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
• Often called “the fourth branch of government,” bureaucrats staff the gigantic executive agencies that run the federal government. To get these jobs, applicants must take competitive exams. Bureaucrats play a huge role in creating public policy by making rules that flesh out vague laws passed by Congress.
• We see four different types of bureaucracy in Washington: cabinet departments, independent agencies, regulatory commissions, and government corporations. Regulatory commissions are largely free of political control and have broad oversight responsibilities, while government corporations like the Postal Service are expected to turn a profit in the free market.
• Because the issues dealt with by bureaucrats are so technical and often pertain to a small interest group, we see the formation of iron triangles—cooperation between a bureaucracy (like the Department of Defense), a congressional committee (like the Senate Armed Services Committee) and an interest group (like weapons and aircraft manufacturers).
• Bureaucrats are supposed to be politically neutral and stable while their political overlords shift due to election results. Still, many suspect that they may take sides, and laws like the Hatch Act were designed to prevent this from happening.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. The official head of the Senate is the

(A) president of the United States

(B) vice president of the United States

(C) president pro tempore

(D) majority leader

(E) chief whip

  2. One of the most important legislative powers of Congress is

(A) the power to choose a president

(B) the ability to propose amendments to the Constitution

(C) the power to ratify treaties (in the Senate)

(D) the power to confirm presidential appointments (in the Senate)

(E) the ability to tax and spend

  3. Congressional districts for the House are determined in the majority of states by

(A) a vote held in the Senate by the majority party

(B) an executive order of the president

(C) the Supreme Court

(D) a census and the various state legislatures

(E) a nonpartisan commission

  4. How are Cabinet members chosen?

(A) By the president and are confirmed by the Senate

(B) By the president and confirmed by both houses of Congress

(C) By the House and confirmed by the Senate

(D) By the Supreme Court

(E) By the president alone—they need no confirmation

  5. The Executive Office of the President (EOP) is

(A) often a favored tool of the president due to the lack of Congressional oversight

(B) relatively powerless since it is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution

(C) located within the Department of Defense

(D) a dumping ground for ex-cabinet secretaries who have done a poor job

(E) always run by the vice president

  6. What is the National Security Council (NSC) in charge of?

(A) Matters relating to immigration

(B) All matters relating to space exploration

(C) Advising the president and helping to coordinate American foreign policy

(D) The construction of nuclear weapons

(E) Protecting the environment

  7. “Senatorial courtesy” is

(A) the process of getting judicial appointments approved by the House

(B) when the Senate approves of the president’s choice of Supreme Court Justice

(C) when a Senator appoints a judge

(D) when the president gets the approval of the two Senators from a state where he is about to name a federal judge

(E) the law that makes Senators immune to prosecution

  8. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established

(A) the use of certiorari by the Supreme Court

(B) the power of the court to use judicial review

(C) the right to always have counsel present in court cases

(D) the need for government officials to have a warrant in order to tap someone’s phone

(E) a quota system to promote affirmative action

  9. The Pendleton Act

(A) made it illegal for government employees to give money to political campaigns

(B) was passed in the 1950s

(C) was ruled unconstitutional

(D) gave the Supreme Court the power to overturn Executive Privilege

(E) limited the Spoils System and created a system of civil service exams

10. An iron triangle is

(A) a name for an agreement between the secretaries of state, defense and treasury

(B) the union of the army, navy and air force

(C) a phenomenon that never occurs in American government

(D) another name for the three branches of government

(E) a policy-making group made of a committee of Congress, an interest group, and a bureaucratic agency

10

PUBLIC POLICY

CONCEPTS

• Why do the poorest people in the United States have the least political power?
• What role does federalism play in the implementation of social welfare policy?
• Why is it so difficult to pass social welfare policy?
• Why are entitlement programs always a threat to the budget-making process?
• Why can it be said that the president is a secondary player when it comes to the economy?
• Why is it so difficult to write a budget for the United States?
• How can the president use the budget-making process to control his policy initiatives?

TERMS

• social welfare policy
• incrementalism
• policy fragmentation
• policy implementation
• agenda setting
• issue-attention cycle
• gross domestic product (GDP)
• laissez-faire economics
• Keynesian economics
• fiscal policy
• monetary policy
• trade deficit
• deficit spending
• Federal Reserve System
• supply-side economics
• Office of Management and Budget
• Congressional Budget Office
• mandatory spending
• discretionary spending
• social welfare
• entitlement programs
• Medicare
• Social Security
• COLAs
• food stamps
• supplemental public assistance programs
• Welfare Reform Act

The process of public policy making consists of first deciding what the problem is and then deciding how to solve it. Policy making can have three purposes.

• Solving a social problem, such as high crime rates, high unemployment, poverty among the aged, or teenage drinking
• Countering threats, such as terrorism or war
• Pursuing an objective, such as building a highway or finding a cure for cancer or AIDS

Policy can be achieved by prohibiting certain kinds of behavior, such as polygamy, murder, rape, and robbery. It can also be achieved by protecting certain activities. Granting patents and copyrights to individuals for their intellectual property, protecting the environment, and setting rules for workplace safety are all examples. Policy can promote some social activity; giving tax deductions for donations to charities is an example. Policy can be achieved by providing direct benefits to citizens. These benefits may include building roads, libraries, or hospitals. Benefits can also take the form of individual government subsidies, student loans, and pensions for the elderly.

Policy making can be frustrating because it often depends on public opinion, which can be fickle and unpredictable. The issue-attention cycle requires policy makers to act quickly, before the public becomes bored and loses interest. Public complaints over high energy prices can cause a flurry of policy making. But when prices go down, the public forgets about it until the next time.

Policy making often involves trade-offs between competing goods. To find additional energy resources may require access to pristine wildlife reserves. The risks to wildlife and the environment may be too high a price to pay for the additional energy. Conservation, smaller cars, and alternative energy sources may be better solutions, but each will have its supporters and opponents.

Because policy making can have unforeseen results and can touch off bitter disputes, legislators often use incrementalism—the slow, step-by-step approach to making policy. Or legislators may decide to use the policy of inaction because taking no action is one way of making policy. Conflicts over health care reform and social security entitlements can result in simply maintaining the status quo or not changing a policy.

MAKING POLICY

Policy making has a number of steps, and each is influenced by politics.

• The first involves defining the role of government in solving social and economic problems. The political left sees a greater responsibility for government than the right, with the result that governments on the left are larger, more active, and more expensive than on the right.
• Agenda setting identifies the social and economic problems, redefines them into political issues, and ranks them in order of importance. A citizen’s socioeconomic status can determine which problems seem important and which don’t. Poor people may rank job training high on the agenda, while the rich may rank tax cuts higher. When large numbers of people are affected, the concern will be ranked high. However, there are times when it is those with the most money who will have their issues placed high on the agenda. For example, large energy-producing corporations have a great deal of access to policymakers.

Policy can try to address the concerns of opposing sides. Strict environmental standards for oil exploration and refining try to address the concerns of two constituencies: the environmentalists and the petroleum producers.

A momentous event, such as a war, an oil embargo, or a collapsing stock market, may set the agenda. Old issues such as the quest for universal health care, the war on drugs, or environmental concerns can resurface. Scholars can force issues into the agenda through research studies. The impact of global warming on our planet is an example..

• Policy formulation and adoption can be accomplished in a number of ways. Sometimes the most difficult method is the legislative process in Congress, while the easiest may be through the executive branch by the use of executive orders from the president. Rules enacted by regulatory agencies or precedent-setting decisions by the Supreme Court are also sources of policy formulation and adoption. Brown v. Board of Education was certainly a policy-making decision.
• Policy implementation puts the policy into effect by enforcement through the appropriate government agency. Timetables and rules for carrying out policies as well as anticipating problems are all part of policy implementation. One of the major concerns of policy making is the unforeseen consequences. The three-strike rule, intended to get career criminals off the streets, has ended most plea-bargaining arrangements, causing overloaded courts, judges, and jails. The three-strike rule has turned out to be a much more expensive public policy than anticipated.
• Policy evaluation is the final step. Does a policy work? Have unforeseen consequences caused other policy problems? Evaluation provides feedback to the policy makers, so that modifications can be made to better solve the problems. Evaluation may determine that the problem has been solved and that the policy can be terminated.

OBSTACLES TO POLICY MAKING

The United States is a pluralist democracy, with multiple centers of power for making policy. Those interested in affecting policy-making concentrate their efforts at these many centers. Because the United States has a federal system of government, policy can be made at the local, state, and national levels. Separation of powers creates three policy-making centers: the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. There is also the general bureaucracy, with its multiple policy-making centers. Trying to influence legislation, thousands of interest-group lobbyists descend upon these policy-making centers at all levels of government.

In their efforts to prevent tyranny and corruption, the framers created a policy-making nightmare by dispersing the power centers. Getting things done is cumbersome and frustrating. Multiple access points cause policy fragmentation, where many pieces of legislation deal with parts of policy problems but never deal with the entire problem. The War on Drugs has at least 75 congressional committees with some type of jurisdiction or oversight; local and state law enforcement agencies are involved, as well as the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, Border Patrol, Immigration and Naturalization Service, customs service, DEA, and the FBI.

Because so many agencies of government are involved, the drug war requires policy coordination. Interagency task forces try to iron out policy problems and conflicts between competing agencies, and Congress uses its oversight powers to change agency jurisdiction and give coherence to policy.

ECONOMIC POLICY

In 1992, Bill Clinton’s informal campaign slogan was “It’s the economy, stupid!” Of all the issues that face politicians, the economy is often the most important. Success or failure usually rests with the person the public perceives as responsible for the condition of the economy; and whether it is true, the electorate usually holds the president responsible. Because of this phenomenon of responsibility, it can be said that Clinton was a very lucky candidate. In 1992 the economy was in recession and George H.W. Bush was blamed. In 1996 the economy was booming, and Clinton was given credit and reelected.

Because of the importance of the economy in the eyes of the voters, it is in a politician’s self-interest to make policies that will increase people’s standard of living. The electorate looks to Washington to achieve this objective. For the policy maker, the vexing question is how to achieve it.

Sound economic policy that achieves prosperity is probably the most elusive of all policies. There are many elements to the problem: inflation, deflation, interest rates, the supply of money in circulation, the profitability of corporations, foreign competition, international agreements, and consumer confidence, just to name a few. Complicating the problem are the various economic theories that drive policy decisions, and the various government agencies and institutions that make decisions affecting economic conditions.

ECONOMIC THEORY

Capitalist free-market systems in which both government and private industry play a role are called mixed economies. Mixed free-market systems are characterized by both private and public (government) ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services. The price of goods and services is determined by the free-market interplay of supply and demand. The profits after taxes are kept by the owners.

Free-market economic systems are plagued by periods of prosperity followed by periods of economic contraction (decreased activity, economic downturn). Because the United States has a mixed free-market system, the major problem for policy makers is how to maintain prosperity and economic growth while reducing the impact of the inevitable economic contraction. In capitalist systems, the basic question is to what extent the government should intervene.

Laissez-faire economists believe that the government should never become involved in economic issues. They believe that the narrow pursuit of individual profit serves the broader interest of society. Central to laissez-faire economics is the belief that free markets are governed by the laws of nature and government should not interfere with those laws. In vogue with rugged individualists in the nineteenth-century, laissez-faire economics disappeared as a viable government policy option during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Perhaps the most influential economist of the twentieth-century was John Maynard Keynes, an interventionist. Keynesian economists believe the government can smooth out business cycles by influencing the amount of income individuals and businesses can spend on goods and services. This can be accomplished in two ways: fiscal policy and monetary policy.

FISCAL POLICY

Fiscal policy refers to the government action of either lowering or raising taxes, which results in more or less consumer spending or enacting of government spending programs, such as building highways or hospitals. Keynesians believe that during economic downturns the government should spend money on projects to inject money into the economy. They are less worried about government deficit spending than about keeping the economy prosperous. A prosperous economy means a larger tax base, which will eventually correct deficit spending. In effect, the Keynesian school believes that when the economy is good, surplus taxes (money left over from tax revenues) should be saved to pay for the government spending that must take place during an economic downturn. Using this school of thought, the policy alternatives are obvious, but questions still remain. Should there be tax cuts? If so, how much, and who should get them? How much spending should the government engage in? How much deficit spending (funds raised by borrowing rather than taxation) should be allowed? The answers to these questions are extremely difficult, with major political consequences.

In the 1980s, the Reagan-Bush administration became the champion of the supply-side school of economic thought. The supply-siders take issue with supporters of Keynesian economics. Inflation is caused by too many dollars chasing too few goods. If the supply of goods is raised, the cost of the goods will decline. According to this theory, supply-siders argue that the government should cut taxes and spending on domestic programs to stimulate greater production.

Going along with supply-side theory, Congress in the 1980s enacted extensive tax cuts and reductions to social welfare programs, a policy later dubbed Reaganomics. Inflation was brought under control but huge yearly budget deficits, caused in part by a defense buildup, created a four-trillion-dollar debt. In the 1990s, budget surpluses began to shrink the deficit but these gains were reversed as a result of policies enacted during the Bush and Obama administrations. Tax cuts followed by rising costs associated with the War on Terrorism, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, and government stimulus programs have resulted in record budget deficits. The most recent estimates of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) have warned against increasingly large budget deficits. In 2010, a $1.5 trillion deficit in the federal budget stoked political controversy and contributed to historic Republican gains in both houses of Congress in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Monetary Policy

Monetary policy refers to the process by which the government controls the supply of money in circulation and the supply of credit through the actions of the Federal Reserve Board (the Fed). The Fed can increase the amount of money in circulation by lowering interest rates. Rate reductions make borrowing money less expensive because interest on the money is low. This action usually inflates (expands) the economy, resulting in higher prices and wages. If the Fed raises interest rates, the impact on the economy will be deflationary, resulting in either more stable or lower prices or wages.

Monetary policy can be implemented by the Federal Reserve Board in three ways.

• By manipulating the reserve requirement, which raises or lowers the amount of money banks are required to keep on hand. Raising the reserve shrinks the amount of money available for borrowing, which raises interest rates. Lowering the reserve will have the opposite effect, lowering interest rates.
• By manipulating the discount rate, which raises or lowers the interest banks pay to the Federal Reserve Banks for borrowing money. Lowering the discount rate will lower the interest rates for consumer loans. Raising the discount rate will raise the interest rates for consumer loans. The higher the rate, the less consumers purchase.
• By manipulating open market operations, as the Federal Reserve buys and sells United States government bonds. People buy bonds because they have a better interest rate than savings accounts. When the Fed sells bonds, people withdraw money from banks to take advantage of the bond’s higher interest rate. Because the bank has less to loan, consumer interest rates go up, which slows consumer spending and economic growth. When the Fed buys bonds, money flows back into the banks, which increases the money available for loans. With more money in the bank for consumers to borrow, interest rates are driven down. Lower interest rates means more consumer spending, which increases economic growth.

Some economists believe that government should intervene only to manipulate the money supply, an idea championed by Milton Friedman. These monetarists believe that the money supply should be increased at a constant rate to accommodate economic growth. Monetarists do not believe that interest rate changes and manipulation of tax rates have much of an impact on economic conditions.

In the 1990s, the U.S. economy expanded without tax cuts, creating record employment levels with little inflation. Many gave the credit to the monetary policy of Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve.

THE TOOLS OF ECONOMIC POLICY MAKING

The president receives advice on the state of the economy from the following departments and agencies:

• The Council of Economic Advisors
• The National Economic Council
• The Office of Management and Budget
• The Secretary of the Treasury

The president can influence the fiscal and monetary policies of these departments and agencies through his appointment power and policy initiatives. Remember that fiscal policy involves the budget, and monetary policy involves the money supply.

Fiscal Policy Making

The Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is responsible for initiating the budget process. The director meets with the president to discuss his policy initiatives. The state of the economy is discussed, centering on government revenue projections, which is the predicted income from taxes. Based on the president’s priorities, some executive departments will receive more money than others. The OMB then writes the president’s budget and submits it to Congress. Upon its arrival the budget is sent to three committees. The House Ways and Means Committee deals with the taxing aspects of the budget. Authorization committees in both houses decide what programs Congress wants to fund. Appropriations committees in both houses then decide how much money to spend for those programs that have been authorized.

The budget process is complicated, politically divisive, and in recent years nearly impossible to conclude. The president’s projected revenues and expenditures often conflict with those of Congress. Congress often simply does not trust the president’s numbers, and conversely, the president does not trust Congress’s. These yearly budget problems forced passage of the Budget Reform Act of 1974, which created the Congressional Budget Office, with budget committees in both the House and Senate. The congressional committees set their own revenue and spending levels. Negotiations then take place among the White House and the two houses of Congress in an effort to get one budget acceptable to everyone. Failure to achieve a budget by the beginning of the fiscal year could mean shutting down the government and sending employees home. When this occurs, budget stop-gap bills are passed to temporarily appropriate money to keep the government operating.

The 1990 Budget Enforcement Act was an effort to streamline the budget process and make it easier to arrive at a compromise budget. The law categorizes government expenditures as either mandatory or discretionary spending. Mandatory spending is required by law, to fund programs such as the entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ pensions, and payment on the national debt. Discretionary spending programs are not required by law and include defense, education, highways, research grants, and all government operations. Discretionary programs are the primary targets for making cuts to balance the budget.

TRADE POLICY

The United States is by far the richest nation in the world. The output of the economy of the state of California alone ranks among the top ten nations in the world. The economic outputs of each of the three cities of Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York rank among the output of the top 20 nations. For better or for worse, the United States is the largest producer and consumer of products.

Foreign nations depend on the United States as a market for their products, as we depend on them for ours. The ratio of imported products to exported products is called the balance of trade. Trade deficits occur when imports exceed exports. Trade deficits cause wealth to flow from a nation. When nations face trade deficits, they often place restrictions on imported goods. The nation facing the restrictions can take retaliation by imposing high import taxes or unfair regulations on products, effectively keeping out foreign goods. Trade wars can result, stopping trade between countries. Trade surpluses are the result of more money flowing into a country than out. The oil-producing nations have huge amounts of money flowing into their treasuries and therefore have large trade surpluses.

In an effort to promote trade, the United States signed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO). The 125 members of the WTO account for 97 percent of the world’s trade. The organization works to lower tariffs and quotas and reduce unfair trade practices.

In an effort to promote free trade between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, the three nations signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, effectively removing import tariffs from one another’s products. As an economic policy, NAFTA is controversial. It is opposed by U.S. industrial labor unions because of their fear that jobs will be lost to cheap Mexican labor. Others fear that the industrial capacity of the United States will be damaged because factories will move to Mexico where environmental laws are not strictly enforced. NAFTA supporters claim it will improve the U.S. economy and will also create jobs in Mexico, resulting in less illegal immigration. Supporters also claim that a richer Mexico will purchase more American products. NAFTA has proven to be something of a mixed blessing. Its passage has led to cheaper labor (in Mexico) for many U.S. companies and an increase in trade between the two countries. Nevertheless, many American jobs have undeniably been sent south of the border, and many Mexican farmers are losing their land in a futile attempt to compete with American agribusinesses.

DOMESTIC POLICY

While economic policy is contentious, domestic policy is sometimes even more so because it gets to the very essence of the purposes of government. Liberals believe government has an obligation to provide for social welfare, to help the needy. Conservatives believe social-welfare programs are encroachments on individual liberties and responsibilities. They think these programs turn the government into an instrument used to create a permanent class of the underprivileged, dependent upon government handouts. Somewhere in between are the moderates who believe government should provide opportunities and limited help during difficult times.

The twentieth-century has seen a dramatic change in the way society perceives the role of government in providing for the basic needs of people. Before the Great Depression, there were no government programs to help people who suffered from the hardships of old age, disabilities, unemployment, and poverty. So many people needed help in the 1930s that the government had no choice but to enact programs to create jobs, provide housing, and feed the hungry. Later on, the Great Society programs of the Johnson administration expanded government welfare programs, but because of the expense and questions about their effectiveness, many of the Great Society programs were eliminated or scaled back during and after the Reagan administration.

Today there are two kinds of social-welfare programs.

• Social insurance programs are in reality national insurance programs into which employers and employees pay taxes. Because individuals pay into these programs, the benefits derived are considered by the public to have been earned. There seems to be little public debate over a citizen’s “right” to Social Security.
• Public assistance programs, on the other hand, are not perceived as earned. These programs are a result of condition and a government responsibility to help the needy. Recipients are not required to pay into the system to get something out. Public assistance is considered by some to be a “handout” to the lazy. Because politicians understand this public perception, public-policy initiatives from both parties have concentrated on forcing people on public assistance to either seek work or enter work-training programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY

Social Security is an entitlement program mandated by law. The government must pay benefits to all people who meet the requirements of the program. Changing the law would require congressional action. Because the largest voting block of the electorate is made up of those nearing or at retirement age, there is little chance of major changes to the system, even though the experts warn that the Social Security trust fund will go bankrupt in the near future. Currently, entitlement programs account for the largest expense in the federal budget.

In its original form Social Security only provided benefits to retired persons beginning at age 65. The program has now been expanded to include four categories of persons.

• Retired workers and their survivors who are presently age 65 and older receive monthly payments from the Social Security trust fund. To help maintain a recipient’s standard of living, recipients are entitled to a COLA (cost of living adjustment) if the inflation rate exceeds 3 percent. COLAs put a strain on the ability of the trust fund to meet its obligations. Changes in the demographic composition of society are also putting a strain on the system. Society is aging, and the ratio of workers to retirees is declining. Because Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system, the money that is now paid into the system pays the present beneficiaries. As the ratio of workers to retirees continues to decline, workers will have to pay higher taxes to maintain the income of those who are retired.
• Insurance for the disabled provides monthly payments to those citizens who are permanently and totally disabled. This category includes the learning disabled and those dependent on drugs and alcohol.
• Medicare provides government assistance to people older than 65 for health care. For those retirees who pay an additional tax on their social security benefit, Medicare part B will pay approximately 80 percent of their doctor’s bills. The high cost of health care has nearly bankrupted Medicare.
• Medicaid provides medical and health-related services for low-income parents, children, seniors, and people with disabilities. It is jointly funded by the states and federal government and is managed and run by the individual states.
• Temporary unemployment insurance for those out of work provides a weekly benefit, for a limited time. Each state government administers its own unemployment insurance program. Both the federal and state governments pay into a trust fund to provide the benefit. Each state determines the amount and duration of the benefit, with most around $200 a week for 26 weeks. The $200 must pay for all living expenses: rent, food, clothing, etc.

SOCIAL WELFARE

No matter how well intentioned the government has been, and no matter how much money has been spent, poverty has remained a perpetual problem for policy makers at both the state and federal levels. The first federal welfare programs were established by the Social Security Act in the 1930s. The largest and most controversial became known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).

All social welfare programs are designed to help targeted groups. Public assistance programs, known as welfare, target families whose total income falls below the federally determined minimum amount required to provide for the basic needs of a family. The present amount is approximately $17,000 for a family of four. The larger the family, the more income is required and the more money is paid out. Critics claimed that welfare was an incentive for families to have more children. Further complicating matters were complaints from recipients about a system that was degrading because investigators, looking for welfare cheaters, were invading their privacy.

In addition to AFDC, the federal government has established supplemental public assistance programs (known as SSI) to help the disabled and the aged who are living at or near the poverty level. To improve the diet and increase the buying power of the poor, the federal government also provides food stamps. Recipients use government-provided debit cards to help pay for food. Both SSI and the food-stamp program are federal programs administered through local and state agencies.

In an effort to reduce the number of people living on public assistance, the Welfare Reform Act was passed in 1996. Under the new law, social-welfare programs are funded by both the state and federal governments, with the federal government contributing the greatest share in the form of block grants. Block grants are important because they allow states to experiment with new types of programs designed to get people off welfare and into work programs. The administration of programs (the distribution of cash payments) and the incentives for finding work and providing job training are left to the states. The intent of the law is to reduce the welfare roles and force people to find work. This is accomplished by

• Abolishing Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which has affected 22 percent of the families in the United States with children, replacing it with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
• Requiring adults to find work within two years or be cut off
• Placing a lifetime limit of five years for welfare eligibility, although it is possible to get a waiver if a recipient is actively seeking work
• Prohibiting illegal immigrants from receiving assistance

The political debate over public assistance centers around two issues: Who pays how much, and what is the fair standard to be used for the recipient? Both Democrats and Republicans have tried to reduce these programs. Cutting them, however, places more people at risk, reducing food stamp programs and school lunch programs, causing increased hunger. To make matters more complicated, the Welfare Reform Act moved millions off the welfare rolls of the states as it coincided with a boom in unemployment.

HEALTH CARE

One of the most vexing problems for policy makers is what to do about the high cost of health care. Americans spend more than 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, or GDP (the total of goods and services produced in a year), on health care. The United States has the most expensive health care system in the world and is the only fully industrialized nation without a national health care program. High costs have not guaranteed any longer life expectancy, nor better treatment than that found in other industrialized nations. Instead of a national program run by the government, most Americans have relied on various types of insurance programs to pay for health care costs. The average cost for these insurance programs is at least $5,000 per year and is rising faster than the cost of living. The premiums for these health care programs are paid by workers and employers. For many reasons, but primarily because of cost, 15.4 percent of the population was without health insurance in 2010.

As with other government programs, the electorate is divided on how to solve the two issues of universal health care and the burden of health care costs. Voters seem to want increased coverage but there is little evidence to indicate they are willing to pay for it. The only tax increases the American electorate is willing to pay are the so-called “sin taxes” on alcohol and tobacco products, which will not generate enough revenues to provide increased coverage. Another basic issue for which there is no consensus is whether health benefits should be a government or privately administered program. With little public consensus, over the past two decades, reform has been extremely contentious.

An ill-fated attempt at health care reform was made in the first Clinton administration. The proposed policy called for universal coverage and strict cost controls. The policy would have required increased taxes coupled with cost-cutting limits on the types of medical procedures allowable. The lack of public consensus killed the proposal within a year.

The debate over health care continued during the 2000 presidential election. Both candidates agreed that something had to be done about both escalating costs and the increasing numbers of uninsured. The Democrats promoted a policy of a government-paid prescription drug program for senior citizens. The Republicans promoted a prescription-drug program run by insurance providers, but again there was no consensus.

The most significant health care legislation in American history was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010. The “Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act” was passed over the course of months and it generated significant political debate and controversy. The law was celebrated by most Democrats, who touted it as the much-needed solution to the long-term flaws in the American healthcare system. Republicans and some independent voters criticized the law, claiming it was an expensive intrusion of the federal government into the public sector. The debate lasted until the mid-term elections in November of 2010, when Republicans gained a large number of Congressional seats partly as a result of voter discontent with the law.

The most important of the law’s provisions allows the federal government, beginning in 2014, to fine individuals who do not participate in an insurance program. This policy, known as the “individual mandate,” has been the basis of many Republican criticisms of the law. The attorneys general of 28 states have challenged this provision in the law in federal court, claiming that the Constitution prohibits Congress from taxing individuals for not purchasing a product (i.e., health insurance). The federal court decisions have been split with some judges upholding the law and some striking down part or all of the law. The final decision on the constitutionality of the individual mandate will likely come directly from the Supreme Court at some point in 2012 or 2013. The Supreme Court’s decision on the healthcare legislation could impact the outcome of the presidential election of 2012.

SUMMARY

• Public policy is made when the government decides to take action to solve a societal problem, and consists of five steps:
  (1) defining the role of government,
  (2) agenda setting,
  (3) policy formulation,
  (4) policy implementation, and
  (5) policy evaluation.
• Economic policy has been one of the most important areas of public policy in American history. Policy makers have oscillated between supporting laissez-faire free market principles and redistributionist, interventionist policies.
• The United States has joined international trade organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in order to boost our commerce with the rest of the world. Nevertheless, we still use tariffs and subsidies to protect large swathes of our industry and agriculture.
• Before FDR, the federal government did not engage in much domestic policy making, but since that era we have seen the rise of programs like Social Security, Welfare (through the Aid to Families With Dependant Children and new state-based systems) and Medicaid.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is in charge of

(A) assessing the nation’s economic health

(B) writing the national budget to reflect the interests of Congress

(C) planning out the national budget for the president

(D) providing long-term and highly theoretical economic advice

(E) protecting the environment

  2. Which of the following is NOT generally a step in the policy-making process?

(A) Policy formulation

(B) Abandoning governmental solutions for societal problems

(C) Policy implementation

(D) Policy evaluation

(E) Agenda setting

  3. Which of the following is an example of a policy that a believer in laissez-faire economics might support?

(A) Giving the EPA greater power to fine factories that contribute to global warming

(B) Increasing taxes across higher income groups to aid the poor

(C) Creation of a law that protects unions and grants them collective bargaining rights

(D) The implementation of a flat tax

(E) Spending more money on farmers to support America’s agricultural output

  4. Which of the following people would NOT receive money from Social Security?

(A) Retired workers

(B) The widow of a retired worker

(C) A quadriplegic

(D) A worker who has just lost her job

(E) A family that is chronically poor

  5. When a nation’s imports exceed its exports, the country is

(A) running a trade deficit

(B) running a trade surplus

(C) in default

(D) bankrupt

(E) automatically expelled from the WTO

11

CIVIL RIGHTS AND
CIVIL LIBERTIES

CONCEPTS

• Why would Justice Thurgood Marshall blame the Supreme Court for the racial policies practiced in the United States before the Brown decision?
• Why did the Supreme Court allow the use of affirmative-action programs?
• Why is it said that the Warren Court took the handcuffs off the criminals and put them on the police?
• What mechanism did the Supreme Court use to ensure the rights of defendants in state criminal prosecutions?
• What impact has the interpretation of speech as a preferred right had on the government’s power to censure?
• How does the Supreme Court interpret the right to privacy on matters dealing with human reproduction?
• How has the Supreme Court changed its reasoning in dealing with religious activities in schools financed by the public?

TERMS

• selective incorporation
• Fourteenth Amendment
• freedom of speech
• freedom of the press
• freedom of assembly
• freedom of religion
• slander
• libel
• obscenity
• preferred position doctrine
• prior restraint
• rights of the accused
• double jeopardy
• unreasonable search and seizure
• probable cause
• exclusionary rule
• objective good faith
• inevitable discovery rule
• cruel and unusual punishment
• implied right to privacy
• due process
• Jim Crow laws
• poll tax
• grandfather clause
• Civil Rights Act of 1964
• de facto segregation
• de jure segregation
• affirmative action
• Equal Rights Amendment
• abortion

HOW TO DISCUSS A COURT CASE

First, an important tip: In responding to an essay question involving Supreme Court decisions, do not spend a lot of time giving narratives on the background of cases. Explain the essential questions and answers of cases, as well as the reasoning the Court used in the decision. The most important aspect of a case, for political science purposes, is its impact on government or society. When asked about a case, make sure the consequences of the decision are discussed. For example, the most important consequence of Marbury v. Madison is the establishment of judicial review, which is arguably the most important principle the Court ever enshrined. The consequence of Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States is the affirmation of the power of Congress, through the use of the Commerce Clause, to end segregation by law in the United States.

The term civil liberties generally applies to those protections (enjoyed by all Americans) from the abuse of government power. The term civil rights is used specifically to describe protections from discrimination based on race, gender, or other minority status. Often, the term is used to refer specifically to the struggles of African Americans for equal status (e.g., the Civil Rights Movement).

THE EXTENSION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES THROUGH AMERICAN HISTORY

In Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court determined that the Bill of Rights restricted the national government but not the state governments. It was not until 1925 that the Court overturned this ruling, citing Fourteenth Amendment restrictions on the states (“no state shall … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”). That case, Gitlow v. New York, concerned freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Court ruled that state limits on speech and the press could not exceed the limits allowed the national government.

Since then, the Court has applied the Bill of Rights to state law on a case-by-case basis. This process is called selective incorporation. Currently, the following rights have NOT been incorporated and may thus be restricted by the states:

• The Second Amendment right to bear arms
• The Third Amendment protection against forced quartering of troops in private homes
• The Fifth Amendment right to indictment by a grand jury
• The Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in civil cases
• The Eighth Amendment protection against excessive bail and fines

All other provisions of the Bill of Rights, however, apply equally to the states and the national government. Thus, while the states may place restrictions on gun ownership (because the Second Amendment has not been incorporated), they may not deprive accused felons of their right to legal counsel (a right incorporated in Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963).

In defining individual rights, the Court has consistently weighed the rights of individuals against the needs of society at large. Therefore, none of the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights is absolute.

FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND RESTRICTIONS

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of petitioning the government, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. None of these important rights, however, is absolute. Throughout the nation’s history, the Supreme Court has ruled that these rights may be limited in the interest of the greater public good. It has also ruled, however, that such restrictions must be well justified, well defined, and limited only to those few instances in which the public welfare is genuinely threatened.

Freedom of Speech

The most famous limit on free speech is the clear and present danger test. In the case of Schenck v. United States (1919), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes argued that a person may not falsely scream “fire!” in a crowded theater, because doing so would likely result in panic. The Court has also ruled that there is no constitutional protection for false defamatory speech (called slander when it is spoken and libel when it is in a more permanent form, such as print), obscenity, or speech intended to incite violence.

Since the 1940s, the Court has followed the preferred position doctrine in determining the limits of free speech. The doctrine reflects the Court’s belief that freedom of speech is fundamental to liberty; therefore, any limits on free speech must address severe, imminent threats to the nation. They must also be limited to constraining those threats; any restriction that fails to meet this test would probably be overturned by the Supreme Court. The Court continues to protect offensive but nonthreatening speech such as flag burning (usually undertaken by protesters, who burn the flag as a symbolic indication that the country has failed to protect American values such as democracy and freedom for all).

Important Cases

Schenck v. United States (1919). This case, decided by Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, established that speech which evokes “a clear and present danger” is not permissible. He famously used the example of someone falsely yelling “fire!” in a crowded theater as an example of prohibited speech.

Gitlow v. New York (1925). This case created the “Bad Tendency Doctrine,” which held that speech could be restricted even if it only has a tendency to lead to illegal action. Though this element of the decision was quite restrictive, Gitlow also selectively incorporated freedom of speech to state governments.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Students in an Iowa school were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam war. The Court ruled that this suspension was unconstitutional, and that public school students do not “shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door.”

Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986). This case gave public school officials the authority to suspend students for speech considered to be lewd or indecent.

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988). In this much-publicized case, the Court held that intentional infliction of emotional distress was permissible First Amendment speech—so long as such speech was about a public official, and could not reasonably be construed to state actual facts about its subject.

Texas v. Johnson (1989). Johnson established that burning the American flag is an example of permissible free speech, and struck down numerous anti-flag burning laws.

Morse v. Frederick (2007). This case was known as the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case, in which the Supreme Court limited students’ free speech rights. The justices ruled that Frederick’s free speech rights were not violated by his suspension over what the majority’s written opinion called a “sophomoric” banner.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010). The case established that corporations have a First Amendment right to expressly support political candidates for Congress and the White House.

Freedom of the Press

On occasion the government has tried to control the press, usually claiming national security interests. This occurred during the 1990 Persian Gulf War, when the Pentagon limited media access to the war zone and censored outgoing news reports. The media objected to these limitations. Such conflicts usually end up in the courts, where judges are forced to weigh conflicting national interests: the need to be informed versus security concerns. A previous similar case involved the Pentagon Papers (1971), a secret report on American involvement in Vietnam. The report was leaked to the New York Times, which published excerpts from the report. The government tried to halt further publication, claiming that national security was at stake. In that case, the Court rejected the government’s efforts to prevent publication (called prior restraint), ruling that the public’s need to be well informed outweighed the national security issues raised. The Pentagon Papers case demonstrates the preferred position doctrine.

An even more contentious issue involves the media’s responsibility to reveal the sources of their information. The Supreme Court has ruled that reporters are not exempt from testifying in court cases and that they can be asked to name their sources. Reporters who refuse to do so, as many have, can be jailed. A number of states have enacted shield laws to protect reporters in state cases, but in other states and in federal cases reporters have no such protection.

As mentioned above, libel and obscenity are not protected by the First Amendment. In the case of Miller v. California (1973), the Court established a three-part obscenity test:

• Would the average person, applying community standards, judge the work as appealing primarily to people’s baser sexual instincts?
• Does the work lack other value, or is it also of literary, artistic, political, or scientific interest?
• Does the work depict sexual behavior in an offensive manner?

Important Cases

Near v. Minnesota (1931). Near established that state injunctions to prevent publication violate the free press provision of the First Amendment and are unconstitutional. This case is important in that it selectively incorporates freedom of the press and prevents prior restraint.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). If a newspaper prints an article that turns out to be false but that the newspaper thought was true at the time of publication, has the newspaper committed libel? This case said no.

New York Times v. U.S. (1971). When Defense Department employee Daniel Ellsburg leaked some confidential files indicating that the war in Vietnam was going poorly, the government sought to prevent the publication of these “Pentagon Papers” by the New York Times. In this case, the Court held that executive efforts to prevent the publication violated the First Amendment were forbidden.

Hazelwood School v. Kuhlmeier (1988). In Hazelwood, the Court held that school officials have sweeping authority to regulate free speech in student run newspapers.

Freedom of Assembly and Association

The First Amendment protects the right of people to assemble peacefully. That right does not extend to violent groups or to demonstrations that would incite violence. Furthermore, the government may place reasonable restrictions on crowd gatherings, provided such restrictions are applied equally to all groups. Demonstrators have no constitutional right, for example, to march on and thereby close down a highway. They may not block the doorways of buildings. In short, crowd gatherings must not unnecessarily disrupt day-to-day life. That is why groups must apply for licenses to hold a parade or street fair.

The Court has also ruled that the combined rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly imply a freedom of association. This means that the government may not restrict the number or type of groups or organizations people belong to, provided those groups do not threaten national security.

Important Cases

Thornhill v. Alabama (1940). Labor unions have been controversial since the dawn of the industrial revolution—did their strikes constitute a form of unlawful assembly? In Thornhill, the Court held that strikes by unions were not unlawful.

Cox v. New Hampshire (1941). When a group of Jehovah’s Witnesses were arrested for marching in New Hampshire without a permit, they claimed that permits themselves were an unconstitutional abridgment of their First Amendment freedoms. In Cox, the Court held that cities and towns could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of public order.

Lloyd Corporation v. Tanner (1972). This case allowed the owners of a shopping mall to throw out people protesting the Vietnam War. The key element here is that malls are private spaces, not public. As a result, protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments.

Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000). Private organizations’ First Amendment right of expressive association allows them to choose their own membership and expel members based on their sexual orientation even if such discrimination would otherwise be prohibited by anti-discrimination legislation designed to protect minorities in public accommodations. As a result of this case, the Boy Scouts of America were allowed to expel any member who was discovered to be homosexual.

Freedom of Religion

The Constitution guarantees the right to the free exercise of religion, meaning that the government may not prevent individuals from practicing their faiths. This right is not absolute, however. Human sacrifice, to give an extreme example, is not allowed. The courts have ruled that polygamy is not protected by the Constitution, nor is the denial of medical treatment to a child, regardless of individual religious beliefs. However, the Court has ruled that Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot be required to salute the American flag and that Amish children may stop attending school after the eighth grade. In all cases, the Court weighs individual rights to free religious exercise against society’s needs.

The Constitution also prevents the government from establishing a state religion (the Establishment Clause). The Establishment Clause has been used to prevent school prayer, government-sponsored displays of the Christmas nativity, and state bans on the teaching of evolution (because such bans were religiously motivated). However, the wall between church and state is not rock solid. The Court has allowed government subsidies to provide some aspects of parochial education (such as lunches, textbooks, and buses). It has also allowed for tax credits for non-public school costs. In deciding whether a law violates the Establishment Clause, the Court uses a three-part test, called the Lemon test after the case Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971):

• Does the law have a secular, rather than a religious, purpose?
• Does the law neither promote nor discourage religion?
• Does the law avoid “excessive entanglement” of the government and religious institutions?

Important Cases

Engel v. Vitale (1962). This landmark case prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools.

Abington School Dist. v. Schempp (1963). Given the Court’s ruling in Engel, it’s not surprising that in Abington they decided that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment forbids state-mandated reading of the Bible, or recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in public schools.

Epperson v. Arkansas (1968). In line with the Establishment Clause, Epperson prohibited states from banning the teaching of evolution in public schools.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). This case dealt with state laws intending to give money to religious schools or causes. The Court held that in order to be consistent with the Establishment Clause, the money had to meet three qualifications: (1) it must have a legitimate secular purpose, (2) it must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and (3) it must not result in an excessive entanglement of government and religion. These qualifications are known as the “Lemon Test.”

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972). This case dealt with the Amish community’s desire to pull their children from public school before the age of 16 so that they could help with farm and domestic work. The Court sided with the Amish and held that parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons.

Employment Division v. Smith (1990). This case determined that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. In short, states may accommodate otherwise illegal acts done in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so.

THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Rights granted to the accused are a fundamental protection against governmental abuse of power. Many of the these rights are found in the Fifth Amendment. Without them, the government could imprison its political opponents without trial or could guarantee conviction through numerous unfair prosecutorial tactics. However, these rights are also controversial. Anti-crime organizations and politicians frequently decry these protections when arguing that it is too difficult to capture, try, and imprison criminals. These accusations have grown louder and more frequent since the 1960s, when the Warren Court (the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren) greatly expanded those protections that are granted to criminal defendants.

Important Cases

Weeks v. United States (1914). Though the Constitution is unequivocal when it forbids unlawful search and seizure, such ill-gotten evidence was still commonly used to prosecute defendants. Weeks established the exclusionary rule, which held that illegally obtained evidence could not be used in federal court.

Powell v. Alabama (1932). The Constitution is clear in the Sixth Amendment when it guarantees all those accused of a federal crime the right to have a lawyer. But what about those accused of state crimes? Should they get a lawyer if they can’t afford one? In Powell, the Court ruled that state governments must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can’t afford it.

Betts v. Brady (1942). The Betts case established that state governments did not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961). By 1961, the exclusionary rule meant that any unlawfully gathered evidence could not be introduced in federal court, but such evidence was introduced all the time in state courts. The Mapp case extended the exclusionary rule to the states, increasing the protections for defendents.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). This was a powerful repudiation of Betts v. Brady. Here, the Warren court strongly holds that all state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can’t afford one.

Escobedo v. Illinois (1964). Escobedo is another important Warren Court decision. Here, the Court held that any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him—or any confession garnered after that point would be inadmissible in court.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966). Miranda is the most dramatic and well-known of the Warren Court decisions. The court found that all defendants must be informed of all their legal rights before they are arrested. It is thanks to Miranda that we all know the phrase “You have the right to remain silent …” and you can’t get through an episode of Law & Order without hearing it at least once.

Protection from Self-Incrimination

The Constitution protects individuals from self-incrimination. A defendant cannot be forced to testify at trial, and the jury is not supposed to infer guilt when a defendant chooses to not testify. Furthermore, a defendant must be notified of his right to remain silent, his right to a lawyer, and his protection against self-incrimination at the time of his arrest. This precedent was established in the 1966 Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda had been arrested for kidnapping and rape, and, within two hours of his arrest, he had confessed to his crimes. His lawyer appealed the case on the grounds that Miranda had not been advised of his constitutional rights (e.g., the protection against self-incrimination and the right to legal counsel). In Miranda, the Supreme Court decided that the police had deprived Miranda of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. Those rights have since come to be known as Miranda rights.

For years, the courts rarely admitted into evidence confessions from arrestees who had not been properly “Mirandized.” In recent years, however, the Supreme Court has defined some situations in which such confessions are admissible. In 1991, the Court ruled that a coerced confession does not automatically invalidate a conviction. Rather, an appeals court may consider all evidence entered at trial. If the court decides that a conviction was probable even without the confession, it may let the guilty verdict stand.

Protection from Unreasonable Search and Seizure

The Fourth Amendment limits the power of the government to search for evidence of criminal activity. When the police want to search private property, in most circumstances they must first go before a judge and justify the search. If the judge is convinced that the search is likely to uncover evidence of illegality—called probable cause—the judge issues a search warrant, which limits where the police may search and what they may take as evidence. Evidence found by police who disregard this procedure may not be admitted as evidence in trial. This is called the exclusionary rule. The Supreme Court applied the exclusionary rule to federal trials in 1911. In the 1961 case Mapp v. Ohio, the Court incorporated the exclusionary rule, thus making it applicable to state trials as well.

As with all constitutional rights, however, there are exceptions to this rule. In 1984, the Supreme Court established the objective good faith exception, which allows for convictions in cases in which a search was not technically legal (either because it violated the warrant or because the warrant itself was faulty) but was conducted under the assumption that it was legal. The Court has also determined that illegally seized evidence that would eventually have been found legally is also admissible in court. This principle is known as the inevitable discovery rule.

There are also circumstances under which the police may conduct a search without a warrant. Police may conduct an immediate search following a legal arrest, for example. Police may also conduct an immediate search of private property if the owner consents to that search. Evidence found in plain view may be seized immediately; if, for example, a person is growing marijuana on his front lawn, the police may seize that evidence without first acquiring a search warrant. Finally, police may conduct an immediate search if they have probable cause to believe they will find evidence of criminal activity, especially when they believe that evidence would disappear by the time they received a warrant and returned. The police would later have to demonstrate that they had probable cause in court.

Rights to an Attorney and a Speedy Trial

The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney in federal cases. In 1932, the Supreme Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to incorporate this right in capital cases (“the Scottsboro boys” case). In the 1963 case Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court ruled that all criminal defendants in state courts were entitled to legal counsel. In both cases, the Court ruled that the state must provide a lawyer to defendants too poor to hire a lawyer. The Court has since extended this protection to misdemeanor cases, provided those cases could result in jail time for the defendant. However, the Court has held that states are not required to provide a lawyer to litigants in civil cases.

The Sixth Amendment also guarantees defendants the right to a speedy trial. The courts have become so overburdened with cases that the Supreme Court recently imposed a 100-day limit between the time of arrest and the start of a trial. The limit has had little practical effect, however, because both prosecutors and defense attorneys can request an extension to prepare their cases. Courts have generally granted such extensions. As a result, it is not unusual for a defendant to wait a year or more between his or her arrest date and a trial.

Protection from Excessive Bail and “Cruel and Unusual Punishment”

The Eighth Amendment states that “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The government is not required, however, to offer bail to all defendants. In 1984, Congress passed the Bail Reform Act to allow federal judges to deny bail to defendants considered either dangerous or likely to flee the country. The protection from excessive bail has not been incorporated, and states are therefore free to set bail as high as state law permits.

The “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the Constitution lies at the heart of the debate over the death penalty. The Court has placed limits on when the death penalty can be applied; however, it has upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty when properly applied. Critics point to statistics that those convicted of killing African Americans are far less likely to receive the death penalty than those convicted of killing Caucasians. The Court has rejected this argument. In recent years, the Court has moved to make it easier for states to carry out the death penalty by limiting the number and nature of appeals allowed by convicted murderers on death row.

Important Cases

Furman v. Georgia (1972). Here, the court looked at the patchwork quilt of nationwide capital punishment decisions and found that its imposition was often racist and arbitrary. In Furman, the Court ordered a halt to all death penalty punishments in the nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found.

Woodson v. North Carolina (1976). North Carolina tried to satisfy the Court’s requirement that the imposition of the death penalty not be arbitrary—so they made it a mandatory punishment for certain crimes. The Court rejected this approach and ruled mandatory death penalty sentences as unconstitutional.

Gregg v. Georgia (1976). Georgia was finally able to convince the Court that it had come up with a careful and fair system for trying capital offenses. As a result, the Court ruled that under adequate guidelines the death penalty did not, in fact, constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Thus Gregg allowed the resumption of the death penalty in America.

Atkins v. Virginia (2002). Here, the United States lined up with most other nations in the world by forbidding the execution of defendants who are mentally handicapped.

The Right of All Americans to Privacy

The right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. However, in the 1965 Supreme Court case of Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights contained an implied right to privacy. The Court ruled that the combination of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments added up to a guarantee of privacy. The Griswold case concerned a state law banning the use of contraception; the Supreme Court decision overturned that law. Griswold also laid the foundation for the landmark Roe v. Wade case of 1973, which legalized abortion.

Important Cases

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). The Constitution never explicitly grants Americans a right to privacy, but the Court discovers one in this landmark and controversial case. Writing for the majority, Justice William O. Douglas noted that amendments like the Third, Fourth, and Ninth all cast “penumbras and emanations” which showed that the Founders really had intended for a right to privacy all along.

Roe v. Wade (1973). Though Roe is one of the most famous court cases in American history, legally it is really a subset of the Griswold decision. The court had already done the heavy lifting of discovering the right to privacy in the Constitution. As a result, in Roe they established national abortion guidelines by extending the inferred right of privacy from Griswold.

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1987). This case did not overturn Roe v. Wade, but it did give states more power to regulate abortion.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). A Pennsylvania law that would have required a woman to notify her husband before getting an abortion was thrown out, but laws calling for parental consent and the imposition of a 24-hour waiting period were upheld. All in all, the message was that states can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an “undue burden” upon women.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003). With this ruling, the Supreme Court struck down a sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas. The court had previously addressed the same issue in Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), where it did not find constitutional protection of sexual privacy. Lawrence explicitly overruled Bowers saying that consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected under the Fourteenth Amendment.

CIVIL RIGHTS

The AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam occasionally tests your knowledge of key civil rights legislation. Below is what you need to know about civil rights for the test.

Civil Rights and African Americans

Prior to the Civil War, most of the African-American population in the U.S. consisted of slaves, who were denied virtually any legal rights whatsoever. Free blacks were also denied basic civil rights such as the right to vote and the right to equal protection under the law. Because the Supreme Court had ruled in 1833 that the Bill of Rights applied to the federal government only, states were free to enact discriminatory and segregationist laws. Many did so to ensure the oppression of African Americans.

The Civil War began the long, slow development toward equality of the races before the law. Here is a list of key events in that process.

• The Civil War. The Civil War was fought, at least in part, over the issue of slavery (the debate over the relative powers of the federal and state governments was also a major cause of the war). The war was more clearly defined as a war about slavery in 1863, when President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared the liberation of slaves in the rebel states. The Civil War also influenced the civil rights process in a less direct and less immediate way, as it resulted in an increase in the power of the federal government. One hundred years later, the increased power vested in the federal government would be the means of imposing and enforcing equal rights laws in the states.
• Thirteenth Amendment. The Thirteenth Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, made slavery illegal.
• Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified during Reconstruction, was designed to prevent states in the South from depriving newly freed blacks of their rights. Its clauses guaranteeing due process and equal protection were later used by the Supreme Court to apply most of the Bill of Rights to state law. However, in the 1880s the Supreme Court interpreted the amendment narrowly, allowing the states to enact segregationist laws. The Fourteenth Amendment also made African Americans citizens of the nation and of their home states—the Dred Scott case (1857) had ruled that slaves and their descendants were not citizens.
• Fifteenth Amendment. The Fifteenth Amendment banned laws that would prevent African Americans from voting on the basis of their race or the fact that they previously were slaves.
• Civil Rights Act of 1875. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 banned discrimination in hotels, restaurants, and railroad cars, and also banned discrimination in selection for jury duty. The Supreme Court declared the Act unconstitutional in 1883.
• Jim Crow laws and voting restrictions. As the federal government exerted less influence over the South, states, towns, and cities passed numerous discriminatory and segregationist laws. The Supreme Court assisted the states by ruling that the Fourteenth Amendment did not protect blacks from discriminatory state laws, and that blacks would have to seek equal protection from the states, not from the federal government. In 1883, the Court also reversed the Civil Rights Act of 1875, thus opening the door to legal segregation. These segregationist laws are known collectively as Jim Crow laws. The states also moved to deprive blacks of their voting rights by imposing poll taxes (a tax that must be paid in order to vote) and literacy tests. To allow poor, illiterate whites to vote, some states passed grandfather clauses that exempted from these restrictions anyone whose grandfather had voted. Grandfather clauses effectively excluded blacks, whose grandparents had been slaves and therefore could not have voted.
• Equal Pay Act of 1963. This federal law made it illegal to base an employee’s pay on race, gender, religion, or national origin. The Equal Pay Act was also important to the women’s movement and to the civil rights struggles of other minorities.
• Twenty-fourth Amendment (1964). This outlawed poll taxes, which had been used to prevent blacks and poor whites from voting.
• Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a landmark piece of legislation. It not only increased the rights of blacks and other minorities, but also gave the federal government greater means of enforcing the law. The law banned discrimination in public accommodations (public transportation, offices, and so on) and in all federally funded programs. It also prohibited discrimination in hiring based on color and gender. Finally, it required the government to cut off funding from any program that did not comply with the law, and it gave the federal government the power to initiate lawsuits in cases of school segregation. States that had previously ignored federal civil rights mandates now faced serious consequences for doing so.
• Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Voting Rights Act was designed to counteract voting discrimination in the South. It allowed the federal government to step into any state or county in which less than 50 percent of the population was registered to vote, or in areas that used literacy tests to prevent voting. In those areas, the federal government could register voters (which is normally a function of the states).
• Civil Rights Act, Title VIII (1968). This banned racial discrimination in housing.
• Civil Rights Act of 1991. This law was designed to address a number of problems that had arisen in civil rights law during the previous decade. Several Supreme Court decisions had limited the abilities of job applicants and employees to bring suit against employers with discriminatory hiring practices; the 1991 act eased those restrictions.

Important Cases

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). This case famously allowed southern states to twist the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by allowing “separate but equal” facilities based on race.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954). In this landmark case, a unanimous court led by newly appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren ruled the doctrine of “separate but equal” to be unconstitutional.

Brown v. Board 2^nd (1955). One year later, the Warren Court saw that segregation was still ubiquitous. So in Brown II, they ordered schools to desegregate “with all due and deliberate speed.”

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964). Did the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 mandate that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against African Americans? Yes, said the Court.

Katzenbach v. McClung (1964). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination in public places, but what about in private businesses? The Katzenbach case established that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to state discrimination statutes. This ruling made the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to virtually all businesses.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978). Alan Bakke was a white applicant who was rejected from medical school because of an affirmative action plan to boost the number of black students. The Court ruled that Bakke had been unfairly excluded and that quotas requiring a certain percentage of minorities violated the Fourteenth Amendment. But the Court also held that race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity.

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003). These cases involved the University of Michigan Law School and the University of Michigan undergraduate school. Both used affirmative action, but the undergraduate school did so by giving minority applicants a large boost in the score used by officers deciding on admission. The Court threw out the undergraduate system of selection, but generally upheld Bakke.

Although the number of major new civil rights laws has decreased in the past decades, the fight for civil rights for African Americans and other minority groups is far from over. Although legally enforced segregation of public facilities no longer exists, racial segregation remains a national concern. Most public school systems remain essentially segregated because the neighborhoods that feed them are segregated. The impact of this de facto segregation (as opposed to de jure segregation, which is segregation by law) is increased by the disparity in average incomes among whites and blacks: Because many local school systems are supported by property taxes, lower-income neighborhoods end up with poorly funded, overcrowded schools. In the 1970s, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could bus children to different school districts to achieve the goal of integration, provided the affected districts had been intentionally segregated. Busing plans failed, however, due to public protest and the abandonment of cities by whites.

Furthermore, discrimination continues in employment, housing, and higher education. Because such discrimination is subtler—few employers tell job applicants, “I won’t hire you because you’re black”—it is more difficult to enforce antidiscrimination laws and punish offenders in these areas. Affirmative action programs, which seek to create special employment opportunities for minorities, women, and other victims of discrimination, address these questions but have become increasingly controversial and politically unpopular in recent years. In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action programs could not use quotas to meet civil rights goals; however, it did say that gender and race could be considered among other factors by schools and businesses practicing affirmative action. Opponents of affirmative action programs argue that such programs penalize whites and thus constitute reverse discrimination, which is illegal under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Civil Rights and Women

The granting of equal rights for women in the United States is a relatively recent phenomenon. Women were not given the right to vote in all 50 states until 1920. Employment discrimination based on gender was not outlawed until 1964. As recently as the early 1990s, women were not guaranteed 12 weeks of unpaid leave from work after giving birth (this finally changed with the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which gives this right to both mothers and fathers). Those who fought for the failed Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution continue to argue that women do not yet have a full guarantee of equality under the law from the federal government.

Here is a list of events of the women’s rights movement that the AP U.S. Government and Politics Exam sometimes tests.

• Nineteenth Amendment (1920). Granted women the right to vote.
• Equal Pay Act of 1963. This federal law made it illegal to base an employee’s pay on race, gender, religion, or national origin. Prior to this bill, many businesses and organizations maintained different pay and raise schedules for their male and female employees. In fact, many continued to do so after the bill passed. Federal enforcement of the law, however, has helped narrow the gap between the salaries and wages of the genders.
• Civil Rights Act of 1964. The provision pertaining to gender discrimination was included in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by an opponent of the bill. Representative Howard Smith of Virginia believed his proposal was ridiculous and would therefore weaken support for the bill. Much to his surprise, the bill passed with the gender provision included. The bill prohibits employment discrimination based on gender.
• Title IX, Higher Education Act (1972). This law prohibits gender discrimination by institutions of higher education that receive federal funds. Title IX has been used to force increased funding of women-only programs, such as women’s sports. The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988 increased its potency by allowing the government to cut off all funding to schools that violate the law (and not just to the specific program or office found in violation). As a result of these laws mandating equity in college athletics spending, colleges have eliminated many less popular men’s sports, resulting in a backlash against Title IX and the Civil Rights Restoration Act.

As women have entered the workplace in greater numbers, the issue of sexual harassment at work has gained prominence. Sexual harassment is defined as any sexist or sexual behavior—physical or verbal—that creates a hostile work environment. It can range from suggestive remarks to attempts to coerce sex from a subordinate. Like other forms of discrimination, it is difficult to prove legally. Efforts to combat it range from public-awareness programs to sensitivity training to increased legal penalties for harassers.

Abortion has remained a controversial and prominent political issue since the Supreme Court affirmed a woman’s right to an abortion in Roe v. Wade (1973). In that case, the court ruled that a woman’s right to an abortion could not be limited during the first three months of pregnancy (increased limits are allowed as the development of the fetus progresses). Opponents of abortion, who call themselves pro-life, argue that the procedure is murder and should be criminalized. Those who support women’s right to abortions (dubbed the pro-choice movement) argue that women should ultimately decide the ambiguous moral issues for themselves. Because of the very personal, life-and-death issues involved in the abortion debate, advocates on both sides of the issue feel very strongly, and as a result abortion is a major political issue. The decision in Roe v. Wade has influenced every election and Supreme Court nomination since; as a result of this case, candidates’ opinions about the abortion issue are often the first thing the public learns about them. In most European countries, abortion rights were established legislatively (by laws). Many legal scholars believe that the judicial solution (left up to the courts) applied by the United States has opened the door to ideologues.

Other Major Civil Rights Advances

• Age Discrimination Act of 1967. As its name states, this law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of age. The law makes an exception for jobs in which age is essential to job performance. An amendment to this law banned some mandatory retirement ages and increased others to 70.
• Twenty-sixth Amendment (1971). Extended the right to vote to 18-year-olds.
• Voting Rights Act of 1982. This law requires states to create congressional districts with minority majorities in order to increase minority representation in the House of Representatives. The law has resulted in the creation of numerous strangely shaped districts, such as one in North Carolina that was 160 miles long and, at points, only several hundred yards wide. The Supreme Court nullified the district just described, leaving it unclear how the government may both achieve the goals of the Voting Rights Act and maintain the regional integrity of congressional districts.
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This law requires businesses with more than 24 employees to make their offices accessible to the disabled. It also requires public transportation, new offices, hotels, and restaurants to be wheelchair-accessible whenever feasible. Finally, it mandated the development of wider telephone services for the hearing-impaired.

Other Important Cases

Federalism

Marbury v. Madison (1803). This most important of all decisions established judicial review—the Supreme Court’s power to strike down acts of United States Congress which conflict with the Constitution.

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). This case is important because it established a precedent of federal courts using judicial review to strike down Congressional legislation.

Gitlow v. New York (1925). Gitlow began the process of selective incorporation—the practice of transferring protections that Americans had from the federal government and applying them to state governments.

South Dakota v. Dole (1987). The federal government mandated the 21-year-old drinking age by threatening to withhold federal highway funds from all states that did not comply. In this case, such withholding was held to be constitutional.

United States v. Lopez (1995). Congress had used the Commerce Clause to aggressively create legislation governing what seemed to be purely local matters. Here, the Court blocks them a bit by holding that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution does not give Congress the power to regulate guns near state-operated schools.

Executive Power

Korematsu v. United States (1944). This case was not the Supreme Court’s finest hour, as it ruled that American citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order.

United States v. Nixon (1974). In this case, Congress claimed that there was no such thing as executive privilege as it went after tapes that President Nixon had made of all his conversations in the Oval Office. The Court disagreed and allowed for executive privilege. But they forbid its usage in criminal cases, which meant that Nixon ultimately did have to turn over the tapes.

Clinton v. New York (1998). This case banned the presidential use of a line-item veto as a violation of legislative powers.

SUMMARY

• It is very important to remember that the Bill of Rights only protects Americans from the federal government. It wasn’t until the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment and the advocacy of the twentieth-century Supreme Court that these freedoms were selectively incorporated to the states.
• Know about freedom of speech, clear and present danger and the preferred position doctrine.
• Freedom of the press is protected by the ban on prior restraint, but has limits (as in the case of slander or libel).
• The rights of the people to assemble generally can’t be limited, though there are some exceptions to this rule.
• The Constitution forbids the creation of an official religion through the Establishment Clause, but also prevents the government from infringing on religious freedom through the Free Exercise Clause.
• We have seen a steady expansion of the rights of the accused, particularly since the decisions of the Warren Court.
• Rising from the disgrace of slavery and Jim Crow laws, the Court has acted in the latter half of the twentieth-century to protect racial minorities from discrimination. Today, most controversy swirls around the issue of affirmative action and whether it constitutes a form of reverse racism and thus constitutes a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

PRACTICE QUESTIONS

  1. The Gratz and Grutter cases served primarily to

(A) reinforce primacy of “diversity” as established in Bakke

(B) remove “diversity” as the focus of affirmative action

(C) abolish affirmative action

(D) justify affirmative action by noting that it “righted past wrongs”

(E) establish a quota system

  2. Prior Restraint (for non-student newspapers) was prohibited by

(A) Brown v. Board of Education

(B) Betts v. Brady

(C) Near v. Minnesota

(D) Sheppard v. Maxwell

(E) President Johnson in 1967

  3. The right to always have counsel present in court cases was established by

(A) Powell v. Alabama

(B) Betts v. Brady

(C) Gideon v. Wainwright

(D) Escobedo v. Illinois

(E) Miranda v. Arizona

  4. The Supreme Court case that allowed the resumption of the death penalty was

(A) Furman v. Georgia

(B) Woodson v. North Carolina

(C) Bunn v. North Carolina

(D) Oregon v. Smith

(E) Gregg v. Georgia

12

ANSWERS AND EXPLANATIONS
TO CHAPTER QUIZZES

CHAPTER 5

  1. B After feeling the pressure of the strong British central government, the founders of the new nation wanted something looser and less binding: the Articles of Confederation. But the Articles had no provision for the creation of a central army, and Shays’s Rebellion—an uprising of Massachusetts farmers—scared many people and led to the desire for a stronger form of government.

  2. E This is a NOT question, so be careful to note that it is asking which of the answer choices is NOT a problem with the Articles. Because the Articles had no strong army, were almost impossible to amend, did have states taxing trade with other states, and did have states establishing ties with foreign powers, the answer is (E); after all, the states had so much freedom that many thought the USA was in danger of dissolution.

  3. A The Southern states wanted to count slaves for the purpose of representation, but not taxation. The North held the opposite point of view. Ultimately they compromised, counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for both taxation and representation. Thus (A) is correct.

  4. C No nation had ever had powers divided between a central government and strong regional governments before the United States—this was federalism, which makes (C) correct. Separation of powers, limited government, checks and balances and judicial review are all important principles but have nothing to do with the division of powers between the federal government and the states.

  5. B One of the main sticking points at the Constitutional Convention was how to balance the interest of the large states against those of the small. The large states endorsed the Virginia Plan, which would have created a bicameral legislature in which the large states were dominant. So (B) is the correct response.

CHAPTER 6

  1. A Small groups can often wield disproportionate power over public policy, and often this comes down to the strength, or intensity, of their feelings. So (A) is correct. Saliency, choice (B), is the degree to which an issue is important to a particular group, while stability, choice (C), is how much public opinion changes over time. Choices (D) and (E) are not terms that are generally used to describe public opinion.

  2. D This is a NOT question so we are looking for the one answer choice which is NOT a source of political socialization. Family, school, life experiences, and religion are all major sources of political socialization due to the influence they have on people’s world-views. Neither party really engages in large-scale indoctrination, making (D) the best choice.

  3. C Liberals tend to want the government to use redistributionist policies to help the poor, making (C) correct. Choices (A), (B), (D), and (E) are all examples of ideas that appeal more to conservatives.

  4. B Conservatives are traditionally skeptical of any government attempts to control business and industry, and thus (B) is the answer here. Choices (A), (C), (D), and (E) are all examples of ideas that appeal more to liberals.

  5. E In this NOT question, we are asked to decide which factor does NOT determine ideological behavior. Race and ethnicity, religion, gender, and region are all major factors in determining whether someone will be liberal or conservative. So (E) is the answer, as birth order has never been proven to have any relevance in this area.

CHAPTER 7

  1. D Oftentimes, voters will become dissatisfied with the two parties in power and splinter off to a new, third party. Ross Perot’s Reform Party is a classic example of a “splinter” party, making (D) correct. Choices (A), (B), (C), and (E) are all examples of ideological parties and are thus incorrect.

  2. B In this NOT question, we are looking for the one example of a function that parties are NOT expected to do. Because the United States is a stable democracy, political parties are not expected to foment revolution, making (B) the answer. Choices (A), (C), (D), and (E) are all examples of legitimate political party functions, making them the wrong choices.

  3. D Cuban Americans, evangelicals, white Southerners, and pro-lifers all represent groups that are generally part of the Republican coalition. Mexicans and other non-Cuban Hispanics are far more likely to vote Democratic, making (D) correct.

  4. A While many Americans may be skeptical of interest groups and the power that they wield, comparatively few resort to breaking the law and engaging in outright bribery, making (A) the answer here. Choices (B), (C), (D), and (E) are all examples of tactics commonly used by interest groups to accomplish their goals.

  5. B Unions and corporations have clear policy goals and want to elect candidates that will accomplish those goals. But federal law prohibits them from donating directly to candidates—thus the PAC was born. Because PACs are only allowed to accept and give out set amounts of money, (C) is incorrect and (B) is right. Choices (A), (D), and (E) do not come close to defining the role and purpose of PACs.

CHAPTER 8

  1. E States that use open primaries allow voters of any party to vote in one party primary of their choice, making (E) correct. Choices (A), (B), (C), and (D) do not meet the definition of an open primary and are thus incorrect.

  2. D Rules about campaign finance have changed since 2002, but one rule that has remained constant is that PACs can give candidates $5,000 and no more than $5,000 per election cycle. So (D) should be your choice.

  3. A Answer choices (B), (C), (D), and (E) are all examples of groups that assemble at nominating conventions, but the position of a party is known as its platform, and this is formed by (A) the platform committee.

  4. A The president of the United States is the person who receives a majority of votes in the electoral college, making (A) correct. If a candidate only has a plurality of votes in the electoral college (C), then the House decides the president. Unanimity is nice, but not necessary for victory, making (E) wrong. The popular vote plays no role in who becomes president, making (B) and (D) wrong.

  5. B Though there are exceptions, studies have overwhelmingly shown that the older and more educated a person is, the more likely they are to vote. The 65-year-old college professor is the oldest and best educated member of the group of choices, so (B) is correct.

CHAPTER 9

  1. B Though he is mostly limited to ceremonial duties and to breaking the occasional tie, the vice president of the United States is officially the president of the Senate, making (B) correct. The majority leader (D) is the actual leader of the body, while the president pro tempore (C), also ceremonial, is outranked by the vice president. Neither the president (A) nor the chief whip (E) has leadership roles in the Senate.

  2. E The power to choose a president, the power to propose amendments to the Constitution, treaty ratification, and confirmations are all examples of non-legislative powers of Congress. To legislate means to make laws, and only (E) meets this definition.

  3. D Controversial as it may be, the process of redistricting has always been controlled by state legislatures in the United States—making (D) correct. Though many experts have called for nonpartisan commissions, currently only Iowa uses one to draw its district lines. The Senate and the president have no influence over districting. And while the Supreme Court is empowered to rule on matters of redistricting, it rarely does so.

  4. A The Constitution doesn’t make any mention of the cabinet, but all presidents have had them, and as high ranking members of the executive branch, they must be chosen by the president and confirmed by the Senate, making (A) correct. The House does not confirm presidential appointments, so (B) is false. Neither the House (C) nor the Supreme Court (D) chooses cabinet officials. And as seen from (A), presidential choices for the cabinet do necessitate Senate approval, making (E) false.

  5. A Because it is so informal and because its members need to give frank and unvarnished advice to the president, the EOP is exempt from Congressional oversight and is a favored tool of the presidency, making (A) correct. The fact that the EOP is unmentioned in the Constitution (B) does not detract from its power. It is not located in the Department of Defense (C), neither is it a dumping ground (D). And the vice president does not run it, making (E) false.

  6. C The NSC is a key part of the EOP and presidents have relied on it for many years, as NSC advisors like Henry Kissinger and Condoleezza Rice have used their positions to influence presidents. Its main function is to advise the president and to coordinate foreign policy, and to do so away from the prying eyes of Congress. None of the other answer choices correctly defines the NSC.

  7. D Though the president gets to select all the judges who sit on the federal bench, district court judges all operate out of a specific state. By tradition, the senators from that state must approve of the president’s selections to fill vacancies—this is known as senatorial courtesy, making (D) correct. Judicial appointments are not approved in the House (A), and Supreme Court Justices (B) are not subject to senatorial courtesy. Senators cannot appoint judges (C), and senators are not immune to prosecution (E).

  8. B Marbury v. Madison is one of the most important of all Supreme Court decisions as it established judicial review, which is the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down federal and state laws that are in conflict with the Constitution, making (B) correct. (A) is incorrect because certiorari is a legal document used by the Supreme Court to obtain records from lower courts, and it was not established by any case. (C) is incorrect because it refers to Gideon v. Wainwright. (D) is incorrect because it refers to Katz v. United States, and (E) is incorrect because it is a false statement; a quota system was never established by the court.

  9. E From the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, but especially since that of Andrew Jackson, government jobs were given to political supporters—an arrangement known as the spoils system. The Pendleton Act, passed in 1883, limited this, so (E) is the answer. Choice (A) refers to the Hatch Act, and (B), (C), and (D) are simply untrue.

10. E Also known as a sub-government, the alliance of Congressional committees, interest groups, and bureaucracies is so strong that it is often called an iron triangle, so (E) is correct. Choices (A), (B), and (D) are all things that come in three, but none are known as iron triangles. (C) is false because iron triangles are fairly common in the United States.

CHAPTER 10

  1. C The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) evolved out of the Bureau of the Budget—used by FDR to help guide the nation through the Great Depression. Its primary function is to plan the budget for the president, making (C) the correct response. The OMB exists to serve the president, not Congress, so (B) is incorrect. Assessing the nation’s economic health (A) is more the job of the National Economic Council (NEC), and the NEC would also be in charge of (D). Protecting the environment (E) is the job of the EPA.

  2. B Policy formulation (A), policy implementation (C), policy evaluation (D), and agenda setting (E) are all part of the policy-making process. But abandoning the government means abandoning policy-making, so (B) is the correct answer.

  3. D A supporter of laissez-faire economic policy would be in favor of the free market, less regulation and fewer taxes. For these reasons, (E), (A), and (B) are wrong. Free marketers are traditionally skeptical of labor unions, making (C) wrong. A flat tax would mean an end to the progressive tax rate and less money paid in taxes overall, so (D) is the right choice.

  4. E Retired workers, survivors of retirees, the handicapped, and the short-term unemployed all receive benefits from Social Security. Though a family that is chronically poor may receive money from the government, they wouldn’t get it from Social Security, so (E) is correct.

  5. A When a nation imports more than it exports, it is running a trade deficit, so (A) is right. A surplus (B) occurs when exports exceed imports. Choices (C), (D), and (E) are all factually incorrect.

CHAPTER 11

  1. A The cases of Gratz and Grutter in 2002 involved lawsuits against the University of Michigan by white students who did not get accepted as a result of affirmative action. Though many observers of the Court speculated that affirmative action might be overturned, ultimately the justices upheld it and reinforced the Bakke case. So (A) is correct. Diversity remains the goal of affirmative action, so (B) is wrong. As seen above, (C) did not occur. Though many support affirmative action to right past wrongs, its legal foundation still rests on diversity, making (D) incorrect. Quotas have been illegal since Bakke, so (E) is incorrect as well.

  2. C The state cannot engage in prior restraint, the prevention of publication of articles it might find offensive, and this was affirmed in the Near case, making (C) correct. Brown ended segregation, Betts provided lawyers for defendants who were mentally deficient, Sheppard established rules about protecting defendants from being tried in the media, and President Johnson was never involved in prior restraint issues.

  3. C Sometimes nicknamed “Gideon’s Trumpet,” the case of Gideon v. Wainwright established that all defendants have the right to counsel, so (C) is correct. Gideon overruled Betts, so (B) is wrong, and Powell (A) was overruled by Brady and is also wrong. Escobedo (D) said that the accused cannot be denied a lawyer after they ask for one, and Miranda (E) held that the arrested need to be informed of their rights.

  4. E In the early 1970s, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was being unfairly applied and banned it in the case of Furman v. Georgia, so (A) is incorrect. North Carolina tried to get capital punishment restored by making the death penalty mandatory in some cases, but in Woodson v. North Carolina, the Court struck down this approach, making (B) wrong. Finally, in Gregg v. Georgia, the Court allowed the death penalty to resume, making (E) correct. Bunn and Smith are both cases that deal with religious freedom and are incorrect.

PART III

The Princeton Review
AP U.S. Government and
Politics Practice Tests and
Explanations

13

PRACTICE TEST 1

Click here to download a PDF of Practice Test 1

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Two hours and 25 minutes are allocated for this examination: 45 minutes for Section I, which consists of multiple-choice questions; and 100 minutes for Section II, which consists of 4 mandatory essay questions. Section I is printed in this examination booklet. Section II is printed in a separate booklet.

SECTION I

Time—45 minutes

Number of questions—60

Percent of total grade—50

Section I of this examination contains 60 multiple-choice questions. Therefore, please be careful to fill in only the ovals that are preceded by numbers 1 to 60 on your answer sheet.

General Instructions

DO NOT OPEN THIS BOOKLET UNTIL YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO DO SO.

INDICATE ALL YOUR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS IN SECTION I ON THE SEPARATE ANSWER SHEET. No credit will be given for anything written in this examination booklet, but you may use the booklet for notes or scratchwork. After you have decided which of the suggested answers is best, COMPLETELY fill in the corresponding oval on the answer sheet. Give only one answer to each question. If you change an answer, be sure that the previous mark is erased completely.

Example:

Chicago is a

(A) state

(B) city

(C) country

(D) continent

(E) village

Use your time effectively, working as rapidly as you can without losing accuracy. Do not spend too much time on questions that are too difficult. Go on to other questions and come back to the difficult ones later if you have time. It is not expected that everyone will be able to answer all the multiple-choice questions.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Section I

Time—45 minutes

60 Questions

Directions: Each of the questions or incomplete statements below is followed by five suggested answers or completions. Select the one that is best in each case and then fill in the corresponding oval on the answer sheet.

  1. The Constitution as ratified in 1788 most clearly reflects the framers’ commitment to

(A) the idea of direct democracy

(B) the principle of limited government

(C) the abolition of slavery

(D) protecting the rights of the accused

(E) maintaining the primacy of the states

  2. Which of the following most accurately describes The Federalist Papers?

(A) The Federalist party platform during the presidency of John Adams, the first Federalist president

(B) A popular anti-British booklet of the pre-Revolutionary era

(C) A collection of essays arguing the merits of the Constitution

(D) A series of congressional acts defining the relationship between the federal and state governments

(E) The laws under which the South was governed during Reconstruction

  3. A Supreme Court that demonstrates a willingness to change public policy and alter judicial precedent is said to be engaging in

(A) judicial activism

(B) due process

(C) judicial restraint

(D) ex post facto lawmaking

(E) judicial review

  4. A writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court indicates that the Court

(A) will review a lower court decision

(B) has rendered a decision on a case

(C) has decided not to hear an appeal

(D) will recess until the end of the calendar year

(E) plans to overturn one of its previous rulings

  5. American foreign policy is directed primarily by the

(A) House of Representatives

(B) Senate

(C) president

(D) Supreme Court

(E) federal bureaucracy

“We conclude that in the field of education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”

  6. The Supreme Court issued this opinion in its ruling on which of the following cases?

(A) Gideon v. Wainwright

(B) Marbury v. Madison

(C) Engel v. Vitale

(D) Regents of University of California v. Bakke

(E) Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka

  7. Under which of the following circumstances is Congress LEAST likely to pass a bill the president has threatened to veto?

(A) The president’s public approval rating is extremely high.

(B) A failed attempt has been made to develop a compromise bill with the White House.

(C) The party controlling Congress is not the president’s party.

(D) The president has also expressed the possibility that he might not veto the bill.

(E) Congressional leaders believe they have the votes necessary to override a veto.

  8. Which of the following best describes the practice of “ticket splitting”?

(A) A presidential nominee selects a running mate who can appeal to voter groups whose support of the nominee is weak.

(B) A voter chooses the presidential nominee of one major party, but chooses congressional nominees of the other major party.

(C) A mayor orders the local police force to hand out fewer parking violations in the weeks leading up to the general election.

(D) A delegate to a national party convention supports the front-runner but remains uncommitted on the party platform.

(E) A member of Congress votes against legislation proposed by his or her party leader.

  9. The Rules Committee is considered among the most powerful in the House of Representatives because it has great power over the

(A) ethical conduct of House members

(B) selection of federal judges

(C) number of subcommittees that a standing committee may establish at any given time

(D) scheduling of votes and the conditions under which bills are debated and amended

(E) regulations governing federal elections

10. Compared with political parties in countries such as England and Israel, both of which have multiparty systems, American political parties are

(A) less interested in influencing the outcome of elections

(B) less clearly identified with consistent political ideologies

(C) less effective at raising money from political supporters

(D) better able to reflect the goals of their entire constituencies

(E) more likely to organize around a single issue or goal

11. Which of the following people would most likely be accused of influence peddling?

(A) A congressperson who retires to take a position teaching political science at a university

(B) A former president who advises a current president on a particular foreign policy issue

(C) A voter who researches the positions of all candidates in a race before choosing whom to support

(D) A judge who consistently hands down the maximum sentence to convicted felons

(E) An official who leaves the State Department to work as a paid consultant to foreign governments

12. The primary function of political action committees (PACs) is to

(A) contribute money to candidates for election

(B) coordinate local get-out-the-vote campaigns

(C) promote the defeat of incumbents in the federal and state legislatures

(D) organize protest demonstrations and other acts of civil disobedience

(E) contact Congress to suggest legislation

13. Voters who rely exclusively on television network news coverage of national elections are most likely to be aware of

(A) which special interest groups have endorsed which candidates

(B) the relative strength of each candidate’s support, as indicated by public opinion polls

(C) candidates’ positions on international issues

(D) candidates’ positions on domestic issues

(E) candidates’ congressional voting records

14. Which of the following describe limitations that may constitutionally be placed on freedom of speech and freedom of the press?

I. Under no circumstances may the government limit speech or censor the press.

II. The government may censor the press in the interest of national and military security.

III. The government may outlaw obscene publications.

IV. The government may prevent individuals from engaging in “offensive” speech.

(A) I only

(B) II only

(C) II and III only

(D) III and IV only

(E) II, III, and IV only

15. The Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction in all of the following types of cases EXCEPT

(A) if the United States is a party in the case

(B) in controversies in criminal law between a citizen and a state

(C) in controversies under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties

(D) if a case is between citizens from different states

(E) if cases arise under admiralty and maritime laws

16. Of the following, American federalism is most clearly exemplified by the

(A) system of checks and balances among the three branches of the national government

(B) process by which international treaties are completed

(C) special constitutional status of Washington, D.C.

(D) Tenth Amendment to the Constitution

(E) president’s power to grant reprieves and pardons

17. All of the following are specifically mentioned in the Constitution EXCEPT

(A) judicial review

(B) the national census

(C) rules of impeachment

(D) the State of the Union address

(E) length of term of federal judgeships

18. Which of the following correctly states the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries?

(A) Federal courts are higher courts than state courts and may overturn state decisions on any grounds.

(B) The two are entirely autonomous, and neither ever hears cases that originate in the other.

(C) The two are generally autonomous, although federal courts may rule on the constitutionality of state court decisions.

(D) State courts are trial courts; federal courts are appeals courts.

(E) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts.

19. The line-item veto was found unconstitutional because

(A) it gave executive powers to the legislature

(B) it gave legislative powers to the bureaucracy

(C) it gave legislative powers to the president

(D) it delegated too many powers to the states

(E) it permitted the Senate to use judicial review to reverse the House of Representatives

20. Among the executive branch’s checks on the legislative branch is the president’s power to

(A) call special sessions of Congress

(B) introduce bills to the floor of Congress

(C) address Congress during its debate on bills

(D) vote on acts of Congress

(E) disband congressional committees

21. The amount of access cabinet secretaries have to the president is most likely to be controlled by the

(A) vice president

(B) president’s chief of staff

(C) national security advisor

(D) chair of the Federal Reserve Board

(E) president’s press secretary

22. Unlike a treaty, an executive agreement

(A) is not binding

(B) does not involve international relations

(C) does not require the Senate’s approval

(D) can be enforced by the military

(E) automatically expires after one year

23. Successful candidates for the Republican presidential nomination tend to be more conservative than rank-and-file Republicans because

(A) moderate Republicans are less likely than conservative Republicans to gain widespread support in the general election

(B) most moderate Republicans have approved of the Democratic presidential candidate

(C) most rank-and-file Republicans do not care whether their party’s nominee shares their political views

(D) party activists, whose political participation is disproportionate to their numbers, tend to be very conservative

(E) the Republican Party does not allow rank-and-file members to participate in the selection of the party’s nominee

24. Those who argue that the House of Representatives is the government institution most responsive to the will of the public are most likely to cite as evidence the fact that

(A) congressional reelection campaigns are extremely costly

(B) term limits may soon restrict the number of years a congressperson may serve

(C) Congress has oversight power over many executive agencies

(D) average citizens may, on occasion, be called to testify before a congressional committee

(E) representatives must run for reelection every two years

25. Which of the following accounts for the fact that the power and prestige of the presidency have grown since 1932?

I. America’s increased prominence in international affairs

II. continually improved public confidence in the federal government

III. the New Deal and other programs that have expanded federal responsibility

IV. the president’s increased visibility, due to the development of mass media

(A) I only

(B) I and IV only

(C) I, III, and IV only

(D) II and IV only

(E) II, III, and IV only

26. Which of the following generally results when the Senate and House of Representatives pass different versions of the same bill?

(A) The president signs the version he prefers.

(B) The bill goes back to each house’s committee and restarts the legislative process.

(C) All amendments to the bill are invalidated, and the original version of the bill is sent to the president to sign.

(D) The Senate’s version of the bill is sent to the president because the Senate is the higher legislative body.

(E) The two legislative bodies form a conference committee.

27. Which of the following is the most accurate statement about the voting behavior of Americans over the age of 65?

(A) They are as, or more, likely to vote than are members of other age groups because they have received the highest level of formal education of all age groups.

(B) They are as, or more, likely to vote than are members of other age groups because they believe that they have a personal stake in government policy.

(C) They are less likely to vote than are members of other age groups because it is difficult for them to get to the polls.

(D) They are less likely to vote than are members of other age groups because they are less likely to be aware of election schedules.

(E) They are less likely to vote than are members of other age groups because very few senior citizens run for political office.

28. A member of which of the following demographic groups is most likely to support a Republican presidential candidate?

(A) White male

(B) White female

(C) African American, male or female

(D) Youths under the age of 25, male or female

(E) Individuals earning below poverty-level wages, male or female

29. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed to reinforce the

(A) presidential veto

(B) system of checks and balances

(C) states’ power to challenge federal regulation

(D) Fourteenth Amendment

(E) Taft-Hartley Act of 1947

30. Which of the following best illustrates a use of the elastic clause?

(A) The Supreme Court allows a lower court ruling to stand by refusing to hear an appeal.

(B) A congressional committee prevents the full chamber from voting on legislation by delaying its report.

(C) Congress passes legislation establishing a national speed limit.

(D) A member of the House of Representatives introduces a bill to increase federal income tax rates.

(E) A governor issues an executive order requiring all state employees to submit to drug testing.

31. According to the Federalist Papers, federalism has which of the following effects on political factions?

(A) It provides a structured environment in which factions may flourish.

(B) It limits the dangers of factionalism by diluting political power.

(C) It allows factions to dominate on the national level while limiting their influence on state governments.

(D) It eliminates any opportunity for factions to form.

(E) It prevents factions by declaring them illegal.

32. The Constitution, as originally ratified, addressed all of the following weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation EXCEPT the

(A) lack of a chief executive office

(B) national government’s inability to levy taxes effectively

(C) absence of a central authority to regulate interstate trade

(D) insufficiency of the government’s power to raise an army

(E) omission of a universal suffrage clause

33. Congress’s power to determine national policy

(A) usually increases as a president’s popularity decreases, and vice versa

(B) has declined steadily since the ratification of the Constitution

(C) is severely limited by the “elastic clause” of the Constitution

(D) increases during times of war

(E) stems primarily from its control over the judicial branch

34. In recent years, presidents have come to rely most heavily on the advice of

(A) the full cabinet

(B) the vice president

(C) congressional delegations

(D) the White House staff

(E) foreign ambassadors

35. Which of the following statements about the electoral college is correct?

(A) Each state must split its electoral votes among all the candidates that receive votes.

(B) Each state is equally represented in the electoral college.

(C) The electoral college was created by an amendment to the Constitution.

(D) The results of electoral college voting tend to distort the winner’s margin of victory, when compared with the popular vote for president.

(E) Each state’s delegation to the electoral college consists of that state’s U.S. senators and representatives.

36. Which of the following statements is true of congressional incumbents who run for reelection?

(A) Incumbent senators are more likely to be reelected than are incumbent members of the House of Representatives.

(B) Incumbents are prohibited by law from spending more on their reelection campaigns than their challengers spend.

(C) Incumbents have a great advantage over challengers because they are better known and can raise campaign funds more easily.

(D) Ever since the 1994 election, the majority of congressional incumbents have failed in their reelection attempts.

(E) Most incumbents who run for reelection are unopposed in the general election.

37. Before serving in the House of Representatives or Senate, the greatest number of federal legislators

(A) own and operate small businesses

(B) are professional athletes

(C) teach political science at the college level

(D) work as journalists

(E) earn law degrees

38. A member of the House of Representatives wishing to influence tax policy would most likely try to serve on which of the following committees?

(A) Commerce

(B) Ways and Means

(C) Education and the Workforce

(D) Resources

(E) Judiciary

39. The spoils system of awarding civil service jobs was replaced by the merit system as a result of the

(A) Truman Doctrine

(B) Fair Labor Standards Act of 1961

(C) National Industrial Recovery Act

(D) Civil Rights Act of 1964

(E) Pendleton Act of 1883

40. The boundary lines of congressional districts must be redrawn every 10 years to

(A) reflect population shifts indicated by the national census

(B) guarantee the turnover of the majority of congressional seats

(C) make sure each state’s congressional delegation exactly mirrors its residents’ party affiliations

(D) determine which party’s leader will be named Speaker of the House

(E) increase the number of female and minority members of Congress

41. The chart above best supports which of the following conclusions?

(A) No more than half of all eligible voters ever participate in federal elections.

(B) The number of registered voters always increases between elections.

(C) Voters have been more dissatisfied with their electoral choices in the last decade than they were during the 1970s.

(D) Voter turnout for midterm congressional elections is generally lower than it is for presidential elections.

(E) Voter turnout for the 1996 presidential election was the lowest for any presidential election during the twentieth century.

42. Interest groups representing businesspeople and investors are often among the most successful lobbying groups in Washington, DC, for all of the following reasons EXCEPT

(A) Such groups have the financial resources to mount sustained campaigns on their own behalf.

(B) Many such groups have been in existence for several decades or more, allowing them to master the legislative system and to develop close ties with legislators.

(C) In many districts, these groups’ constituents make up the majority of voters.

(D) These groups’ constituents contribute heavily to many legislators’ campaigns, and in doing so, gain greater access to legislators.

(E) Economic lobbyists often campaign for obscure or minute changes to tax law about which the public knows little, and therefore frequently meet little opposition.

43. Of the following groups that have traditionally supported the Democratic Party, which would LEAST likely be cited by someone arguing that the Democrats represented only liberal constituencies?

(A) White Southerners

(B) Labor union members

(C) African Americans

(D) Northern ethnic minorities

(E) Environmentalists

44. The greatest number of American voters identify themselves as

(A) liberal

(B) conservative

(C) progressive

(D) reactionary

(E) moderate

45. People who join a political party other than the one to which their parents belong most often do so because of

(A) peer pressure

(B) economic issues

(C) religious beliefs

(D) pressure from their employers

(E) issues of international politics

46. Which of the following best describes the fate of most popular third-party movements?

(A) They displace one of the two major parties and become major parties themselves.

(B) They are ultimately abandoned by the public because their politics are perceived as too radical.

(C) Their supporters become frustrated and withdraw from the political process.

(D) They remain active participants in the American political system indefinitely.

(E) They disintegrate when one or both of the major parties adopt the third party’s goals.

47. A constitutional amendment would be required to ban flag burning because that activity is currently protected by the right to

(A) due process

(B) assembly

(C) free exercise of religion

(D) protection against confiscation of private property

(E) free speech

48. The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona was based mainly on the

(A) Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws

(B) incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

(C) Eighth Amendment restriction against cruel and unusual punishment

(D) abolition of slavery by the Thirteenth Amendment

(E) full faith and credit clause of the Constitution

49. The Supreme Court has used the practice of selective incorporation to

(A) limit the number of appeals filed by defendants in state courts

(B) extend voting rights to racial minorities and women

(C) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law

(D) hasten the integration of public schools

(E) prevent the states from calling a constitutional convention

50. The largest portion of the federal budget covers the costs of

(A) national defense

(B) social welfare programs

(C) interest on the national debt

(D) entitlement programs

(E) tax collection

51. Which of the following accurately describes congressional committees?

I. The committee chairpersons always belong to the majority party.

II. Seats on each committee are divided between the two major parties in exact proportion to the parties’ representation in Congress.

III. They recommend whether Congress should pass various pieces of legislation, and those recommendations are always approved by the full congressional body.

IV. When a committee vote results in a tie, the vice president casts the tie-breaking vote.

(A) I only

(B) II only

(C) I and III only

(D) II and III only

(E) I, II, and IV only

52. The primary goal of the Gramm-Rudman Acts of 1985 and 1987 was to

(A) strengthen the military

(B) increase funding for social programs

(C) reduce the federal deficit

(D) limit the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy

(E) allow citizens easier access to government records

53. The term “iron triangle” refers to the interrelationship of the

(A) president, Congress, and the Supreme Court

(B) electorate, Congress, and political action committees

(C) local, state, and federal governments

(D) State Department, the Pentagon, and the National Security Council

(E) federal bureaucracy, congressional committees, and lobbyists

54. Media coverage of an issue is most likely to change public opinion when

(A) the issue directly affects few Americans and is one about which most Americans know very little

(B) coverage is extensive and is either overwhelmingly positive or overwhelmingly negative

(C) that issue is discussed in editorial columns and on broadcasts that emphasize news analysis, such as CNN’s Crossfire

(D) a major newspaper runs a series of articles analyzing the issue in depth

(E) the media provide a diverse range of perspectives on the issue

55. Which of the following most accurately describes the right of American citizens to privacy?