POLS 2311 Joseph Ignagni Notes
POLS 2311 Joseph Ignagni Notes POLS 2311
Popular in American Government and Politics
Popular in Political Science
This 44 page Study Guide was uploaded by Brianna Fragoso on Saturday January 2, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to POLS 2311 at a university taught by Dr. Ignagni in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 8 views.
Reviews for POLS 2311 Joseph Ignagni Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/02/16
CONSTITUTION WILL NOT BE ON QUIZ. Politics: Authoritative:power or authority legitimacy behind it. Allocation:To grant or pass out or distribute or give out.of value:Resources, Money, Land, Rights An authoritative entity distributing resources and deciding who gets what. Social Contract Theory: There is an implied contract between the government and the people. The people allow the government to be in charge or give them power to rule but they expect something in return. 3 potential functions of government: 1. To protect people from each other and from outsiders. 2. To provide other public services. 3. Protecting individual rights and liberties. Lecture II 1/21/14 The Framework for Political Decision Making (1) Power: The ability to inﬂuence or control a decision. What matters? Who has inﬂuence? Who really has power? (2) Goals: What are their objectives, motivations, wants, ambitions, policy preferences, desires? (How badly do they want it? What’s number one on the list of things they want?) (3) Rules: What are the rules of the game? What are the rules of the situation? Will rules help them or interfere with them getting what they want? Regulations, Procedures, Laws, Requirements. Anything tied to their behavior that they have to follow. (4) Context: What is going on? What’s the situation they’re facing? What’s the environment? Are people angry? Are people happy? Is there a war happening? What’s the state of the political world right now? Are the people on the President’s side or Congresses’ side? What’s the historical context? Current information and a history that led to this information. (1) Power: Example: Situation: Afgan war. Most unpopular war. President dominates international politics and foreign aﬀairs. - Has the Power on when the troops leave. He talks to the joint Chiefs of Staﬀ, the army, the military. Situation: Abortion - Right to terminate pregnancies. The Supreme Court - Has the power. What they say goes.The President has no power over this topic. Situation: Dallas Cowboys were deciding where they were going to play. Didn’t like the Irving old Cowboys stadium. Study Jerry Jones, owner of Cowboys. He has the power on where they would move. Study the mayors of the diﬀerent cities. They made bids and talked to Jerry Jones, and Arlington won they had the best bid. Didn’t matter what the President, Congress, or Supreme Court thought. (2) Goals: Example: Situation: Gun Control - Right to bear arms; How far does it extend? Can you limit that right? American Public Opinion: Most Americans on certain topics want more gun control. Background checks: at gun shows, gun shops? American’s consistently say yes I want more background checks. 70% After school shooting it jumped to 80% Extended Ammo: 55%-65% want more limitations. They don’t want to get rid of the right but they want to limit it more. SOME more gun control. Every time they try to do this, it fails in Congress. Why didn’t it pass? Special Interest Group: National Riﬂes Association. (1.5% of America, 5 million members) They are against gun control. They are the epitome and possibly the most powerful interest group in the US. The NRA oﬀers Congress people and state legislatures money. This is why Supreme Court listens to 1.5% vs 75%. They win 98% of the time. They oﬀer them money for their campaign, they oﬀer them free workers, If you don’t vote with us we’ll oﬀer it to your opponent. The 75% doesn’t care are much as the 1.5%. 75% is a lukewarm majority. 1.5% is INTENSE. In America a INTENSE minority, is stronger than a LUKEWARM majority. (3) Rules: Most people think that rules are fair and even handed in politics when it’s the opposite. You need to know what the rules are because they favor one side or the other. They always matter or make a diﬀerence. Example: You’ve been asked to go to a city. The city is decided whether or not to build a dam. We’ve been asked as political scientist, we don’t know how the people feels about this dam? So we need to see how the city is going to vote. We’re doing a survey. 3 groups in the city: (1 preference) People who want no dam - 20% (2) Small Dam (3) Large (1) People who want a small dam - 35% (2) Large Dam (3) No dam (1) People who want a large dam - 45% (2) Small Dam (3) No dam Plurality election: Whatever option gets the most votes wins. (If they did this type of voting the city would build a LARGE dam) Binary election: You don’t put all the items together at one time. You take 2 at a time, and then take run oﬀs. You only consider 2 options at a time. Small vs Large ﬁrst. Group 1 votes SMALL, Group 2 votes SMALL, Group 3 votes LARGE. SMALL WINS. 55% to 45% No vs Small. Group 1 votes NO, Group 2 votes SMALL, Group 3 votes SMALL. SMALL WINS 80% to 20%. The rules of voting determined the winner. Reference: (1) Power: Voters have the power otherwise if the Mayor knows that he can change the outcome by using diﬀerent types of elections. Majority rule winner: An option that can defeat every other option in a two way election. If SMALL when compared to everything wins, it must be the choice the majority wants. 2 potential problems with MJW: (1) 3 people city council. Situation: Building recreation center at the park. A - B-Ball B- Pool C- Tennis Court D- Track Person 1: (1) A (2) B (3) C (4) D Person 2: (1) C (2) B (3) A (4) D Person 3: (1) D (2) B (3) C (4) A Binary: A vs B (1) A (2) B (3) B B wins. B vs C (1) B (2) C (3) B B wins. B vs D (1) B (2) B (3) D B wins. MJW. Not really. No one picked B as their ﬁrst choice. It was a compromise choice. No one hates it. But no one really wants it. ————————————————————————————————— ——————— Diﬀerent city wants a dam: 3 groups in the city: (1st preference) People who want no dam - 45% (2) Small Dam (3) Large (1st preference) People who want a small dam - 10% (2) Large Dam (3) No dam (1st preference) People who want a large dam - 45% (2) No Dam (3) Small dam S vs L (1) S - 45% (2) S - 10% (3) L - 45% S wins. 55% S vs No (1) No - 45% (2) S - 10% (3) No - 45% No wins 90% This town will not build a dam. No vs L (1) No - 45% (2) L - 10% (3) L - 45% L wins. There is no majority rule winner. (2) The order of the election determines who wins. ————————————————————————————————— ——————— 1/23/14 Electoral College/Voting system: The more populous states get more votes. Ex. Michigan gets 16 votes. Texas gets 38. Where do those numbers come from? How many people they have in Congress determines the number. 14 House reps. 2 senators. TX sends 36 House Rep. and 2 senators. In the system who ever wins the state wins ALL of the Electoral college votes. Ex. Candidate MI (10 mil) (16 el. votes) TX (26 mil)(38 el. vote) Total Pop Vote Total El. V. A: 10 mil pop vote. 16 el. 12.999.999 mil pv. 0 el. 23 mil votes. 16 el. B: 0 pop vote. 0 el. 13 mil. pv. 38 el. 13 mil votes. 38 el. At Large District and Single Member Districts: Does everyone get to vote for all the seats - AT LARGE Each section of the city votes for their corresponding seat: SINGLE MEMBER You cut up the city into districts. Each district can vote for one seat vs. 4 seats in city council. If you live in section X you vote for section X only. (1) Segregated City. White people Section 1, 2, 4. Black people Section 4. Seat 1: W vs. B Seat 2: W vs. B Seat 3: W vs B Seat 4: W vs B At Large: Seat 1: W wins 75% Seat 2: W wins 75% Seat 3: W wins 75% Seat 4: W wins 75% 3/4 votes each time. 4-0 Single Member: Seat 1: W wins 100% Seat 2: W wins 100% Seat 3: B wins 100% Seat 4: W wins 100% 3-1 ————————————————————————————————— —————— (4) Context: FDR Executive orders after Pearl Harbor: (1) Japanese who lived on W Coast have curfew (2) If you had any Japanese blood in you. You cannot live on the W Coast. (3) If you were a Japanese descendant period they put them Concentration camp. 120,000 people. 90,000 were US Citizens. Never charged for a crime. No legal right to hold them. The context allowed the Gov’t to arrest based on fear and race. Vietnam: 10 years no real winner. Country becomes communist 2 years after the war everyone is bitter about it. Nicaragua looks like a Vietname war we don’t want to do it again. R. Reagan wanted to go in and ﬁght but no one wanted to. Reagan invades another country without permission. It’s a small island. Wins a war in 24 hours. America is on a winning streak. Let’s invade Nicaragua now. Bush 2 wins in a week.. Panama.. etc. Iraq 1st war took a month. On a winning streak. Let’s go again. Stuck in a 10 year war. 1/28/14 Constitution History: US Constitution not the 1st Constitution the US have lived under. The ﬁrst is the Articles of the Confederation: (1781-1787) The STATES were very powerful under the Articles, the NATIONAL government barely had any power at all. The 13 states weren’t team players, the country was in a state of chaos. Was like 13 little countries that didn’t want a boss. Every state controlled their own trade. Every state could have their own currency. There was no executive branch, no President. No courts, no branch, no supreme court. Only one branch Legislature. Congress was weak. No Power to Tax. They worried that Britain would come back and take over because they were very split. The delegates were sent to amend the Articles of Confederation. Instead they wrote a new constitution. Legally they had no right to do so. Several delegates left when they voted to start over. Current Constitution: Themes of Constitution; (Framers were scared to death of the average people and didn’t think they should be trouble Constitution showed the general distrust they had for the masses) Congress: Legislative Branch A: House of Representatives; Was going to be chosen by the “people” “voters” Only White Males who were Property Owners could vote. About 93% of people in America couldn’t vote. B: Senate; State Legislatures decided who was going to be the representatives in Senate President: Executive Branch Do American’s elect the President of the US? Technically American’s vote does not count. Every state gets so many votes.. Electoral College… There are 38 votes from 38 people. Only 38 people count in TX. They don’t have to vote the state voted. They can write down anybody they want. Supreme Court: Judicial Branch Decided by Senate. Not decided by Interest Groups. Federalist Paper #10 : James Madison “Factions" (Interest Groups) Factions (IG): Citizens who are either a minority or a majority who are united by some common impulse of passion. (He says we should break them and smash them. There is no trust that average people can make decisions.) Federalist Paper #51: James M.: “If men were angels no government would be necessary.” JM: “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition." Always leaders who try to take over. So you have to make sure no one becomes too powerful. No dictator, so we have balance. Terms: Federalism: Division between National (Central) and State (Local). Now National is more powerful than State. Separation of Powers: Divisions between 3 branches of Government. Leg. Exec. Jud. State and National have these 3 branches. Checks and Balances: The power for the other branches to check on them to make sure they don’t do something wrong. No one can dominate within their own area completely. “Our framers created a system that preferred ineﬃciency to tyranny.” We would rather nothing gets done than too much gets done. Everyone has to sign oﬀ on something happening. So you know it probably a good idea. With one person it’s eﬃcient, everything gets done. It’s fast and quick. What’s happening today would not be shocking to the founding fathers. We actually have a conservative form of government. They didn’t want very much to change. It’s so hard to change anything in America. 1/30/14 Great Compromise: More populous states vs Less populous states. Congress: Who gets to send people to Congress? More populous states get more people in Congress. Small states say no we should all get the same amount of people in Congress. Virginia Plan: Big State vs New Jersey Plan: Small State Compromise: The more people you have in your state the more people you haven the HOUSE In SENATE everyone has the same amount of people. Separation of Power: It’s not an even separation of power. Originally this is how they arranged the powers in the Constitution CONGRESS (1) Now LOST power PRESIDENT (2) Now GAINED power SUPREME COURT (3) Now GAINED power Federalist Papers - They wrote these as propaganda papers to explain the Constitution to American’s. To get them to accept it. They were not written during the convention. There was no Bill of Rights in the Constitution originally. The new government seem scary because there was no Rights for the people. The promise of the Bill of Rights is what saves the constitution. James Madison would be surprised to ﬁnd out how powerful interest groups are. Of course he would be surprised with the civil liberties and diversity of America. Executive power has changed; he is so much more powerful than they ever wanted or wanted. Same for Supreme Court. The Democrats and Republicans would shock him, because everything is split into 2 diﬀerent sides. Dem vs Rep. Constitution has been Amended 27 times. 10 times have been the Bill of Rights. 3 reasons we haven’t changed the Constitution much over the years: (1) It’s just an unbelievably great Constitution (possibly true) (2) General or vague at several key points. Vagueness provides ﬂexibility. (3) It’s really hard to amend it. How to amend the Constitution: (A) (1) 2/3 of Congress can propose a constitutional amendment. 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate has to want to change it. (2) Ratiﬁed by 3/4 of State Legislatures. 3/4 of the States have to agree. or (3) Ratiﬁed by 3/4 of State Convention. (B) (1) 2/3 of State Legislatures apply to Congress to call for a Constitutional Convention. (2) Congress calls for a National Constitutional Convention. (3) Convention proposes an Amendment or Amendments. (4) They approve it at the Convention. (5) Ratiﬁed by 3/4 of State Legislatures. 3/4 of the States have to agree. or (6) Ratiﬁed by 3/4 of State Convention. All of the Amendments we’ve had except for one have gone route A2. One other time it went A3. It was about Prohibition the time it went to A3. Route B has never been used because (1) State Legislatures all have to get together and talk about the same topic at the same time and (2) The last time there was a Constitutional Convention they made a new Constitution. Once they get there they can make a whole new constitution and if it is approved by the state legislature or Convention then there would be a new Constitution. Constitution has proposed a new amendment over 11,000 times. There has only been 27. 10 bill of rights. So 17. Charles Beer (Ignangni) American’s tend to talk about the Constitution in terms of Democracy and Politics. It’s not so much about that. It’s really about economics. The Framers were really a bunch of selﬁsh people who were only thinking about themselves. They thought they were about to lose everything so they were trying to protect that. They wanted to safeguard their little place in society, they weren’t thinking about others rights and freedoms. 02/04/14 Bill of Rights; Civil Liberties Bill of Rights was passed in order to ratify the Constitution. James Madison proposes the Bill of Rights. (Mel Brooks: History of the world) Bill of Rights: 10 Amendments James Madison originally proposed 17 Amendments. 5 of them die in Congress. 12 go to the states. Must be ratiﬁed by 3/4th of the States. 2 don’t make it. Arguments against Bill of Rights: (1) We do not need it and it gives the Constitution a bad reputation. A: Articles of Confederation ( No new Constitution ) B: New Constitution The idea they thought the people had was that the Constitution is taking away their rights. But it wasn’t. People couldn’t read to see what was in the Constitution. You’re causing panic by arguing about the Bill of Rights. (2) What if the Bill of Rights is not perfect. Bill of Rights protectts people’s rights from which level of government? First word is Congress. National or Federal.State government can take away your rights. Duel lever lights. 1925 Gitta V. New York - Gitta was a socialist, began telling people we need to change the government, wrote poetry that advocated the government. - New York law says you can’t advocate to over throw the government. - Most of the court says he should go to jail but then someone says, “You have 1st amendment protection, freedom of speech + Press through the 14th Amendment’s process clause. - This is when the Bill of Rights begins to apply to the state government. - It makes a diﬀerence because Amendments 13-15 are called the Civil War amendments. They are amides at the States. 14th: No state shall deprive any person at life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Incorporation doctrine: taking the Bill of Rights and placing them into the 14th Due process Amendment: AKA Selective Incorporation: only speech and press at ﬁrst were moved into the 14th amendment. - 4th Amendment was incorporated in the 1960s into the 14th Amendment. Local police could break into a house without a search warrant but the F.B.I silver plater problem. -2nd Amendment was added with the 14th in 2010. 2/6/14 Freedom of Speech: - Supreme court doesn’t here a case about Freedom of Speech until 1919. Schenck v. US - Mr. Schench passed out pamphlets about draft being unconstitutional. - Federal law say, “You could not abstruct the recruitment or enlistment of the military. - Incorporation Doctrine wasn’t until 1925. But didn’t need it because he has his ﬁrst Amendment. Supreme Court hands out the “Near and Present danger” test You are free to speak unless you create a clear and present danger. 1969: Test for Clear and Present Danger For there to be a clear and present danger all four must be true: (1) Advocacy - Strongly believe something (2) Likely to produce - Odds are in the favor 50% change or higher it will happen. (3) Imminent - It’s going to happen now or it is about to happen (4) Lawless Action - Must be against the law. - Every case after Schenck, the Supreme court found a clear and present danger. We don’t have true Freedom of Speech. Congress shall make no law against freedom of speech. - Market place of ideas. - People will agree with goods ideas and bad ideas will eventually disappear. 2/11/14 Symbolic Speech: Nonverbal; Speaking through symbols. Texas vs Johnson (1989): Dallas, TX; Took part in 1984 Ronald Regan was being renominated for President. A guy takes down the American ﬂag and burned it. There was a Texas law that said you could not desecrate or destroy a vieterated object. - Johnson argued that he was making a political statement and it violated his 1st Amendment. - Through the 14th Amendment Texas can’t stop his 1st amendment. - He wins; Supreme court agrees that TX can’t stop his right to make his political statement. -90-95% of th country hated his courts decision. Supreme Court says obscene speech is not protected. Roth v US (1957) - Obscene Speech falls outside the 1st Amendment right. -You can get in trouble for publishing or giving a speech. -James Jay wrote Ulysses and was considered obscene. - Obscene test: “Roth Test” (1) Material must appeal to the pursuant interest. (2) The Material must be utterly without deeming social value. (3) Should be judge with National Standard. - The test was a complete disaster. People that made porn got around the test. - 1960: People would show a normal clip of a movie then porn after it showed that ﬁlm had some value. Miller vs. California (1973) - Miller Test: - Is still the test that is used today. If you are arrested for showing obscene work (1) Whether the work when taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientiﬁc value. (2) You can use local standards Jenkins v Georgia (1974) - A small town in Georgia though a movie was obscene but there was a bunch of big stars, big name director and was a big hit with the rest of the country. - News papers think it’s one of the best movies of the year. - Supreme court said it wasn’t obscene. 2/13/14 Freedom of Press: Prior Restraint aka Censorship: Preventing materials from being published or distributed before the fact. “Government says: Nobody can see it so they shut it down before anyone get’s a chance to read it.” Supreme Court Case: Near vs. MI (1931) Heard the ﬁrst case about prior restraint. Press wrote stories about mayor and state oﬃcials were corrupt, taking bribes. The government shut down the newspaper. Opening question is Prior Restraint ever allowed? Supreme Court answered that question as yes, it is allowed under certain circumstances. Ex. Troop movements: If we’re at war a newspaper cannot say where troops are going. If people could die you can stop it. Ex. Espionage details: Here are where all the spies in North Korea and their names and where they live. US Supreme Court has never shut down a newspaper. Other lower courts have. Back when we were in the Vietnam war. Daniel Ellsberg works for the Pentagon with high level security clearance. Our government tells him, to look over all the papers we have on the Vietnam war and write up a synopsis of the Vietnam war. (Top secret espionage, weapon info, war movements etc) They wanted a condensed version of it. He realized the public had been lied to about the Vietnam war. Lies he found: Reported: American troops killed 500 in a village. And only 2 Americans were killed. Truth: Americans killed 100. And 20 Americans were killed. Golf of Tonkin incident. Why we got into the war. Reported: Last night our troops were in the Gulf of Tonkin. Our ships were in international waters. We were doing nothing wrong. And we got attacked by the North Vietnamese. America cannot let anyone ever attack us in an unprovoked attack. Next day we begin bombing and attacking Vietnam. Truth: Ships were in Vietnamese waters spying on them. We invaded their territory they had every right to attack. They hear a noise. They think the Vietnamese are attacking them. Nothing happens. They check all the ships and there is no damage. The ships engine probably backﬁred. He takes these papers and gives them to the New York Times. The NY Times gets these papers and publishes the story. No one knows it’s about to happen. Richard Nixon rushes to court and asks for Prior Restraint and says NY Times cannot publish anymore stories. He says stop the press. The lower court orders for them to be stopped. Daniel Elsberg takes the papers and gives it to the Washington Post. They go to newspaper to newspaper giving them the papers. And the lower courts keeps stopping them temporarily. This case goes to the US Supreme Court. Nixon argues the press needs to be stopped. Case name: NY Times vs US (1971) Ny Times is the most powerful newspaper in the world vs the President of the US. Titans ﬁghting! Supreme Court does not stop the press. They say publish away. The argument was: Yea this is embarrassing. It shows the President Johnson, Nixon, Generals has lied about the war. But it’s a history. No one is going to die tomorrow because of this story. Too bad. AKA Pentagon Papers Case Daniel Ellsberg broke the law. He gets charged. He’s found not guilty because Nixon. The same plumbers who broke into watergate broke into Ellsbergs psychiatrists oﬃce, stole his ﬁle, and then they messed everything up in the oﬃce, they take his ﬁle and give it to newspapers across the country. The goal was to discredit Ellsberg. When they charged Ellsberg with the crime, they said the Governments crime was worse than his. So he gets away with it. Libel: Any publication or writing that falsely injures the reputation of another. Defamation by printer writing. Can you punish them later for what they said? The law changes depending on who you are. (1) Public Oﬃcials: People who hold public oﬃce. Ex. President, Mayor, City Council Someone who makes public policy. If you run for a position, even if you lose, you’re a public oﬃcial. (2) Public Figures: Reality TV stars, TV stars, Musicians, etc. (3) Private Citizens: Us NY TIMES Vs Sullivan (1964) In this case the Supreme Court created the Actual Malice test. This test becomes whether the article shows actual malice. Actual Malice: It means that the statements made were either deliberately false or made with reckless disregard for the truth. The Actual Malice test only applies to the ﬁrst two categories. Public oﬃcials and public ﬁgures. If a public oﬃcial or famous person doesn’t like an article, what it takes for them to win a case they have to prove that the statements that were made have ACTUAL MALICE. They lied on purpose or they didn’t even try at all to be correct. Always bet that a famous person will lose a libel case. Actual Malice is almost impossible to prove. You have to prove that someone was out to get you. Argument is: We want the press to cover our politicians. If a newspaper got a story wrong and they sue for $10 mil then all the newspapers would be shut down. 2/18/14 Freedom of Religion Comes from First Amendment. 2 Clauses together should ideally lead to freedom of religion. Free exercise clause: Was intended to prohibit the government from penalizing individuals or religions for their beliefs and religious practices. (No stick) Establishment clause: Was intended to prohibit the government from establishing or possibly encouraging religion. (No carrot) (1) No stick: Government should allow you to believe what you believe and practice it how you want. Government is not to be involved. No punishment. Freely exercised. (2) No carrot: Not supposed to feed or encourage religion. Government is supposed to be neutral. Our history includes the government being anything but neutral. Sometimes it’s not clear what neutrality is. Free Exercise: - Very important to founding fathers. Reason they came to the US was for religious freedom. Make a bet. Ask somebody what is the 1st topic the 1st Amendment talks about. They’ll say Freedom of Speech. It’s Freedom of Religion. Because of this clause, American’s are allowed to do things that they otherwise would not be allowed to do. If you can argue it’s because of religion, you can get away with things. Ex. A case from California. Young man was depressed and suicidal. He went to see his minister. He told his minister that I’m thinking about killing myself but I’m afraid to go to hell. The minister said no you won’t, God will forgive you. The man left his oﬃce and went out and killed himself. His parents sued the minister for malpractice. They don’t win the case. Had they sued a counsellor or psychiatrist that wasn’t religiously aﬃliated they would’ve won the case. You can’t tell a minister that he gave bad religious advice. It’s his right to practice his religion the way he wants to. You cannot punish him. Ex. Nebraska has a law that says you have to have your photograph on your drivers license. A woman went to get her drivers license and she said I don’t want you to take my picture. Photographs are sinful because it’s a graven image. Only God should be able to make your image. Machine is acting like God. She has no picture on her divers license. Ex. Many cities have a ban on door to door solicitation. Those rules apply except for religious purposes. Jehovah’s Witnesses. There is no scenario in which you can tell them they can’t knock on doors. Ex. This man claimed he could heal people of any sickness or disease. No matter what it was. If you would write him and send him money. He would pray for you or send you blessed water. He guaranteed 100% God will heal you. Some people didn’t get healed. They sue, said it was fraud. If it was any other company, he would have lost the case. But because he was SINCERE in believing he could heal you, they couldn’t sue him. Ex. In many states gambling is illegal. Winning money from a game of chance. Church bingo is not illegal. Raising money to practice their religion. Buy more Bibles, build a bigger church, send missionaries. Churches do not pay taxes; No stick. Ex. When we had a draft. Claim it’s against your religious belief. If you have evidence that it’s part of your religion. If your religion doesn’t ban war then you still have to go. What does your church say about war? Conscientious objector. Ex. Polygamy is illegal. If someone wanted to prosecute them they probably would lose. But it’s still illegal. No one arrests them though. Ex. Church using drugs. Still illegal. You would get arrested. Ex. Church in Florida would slaughter animals in front of everyone as part of their services. The city banned killing animals as part of their services. Supreme Court says it’s okay kill the animals. Ex. Amish: Nothing modern after 18??. No TV, no APPLE tech, no electricity. Horses, Buggies. You don’t shave your beard. Battle last year, they held down the other group and cut oﬀ their beards. Etc, you’ve watched Family Guy. Wisconsin has a law saying all children must go to school until their at least 16 years old. The Amish are like no. We need them around the farm. We need workers. We need to teach them how to be mothers and how to be farmers. At 14 they’re going to be full time workers in our home. That’s all the education they need. We don’t want our kids exposed to the evils of high school. Ex. Amish: Group of Amish people said we don’t want to pay Social Security, because of our religious beliefs. Social Security shows a lack of faith. We don’t want a safety net. We don’t want the money back. We will never collect it. God will protect us or our neighbors our family will take care of us. In our culture and religious we trust in God and in our brothers and sisters in Christ. Supreme Court says PAY UP. Is any of this fair? Can the government tell churches no they can’t do anything inside their free exercise or that yes they have to do something? Free exercise is not a clear black and white issue. Establishment: The government should not be connected to school prayer only with Public Schools. Separation of Church and State. They used to start school with a prayer or read a verse from a Bible. It’s illegal because the school is paid for by the state. The government has no role in trying to persuade anyone of religious beliefs. If you went to high school and you had a moment of silence before the day began it was illegal. It’s saying here’s a time to pray so it’s illegal. If you’re on a sports team and your coach says lets pray before we play. These cases are the most ignored because (1) No one cares (2) No one turns them in (3) A lot of people don’t know it’s illegal. There’s always prayer before the meet in CONGRESS. We have ministers in the Army, we have ministers in prison. Is it a violation of church and state? Yes. It’s not consistent. T est 2: Lecture 11: 2/25/14 Civil Rights or Equal Rights Equal Rights: Right of every person to equal protection of the law and equal access to societies opportunities and facilities. Discrimination is at the heart of civil rights. The amendments should have made blacks and whites equal. But people found ways around the amendments. Treatment of Blacks: Civil War Amendments: 13th - 1865 - Ends slavery in the US. Makes it unconstitutional for slavery in the US. No one can be a slave. 14th - 1868 - Has two parts: (1) Due Process (2) Equal protection. 15th - 1870 - A person could not be denied the right to vote because of their ethnicity. (You know how long it took for women to be able to vote? 50 years? 19th amendment) Lecture 12: 2/27/14 Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - In the state of LA the state passed a law saying that blacks and whites cannot be in the same cars of trains. Mr. Plessy got onto a white car and got arrested for going onto a white car because they said he was black. Going from Baton Rouge to New Orleans. What made Mr. Plessy black? One drop of black blood made you black. 14th Amendment - Equal protection clause. His lawyers argument was you’re treating him diﬀerently than white people because he’s black. That violates the equal protection clause. The Supreme Court said that what LA was doing DID NOT violate the 14th equal protection clause. SEPARATE BUT EQUAL Everyone got equal treatment, everyone got to the same place at the same time. Jim Crow Laws - Laws of segregation. They separate people based on race. Jim Crow wasn’t a real person. Jim Crow was a character from a show that travels from town to town in the south. He wore black face. It was completely racist. He portrayed as a dumb guy who always got things wrong. There were thousands of Jim Crow laws that were passed in the South. Education: Black and White schools, Black and white bathrooms, Black and white drinking fountains, black and white separate levels in theaters ex. To Kill a Mocking Bird Buses: Blacks sat in the back, Whites sat in the front. Black and white hospitals, Black and White beaches, in courthouses they had separate Bibles for blacks and whites to swear on. How equal were the facilities? They were not equal. They were never equal. The white cars on the trains were plushier classier ﬁrst class they got food service. The black cars were not. The white schools got new books, got 5x as much money. Black schools got the hand me down books, and barely any money. The white hospitals had several doctors and equipment, the black hospitals had one doctor and only open on the weekends. How’d they get away with that? The judges didn’t want to be fair. The families would sue saying my black child is going to a black school and the white schools are better. Judges would say why do children go to school? To get an education. There’s education going on at both schools. I can’t judge which is better. So it’s good enough. It wasn’t separate but equal. It was separate but you get something. Not the best, not equal but it’s enough. It was WHITE and then NON WHITE. IT was also hispanic, asian, anything not white. Anyone who complained was viewed as whiny. The 14th amendment became a joke. Right before you get to brown there were a few cases where the Supreme Court says the black family wins. All of the victories before Brown involve Law school or Grad school. Mr. Gaines lived in MI and he wanted to go to Law School. MI only had a white law school. So he applies to the Uni. of MI and the state tells him no black person can go to that school but if you want we’ll help you go out of state or to Canada. The Supreme Court says that’s not Separate but Equal. There was no black law school, so they can’t separate it. So they said either immediately build a black law school or accept him. He disappears 3 months later. His body was never found. OU and UT Austin. They wanted to go to Law School and there was no black law school. TX and OK got the memo they need to build a black law school. A black student applied there was no black law school yet. They accept him. They treat him awfully. He had to sit oﬀ in a corner by himself during class. He couldn’t use the library normally, he had to put in a slip and the librarian would bring him the book. He couldn’t eat together. He sued and the Supreme Court judged in his favor saying that wasn’t equal because part of law school is associating and talking with other students. Brown v Board of Education (1954) This involved lower schools. Elementary to high school. Little girl wants to go to white school. They say it’s not fair. Supreme Court agrees. Supreme Court OVERTURNS PLESSY V FERGUSSON + SEPARATE BUT EQUAL They say SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS INHERENTLY UNEQUAL - You cannot make them equal by there very nature they are unequal. They never come out equal. If you build a million dollar high school for whites and if you build a million dollar high school for whites it’s still unequal. Because one race will always know that the other race doesn’t want to be near them. One race is choosing not to be near the other race. It’s psychological saying we’re better than you. A “Badge of inferiority” Most famous footnotes in Supreme Court history: "We base this on modern authority.” - Social Science research. These research projects study how blacks felt inferior. It’s called the Doll example. What they did was they would bring these children in a gym. These researchers were sitting at a desk. They would send in kids one at a time. They were 5 or 6 years old. They handed them two dolls they were identical dolls. Identical in every way except skin color. They would have them play with them. They asked them which one do you like better? They did it over and over again. The results of this study was: White children liked the white doll. Black children liked the white doll. Like 87%. The conclusion of this was even by the age of 5 Blacks were treated so badly that they preferred white over black. The Supreme Court knew that they were walking into a mine ﬁeld. Possibly the most controversial decision of the Supreme court ever. It turned over society. They knew not just a lot of average citizens weren’t going to like it. But a lot of government oﬃcials weren’t going to like it. Earl Warren;Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: Before the announced the decision of Brown, he gets invited to a white house dinner. Dwight Eisenhower was the President. Eisenhower had chosen Warren to be on the Supreme Court a year before. At the end of the dinner the President says can I talk to you Chief Justice? The President says I know you’re about to make this decision of Brown v B of Education. Earl I sure hope that you’re not even considering overturning separate but equal. Do you know what a disaster that will be? There will be confusion, killings, lynchings, etc. Please tell me you’re not considering it. He makes this racist comment: “The South, there’s good people in the South all they’re worried about is there little white girls away from these overgrown negro boys.” He doesn’t tell him what he’s going to do. But he knows he’s not going to get help from the White House on this decision. The Supreme Court does something it never does. There’s no other time you ever do. They say this is the law and here’s the law it’s backed up by. It happens immediately. They say the winner is Brown. But no one has to do anything yet. We want both sides to come back a year from now and we’ll tell you what to do next. They gave the South some breathing room. That never happens Board of Education thought they were going to lose. The lawyer was scared that the Supreme Court was going to throw out separate but equal. They said okay you caught us. The idea is still a great idea. We’ll make it equal we’ll spend the same amount of money for blacks too. Supreme Court said NO. Brown 2 (1955): We want you to integrate it. Black and white kids together. We know its hard. You don’t have to do it tomorrow morning. You have to do it with “All deliberate speed.” The reactions were not nice: Everything Eisenhower said would happen did happen. IT was WE’RE NOT GOING TO DO IT, not WE’RE WORKING ON IT. Black families would sue, and politicians would say things for votes, but when it got to court they said oh we need more time. Brown didn’t change things over night. It feuled the civil rights movement it was a great moral victory. But in reality did next to nothing in 1955. Ten years later 1964, the 11 Southern States that fought for the confederacy, 98% of all black children went to 100% all black or minority schools. Linda Brown won the case but kept going to black schools. Alexander v Holmes County Board of Education (1969): The Supreme Court in the Alexander Case says TIME IS UP. We’ve given you 15 years to work on this problem. If you haven’t done it yet we don’t think you’re trying. AND if anyone wants to sue you government oﬃcials because their children can’t go to a white school we’re telling you they’re going to win. Integration happened immediately (1970) Recently read about a young man who grew up in the city of Chicago. He went to public schools from Kindergarten to 12th grade. He’s black. Graduates from high school. In his 13 years of public education he never went to a school with a single white person. The neighborhood was mainly black, it was a minority neighborhood. The exceptions went to Private school. De Jure segregation: Segregation by Law. De Facto segregation: Segregation by circumstances, or by facts. 03/04/14 Milliken v Bradley (1974) Brown 3: The original girl in Brown 1 - her daughter ended up going to a minority school. She sued because she was going to a minority school but because of De Facto segregation. Never gets to the supreme court. Milliken v Bradley involved Detroit, Chicago. Detroit had the worse race riot in the history of the US. The military had to get involved. When the rioting was over many white people ﬂed to the suburbs. “White Flight” Suburbs were started because of this. The population of Detroit was about 1.9 million. The population of Detroit today is about 700,000. Over a million people left Detroit. It’s the only city in the history of the world that was over a million that’s under a million now. It went from the 4th biggest city in the US to being the size of Ft Worth. It looks like a war zone took place in downtown Detroit, mansions were torn down and burnt down and the remains are still there. Detroit decides to do something illegal to try to stop white people from leaving. Detroit created schools that today you probably call magnet schools, but only white people got to go to them. They told them don’t leave Detroit we’ll put you in school with only white people. People who were afraid of black people were happy for the school. The was De Jure segregation. Black people caught on pretty quickly, they sued the city saying you’ve created little white schools. Detroit makes the argument that if we don’t make schools like that then all the white people will leave. Help us here judge. The lower court federal judge made this ruling: He said both are segregation we should do something to solve the problem. He said I’m going to make the entire area of Detroit one monster school district. Therefore I’m going to send kids anywhere within this school district. Every single suburb in the area. 60 miles in any direction. His argument was if you’re moving away to get away from black people you can’t escape we need to learn to work together and go to school together. Created massive busing program to accomplish that. Of course certain people didn’t want that and the case goes alway to supreme court. The question became did that judge go to far or was he right? Supreme Court said we will get involved in De Jure we will not get involved in De Facto. Detroit is about 85% black today. It used to be about 50% white 50% black. De Jure = Bad (Because of Brown) De Facto = Okay (Because of Milliken) Recently: Detroit had the idea of creating a school in Detroit, it was beautiful new facilities but the catch was you had to be a black man. Even the teachers were black men. Black men were dropping out of school at the highest rate, so they ﬁgured if we pulled out the women no distractions. The ﬁrst year everyone did great. That school doesn’t exist. Because it’s DE JURE. Funny enough the people suing were white people. Black people were using Plessy saying separate but equal is okay. White people were using Brown. Women sued here saying you left out black and white girls. That’s gender discrimination. Civil Right Act of 1964 Among other things this law attempted to combat discrimination in employment and public accommodations; hotels and restaurants. It’s made things much more fair, there is less chance of discrimination. It’s not perfect though. Employment: Before 1964: If Mcdonalds or some company, opened a restaurant and they needed employees they could say “Help wanted: Negroes need not apply” We only hire white people. I’m not going to hire an Asian, Native American, Black person, no one. This document says it’s illegal to discriminate no matter how big the company based on race. You would get in trouble if you did that. People got around the law all the time. 60 minutes did a piece on this. In NY City they opened the want ads and hired 2 actors. A white guy and a black guy. They dressed them up the same. They trained them on how to respond to questions. They made up 2 resumes. Gave them equivalent experience and said they went to Harvard and Yale. They had the black guy go in ﬁrst apply for the job, then later they’d send in the white guy. They tried to make it as equal as they could make it. The black guy would go in and the employer would look over the resume and talk to the black person, the black man. And every time it was something like this “ Wow you went to Yale? “ “Wow you have experience “ Wow this is an impressive resume. You’ll have no problem getting a job but you’re not what we’re looking for. Then the white guy came in person would look it over they said “Wow you’re the dream candidate can you start this afternoon” The white guy got the job every time. 60 minutes why did you give the job to the white guy? I like Harvard better than Yale. I like this company better than that company. How do you prove it’s racism and not just he liked Harvard better than Yale? If you have a lawsuit the only way you could really prove they’re racist is if they have 1000 employees and all of them are white you couldn’t win. If they hired like 50 black people then you wouldn’t win. Public Accommodations: Before 1964: Mcdonalds could say “Black people can’t eat here” was totally legal. We will not let you stay in our hotel. Jackie Robinson - Very often the team would travel to a hotel 24 white players would stay in the hotel but Jackie Robinson had to go across town. Being a black person you could want to travel to Disney land and you know along the way you don’t know who will let you eat in their restaurants or sleep in their hotels. Now CRA 1964 was usually successful but in a small town if they pull into a hotel and the people there decide they want to be racist. They can say oh I forgot to turn on the no vacancy sign. Denny’s was discriminating based on race. A group of FBI agents that were black got oﬀ work and went to Denny’s and the manager sat them down. The place was empty. They didn’t serve them and they pretend to pass them by and be busy. They get hungry again so they go and notice it’s not a coincidence they actually were discriminating. There was a paper trail from Denny’s saying to discourage black clientele. Denny’s got ﬁned millions of dollars. Voting Rights Act of 1965 This attempted to increase the black vote.15th amendment says Blacks have a right to vote. But people found ways to get around the 15th amendment. States passed a number of laws to make it hard for blacks to vote. Ex. White primaries: meaning in several states they passed laws saying black people can vote in the general election they just can’t vote in primaries. The primaries are for white people. In TX a bunch of republican’s are running to see who will be the representative for Republicans and Democrats are running for representatives of Democrats. Blacks can for Governor of TX in fall. But not for the primaries. The most important part of the election is the Republican primaries, because who ever wins the Republican primaries will go on to be governor. Supreme Court said sorry black people should be allowed to vote on everything. Grandfather clauses: these laws said you could not vote in your state unless your grandfather had voted. It kills the voting because their grandfathers were slaves. It doesn’t say we said we wouldn’t discriminate based on race, we used Grandfathers. Literacy tests said you only vote if you literate. It was illegal to teach a slave to read or write. They said okay so they went and got their education. So when they went to vote they said take a literacy test. White’s got a diﬀerent literacy quiz than Black literacy quiz. It was hard and had ridiculous questions. Poll Taxes: said you had to pay money to vote. After the civil war the slaves didn’t have money, and because of employment practices they didn’t really get any money. So they were poor. So they couldn’t vote. Congress passed a law that says anything that discourages black voting is illegal. Open Housing Act 1968 This was an attempt to decrease discrimination in the renting or selling out housing. A person could say I won’t sell to you because you’re black, irish, native american… Not only was it legal for me to say it I can actually put it into the deed of the house that no one could sell this house to a black person. We don’t rent to black people. 03/06/14 Congress - Supposed to represent us Before people went to Congress what was the number one occupation they had before that? Lawyers. If you blew up the Congress building and there was no one left over who would America elect? Lawyers. How about women in Congress? Are women represented in the same percentage in Congress as they are in America? 50%? Is half of Congress female? No. Women make up about 18% of the House of Representative and 18% of the Senate. House has 435 people. Senate has 100. How about African Americans? 13% of America is black. How are they represented? 10% of the house is African American. In Senate there is 0. There’s been a few blacks through senate including barack obama. Why is that? House seats are district seats. The entire state votes for Senate. Therefore whites dominate when it comes to Senate. Hispanics? 16% of the population. House - 8% Senate - 3 Asians? 6% House 3% Senate -1 (Hawaii counts) House and Senate are not as racially diverse. Education and wealth It’s a rare circumstances of a congressman who did not go to college. They have PhD MD MBA etc. Financially they do very very well. Mulitimillionaires, Billionaires, etc. When you look at who is in the USA and who is in Congress it’s not a microcosm of the US. Should it be? What does representation mean to you? Ideology or how they look? Trustees - A trustee means electing someone whose judgement you trust. You say go oﬀ to Washington do a great job. Delegates - People are sent to Washington to do whatever the constituents want. They are there to follow your orders. Politicos - The combo platter. They can act like trustees or delegates. If you’re elected to Congress are you supposed to represent your district or the USA? Do you vote on what’s best for the USA or your district? You vote for TX. You vote for your local voters. Not for USA. Richard Fenno - IGN READER - Home Style - He was interested in representation. He said when people study representation they study how they were voting in Washington. Fenno said I’m also curious about how Congress people act when they go home. What is their behavior like at home? So what he did. He went home with a bunch of Congress people to their home districts. He got permission to follow them around. Wherever they went he went with them. He observed their behavior with their constituents. He said he noticed patterns.. When they go home they divide up their constituents into groups. (Largest to smallest) (1) The geographical constituency. (2) Supporters (3) Loyalists (4) Intimates Geographical - Every single person in the district. All 600,000 people. When asked about their district they knew all the demographics and statistics about their districts. They didn’t walk about it very personally. They wanted to know what’s their because it aﬀected their behavior in Washington. Supporters - These are the people who the Congressman/woman thinks will vote for them. Congress divides the world into 2 halves. Who is for me and who is against me. Who will vote and who won’t. Congress people are always thinking about the next election. There’s a fear of losing their jobs. They’d been in oﬃce for 20 years and they would always win 80% of the votes and yet they acted scared to death of the next election. They would drive around and he’d say I like this neighborhood because I always get 9/10 votes, or shaking hands he’d say that guy is going to vote against me he gave me a weak handshake. Loyalists - These are people who don’t just vote for the person but they give them money and campaign help. They’re the true believers. They don’t just like the congress person they love the congress person. They’ll work for free they’ll do anything to get them reelected. Intimates - These are people like Monica Lewinsky. Haha jk. These are the people who were actual friends with the Congress people. They would talk to those people to get inside info on their district. Tell me who I need to be afraid of. Mom and Dad etc... 03/18/14 UNDERSTANDING A CONGRESSMAN/WOMAN ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES - How much time, staﬀ, and money the congress person allocates to his or her district. They come home constantly. If you live in Hawaii and your district is Honolulu. The government pays every time you go home. It shouldn’t matter where you’re from, if you want to talk to your constituents you should be able to. They decide do they put more people in DC or more people here at home to talk to their constituents. The Congress persons PRESENTATION OF SELF - What kind of image are they trying to give oﬀ? How do they dress? How do they speak? Diﬀerent Congress people are very aware of this concept and they’re trying to give oﬀ diﬀerent images to their districts. Sam Rayburn - He dressed in the best suits. He drove around in a limo. He gave oﬀ a powerful image. When he ﬂew home to TX. There was this old beat up truck. He would be in overalls, chewing up tobacco, he had a southern drawl. Congress people adapt like chameleons to their surroundings. Bill Clinton - The ﬁrst time he ran for the Presidency he went on an airplane tour that stopped in 10 states. He started north and made his way down to AR. He made a speech at the airport. He accent changed every state. The reporters noticed the jokes comments and accent changed the more southern the closer he got to AR. Is he a master politician or fake? You decide… EXPLANATION OF HIS/HER WASHINGTON ACTIVITY - Do Congressmen like to talk to voters? They love talking to their voters and supporters about what they’re doing in Washington. If you’re part of any organization believe it or not a congress person would instantly come talk to any group of any size (not hey me and my buddy want to talk to you) and you can promise them a couple hundred people, after they talk to you, YOU WILL LIKE THEM. and if you go to vote, YOU WILL VOTE FOR THEM. They are masters of explaining to you what they’re doing and getting you to like them. Ex. People hate congress. They are at the lowest approval rating in history. I’m a congressman I take questions. You say “You should be embarrassed about what’s going on in Washington.You guys are doing a terrible job. There is 2 classic responses depending on if you’re criticizing CONGRESS or the PERSON (1) “I’m so glad you came here tonight, I’m so glad you answered that question. You’re right it’s a disgrace what’s going on in Washington. That bill you hated, I hated too. I voted against it. The problem is there’s not a lot of people like you there. Who understand America, what this country is built on!” They’ll praise the person asking the question, saying it’s just me against all the bad congress people. ME GOOD CONGRESS BAD (2) “I’m so glad you came tonight, I’m glad you brought that up. I understand why you would be mad. I thought exactly like you did. When I went to congress last year, I was conﬁdent I was going to vote no. I knew it would hurt the people. That was my initial reaction, but then I wanted to make sure I was right. I began to study all I could on the topic. I consulted experts across the US. I consulted experts on this topic. I knew it was a big deal. One of the hardest decisions of my life after all the study and work, after burning that midnight oil. I understood for most Americans maybe even eventually for you. I decided YES would be best for the US. They come across as good, hard working, honorable, smart, trustworthy. Goals: What do they want? (1) Election/ReElection (2) Policy - What ever they care about. Almost everyone goes to Washington with a policy area they want to work on. (3) Power (within the institution) (4) Ambition (outside of the institution) - You might want another job.. House - Senator, Governor, President. Senate - Governor President. All your focus is just on Dallas or Atlanta if you have no ambition. (5) Personal Financial Gain - Money! You can get wealthy in diﬀerent ways. They would buy land, radio stations etc. Quiz: HOUSE - 435 SENATE - 100 CONGRESS - 535 Members You have to be at least 25 to be in the HOUSE You must have been a citizen for 7 years. 2 years for a term. You have to be 30 to be in SENATE. You have to be a citizen for 9 years. 6 years for a term. Do incumbents usually win the next election? YES 80-90% will win the next election. They almost always win for reelection. David Mayhew talks about the advantages of being an incumbent. Not only do they win but they win big. The election is NOT close. It’s by a landslide. “Vanishing Marginals” 03/25/14 What drives Congress? Committees. This is the key part of what operates congress. Why are they so critical? Specialization and Reciprocity. Specialization - Let’s form committees that will be in charge of diﬀerent topics. Ex. farming, roads, military… The committees report back to Congress. Congress uses a division of labor. They expect the members of the committee to be experts in that ﬁeld. Reciprocity - give back. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. When the experts say it’s a good bill or it’s a bad bill, Congress is expected to vote in their favor. What committees say are good bills almost always pass. It all depends on what the committee says. Focus on the committee when it comes to laws passing. If you’re a lobbyist you focus on the committee. How a Bill becomes a LAW The process of making a law is like a mine ﬁeld. Every step must go perfectly. Ex. Ignagni Congressman - UTA Bill of 2014. Best university in the USA. (1) Proposing that we get the word out about this university and give UTA $10 million. It’s a great school! (2) Bill gets referred to EDUCATION committee. (3) Goes to higher education committee. (Edits it to 4 million UTA, 3 million UTD, 3 million SMU) (4) Goes back to EDUCATION committee. (Edits it from 10 million to 2 million each school.) If the majority of Congress wants the bill they can ﬁle a DISCHARGE PETITION. It’s a possibility but a rarity. Happens about once every 10 years. (1) A Bill must be introduced, sponsored, in the House or the Senate. Must be introduced by someone in Congress. You cannot introduce your own bill, the president, average citizen, cannot introduce their own bill. (2) Bill is referred to appropriate full committee. May have 15 members. (3) Bill goes to subcommittee. May have 5 members. (a) Can pass or recommend the Bill. (b) Can defeat or reject the Bill. (c) Can mark up (Revise, edit) the Bill (d) Can shelve or table the Bill. (They don’t bother to vote it; It’s dead 90% of all bills die here) (4) Bill is referred back to full committee. (a) Can pass or recommend the Bill. (b) Can defeat or reject the Bill. (c) Can mark up (Revise, edit) the Bill (d) Can shelve or table the Bill. (5) Depends on if you’re in House (A) or Senate (B): (A) Rules committee - makes rules for the Bill: Because the House has so many people who want to talk, before a bill can be considered in the House there are rules about how the debate/ discussion can happen. Ex. 1 hour discussing bill, time allotment. Speciﬁc number of amendments are allowed. What the rules say determine if your Bill makes it or doesn’t. If you like a bill and the people on the Rules Committee like you, they can say 5 minutes and no amendments. If they don’t like you, 3 hours and unlimited amendments. They can not give your bill rules, your bill cannot be voted on. House cannot vote on a bill without rules. It dies. (Most powerful committee) (B) In Senate, in theory, there are no rules for debating a bill. If for some reason you want rules you can propose an Unanimous Consent Agreement. Every member of senate has to agree “we want rules.” Uncontroversial bills will get this. If it’s a controversial bill they will not vote for rules. Filibuster - A tactic used where someone is delaying or stalling the procedure. They just keep talking. Once recognized to talk that person can talk for three days straight if their bodies will allow. Senate can do no other business until he/she sits down. Might be for attention purposes but if done strategically, it can be eﬀective to getting bill passed. Is there a legal way to stop a ﬁlibuster? Yes! Cloture - Will stop debate of a ﬁlibuster. To shut down a ﬁlibuster you have to have 60 members of senate to vote to end debate. If you get to 60 democrats or 60 republicans they can stop the ﬁlibusters. If you get 60 votes it doesn’t end the ﬁlibuster immediately they get 30 more hours. (6) The Bill is voted on by the entire House or R. or Senate. 51% must vote to pass. (7) The other house must pass the bill. So it goes to Senate or House of R. (Repeat steps 1-6) (8) Conference Committee: Sometimes diﬀerent versions come from both sides, they have to come to an agreement in order for the bill to pass. (9) The bill must now go back to both houses and be voted on again! No amendments are allowed. Needs 51% of vote. Both houses must pass the bill. (10) Bill goes to the President of the United States. (a) He signs itIt’s law. (b) He vetoes it - He rejects it. (c) He can Pocket Veto the bill. He can shelve it. He sticks it in his pocket. (A) If there is 10 days or less of a Congressional session to go, excluding Sundays, if he sticks it in his pocket the bill is dead. They didn’t give him enough time to think about it. There’s no override, it’s like it never happened. (B) If he sticks it in his pocket with a month to go, it becomes a law without his signature and it doesn’t have to go to Congress. He would do that if he knew Congress is uniﬁed against him. He looks weak if Congress overrides him. (11) It goes back to Congress. They vote again. This time 2/3 of Senate and 2/3 of House of R. must vote in favor. They overrode the veto. The Bill is law even though the President never signs it. 03/27/14 Executive Branch - US PRESIDENT When the framers were writing the Constitution they had lived through 2 type of executives. Under British rule they lived under a King. After the revolution, the articles on the confederation, then they had no
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'