Next weekly assignment for 11 week classes - prepare a rough draft of your 1000 word essay - this will be due August 7th

Yet another political quiz

These are always a fun way to test whether you are in fact the ideologue you claim to be. If you want to take this and report back with comments, I'll try to post them.

- Click here for the quiz. 

Weekly Written Assignment #8 - 11 week class only

Since I'll be on the road, I thought I'd put a second assignment up. This one won't be due until 7/31.

GOVT 2305:

It's worth keeping in mind that in a democratic republic - where elections to public office are prominent and never ending - politics is never far behind anything. This includes the recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case.

On the surface, this case was just about whether a privately held corporation could withhold coverage of certain types of birth control it judges to violate the religious views of those who own the company. Looked at this way, the case was about religious freedom. But since it concerned the religious freedom to impose on birth control practices that many women commonly use, it is also about birth control.

Democrats see an electoral opportunity in this.

Women tend to vote slightly more Democrat than Republican - this is referred to as the gender gap. Since women use birth control more than men, the party sees an opportunity to mobilize women who may have otherwise sat out the upcoming election this November.This could be good news for Democrats because many had predicted the Republican Party was likely to control the U.S. Senate after the election and that Democrats had little chance of controlling the U.S. House of Representatives.

Democrats apparently think that this focus on birth control, and the possibility that employers might be able to keep it off insurance plans, could tip the scales in their direction. Maybe they'll be able to hold on to the Senate - perhaps they can also take over the House.

Elections tend to be won by whichever side is the most mobilized, so they are trying to use this issue to do just that. In this assignment I want you to evaluate this strategy and determine whether it is likely to work. Will attention to birth control provide an electoral advantage to the Democratic Party in the elections this November?

Below I've posted a variety of stories that should get you going:

- Democrats Are in a Perilous Position in 2014 Senate Races.
- The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years.
- How big could the GOP House majority get?
- Can birth control help Democrats keep the Senate?
- Dems Seek Political Edge in Contraception Ruling.
- Republicans Accuse Democrats of Using Hobby Lobby Fallout to ‘Score Election Year Points’
- The data is brutal: the GOP has a real birth control problem.

GOVT 2306:

An area that I spend far too little time on - one of many to be honest - is conflict between the state and local governments in the state. Each session of the legislature features disputes over what the state is willing to allow local government to do - often this has to do with taxes and local regulations. Conflict between state and local power has been a central feature of Texas government since at least the end of Civil War when Republicans tried to use the power of the state to impose national principles on local governments. Local areas pushed back and the power of local governments is written in the constitution of 1876.

But remember that a key point made in the power points is that recognizing cities - and issuing city charters - is a power reserved to the states. Cities have no legal existence apart from states, though as a matter of fact, they do - especially the big ones like Houston. The states allows cities to function as cities, but cities have political cultures that make them distinct entities with policy preferences that are not necessarily in line with those of the Texas Legislature.

There are a variety of areas of disagreement between the state and cities. One that has come up recently concerns the consequences of hydraulic fracturing. While it has been beneficial to the oil and gas industry - and the Texas economy in general - there are concerns that it has multiple negative consequences, including polluting ground water, destroying local road (those truck are heavy) and causing small earthquakes.

Since cities and local governments often bear the brunt of these costs, many have begin pushing back against fracking. Now that list includes the first city in Texas to do so: Denton.

I want you to read up on the conflict - with a focus on what is happening in Denton - and detail it as much as possible. What forces are lining up on either side of the issue? How can we draw a line between what the state of Texas gets to allow and what the cities can prevent? Go further and try to figure our what other forces are at work here and how it might work itself out.

What is happening in Denton could foreshadow what might happen here. There's lot's of drilling going in in our area - as I'm sure you are aware.

Here are a few places to begin your reading:

- Denton could become 1st Texas city to ban fracking.
- North Texas city rejects partial fracking ban.
- Texas city weighs ban on new fracking permits.
- Why A Texas City May Ban Fracking.
- Denton Council Punts Fracking Ban Proposal To Voters.
- Former Texas officials warn Denton against fracking ban.

Road Trip 7/16 - 8/6 (more or less)

Please note that I'll be on the road for the next 2-3 weeks - mostly driving through the southwest. I'll have my laptop and will stay connected, but I might be out of touch here and there.

Everything has been set up so you can get the work done that you need to do, so you should be able to handle things on your own. Let me know if you have issues or concerns.

Weekly Written Assignment #7 - 11 week class only

For GOVT 2305: 

In the early sections of this class, you were introduced to the concepts of democracy, oligarchy and autocracy. We mentioned that while the governing system has aspects of each, we also touched on the allegation that the United States was established to be a democratic republic, and that the nation has become increasingly democratic over time.

The increased levels of equality witnessed over the past few decades have led to some wondering whether the nation has become less democratic, and that we are in fact now an oligarchy. A few articles to that effect have been published recently. Here are a few:

- IS AMERICA AN OLIGARCHY?
- America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic, university study finds.
- Scholar Behind Viral 'Oligarchy' Study Tells You What It Means.
- Stop calling the U.S. an oligarchy.

I want you to read these - as well as any other material you find appropriate, and critically evaluate the claim. Is America in fact - now - an oligarchy. Whether you agree or disagree, back up your claim.

For GOVT 2306: 

Texas' ongoing struggles with the national government over gerrymandering and voting rights continues.

In 2012 the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case - Perry v Perez - about the maps the legislature drew following the reapportionment in 2010. Latino groups argued that the map was drawn in a manner that suppressed the Latino vote - which tends to vote Democrat over Republican. There's your political angle.

The court ruled that it was "unclear whether the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas followed the appropriate standards in drawing interim maps for the 2012 Texas elections" so they threw the map out and ordered the case to be reheard. Now they are being reheard, so Texas has to defend how it draws electoral districts once again.

I want you to read up on the current dispute, outline the issues involved in it, and provide an educated prediction about whether Texas will win or lose this case. It's an important case because it will tell us how much leniency the Supreme Court will give Texas in future disputes. This is up in the air following the recent decision in Shelby v Holder - which you should read up on.

Here are links for background - though note the two I provided above:

- Case Information.
- Gerrymandering.
- Texas GOP’s secret anti-Hispanic plot: Smoking gun emails revealed.
- Texas Congressional District Maps Redrawn by GOP to Lessen Democrat and Latino Influence, Lawsuit Claims.
- Texas Fights U.S. Again Over Black, Latino Voting Rights.
- Texas Redistricting Trial Begins; GöPerdämmerung: Twilight of the Grumpy White Legislators.
- TXGOP's anti-Latino redistricting scheme exposed in e-mails.

Written Assignment #6

For GOVT 2305:

For this assignment I want you to try some policy analysis. Read up on the most recent development on the border - the influx of children on the borer - and try to come up with the most effective solution to it. Preferable one that does not cause further disputes down the road.

I also want you to keep the political angles involved in this dispute. Keep in mind that we are just a few months away from the 2014 election. Politicians - especially those with difficult elections ahead - keep in mind how the positions they take on issues like this will affect them on election day.

There's lots to this story, so the more you are able to appreciate all the angles associated with it, the better your grade. This is more than a border security issue.

Here are a few items you might consider reading, but be sure to do your own research.

- ‘Flee or die’: violence drives Central America’s child migrants to US border.
- Why are so many kids crossing the US-Mexico border and what should Obama do?
- Debunking 8 Myths About Why Central American Children Are Migrating.
- Boehner: No 'blank check' for border crisis.
- White House seeks $3.7bn in extra funding to address child migrant crisis.
- Border Crisis Puts Spotlight on 2008 Immigration Law.

For GOVT 2306:

This assignment will build on the one for 2305. It's also about the recent influx of immigrant/refugee child on the Texas-Mexico border, but I want you to analyze this more from the point of view of federalism.

What are the relative responsibilities of the national and state government in this dispute? Try to drill down into basic conflicts between the two levels - three levels if you want to bring Texas cities into this as well. Outline as clearly as you can, the conflict between each level of government over this issue.

You can look at this from a constitutional perspective, but don't forget the political differences as well. The different actors are not only trying to deal with a public policy problem, they are also positioning themselves and their parties for the upcoming election. In the case of Governor Perry, he's trying to look like a viable presidential candidates as well.

You can also try to predict how this might be resolved, but keep in mind that not everything gets resolved. I'm betting that we forget about this issue before the semester is over.

Here are some articles you might consider reading:

- Perry, Obama Discuss Solutions to Immigration Crisis.
- Texas Democrats Say GOP Stalling Aided Immigrant Influx.
- Obama, on Texas Trip, Will Face Immigration Critics.
- Obama: Perry should press Texas delegation on border-security funding.
- Obama-Perry Texas talks tense as migrant children stranded.

In case you wonder why I don't assign group projects

Its the free rider problem in a nutshell

Reviews for the 5 week final exams now available

You'll see links to them on the top right column.

Use them as a starting point for your studies.

Remember that I pushed up the day for the final and paper. Look on Black Board for the new dates.

From The Dish: An Online Right To Be Forgotten?

It's the 4th of July - which is really all about barbecue and fireworks - but also supposedly about the signing the Declaration of Independence. I try to spend a good bit of time in early slides analyzing the argument it contains and the history leading up to it.

I try to draw attention to this open ended part of it: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. 

In lecture classes I like to generate a discussion about the word "among" which seems to suggest that other rights exist beyond those three listed. Is this in fact that case and if so what might those rights be? How would we figure this out?

The recent decision by the European Union Court of Justice that there is a right to be forgotten would be a perfect subject. This Dish links to a variety of stories discussing the right and the difficulty we might have in enforcing it.

- Click here for the post.

The digital revolution - which makes information retrieval easy - might make this impossible. And ironically, the more we actively try to conceal parts of out past, the more we highlight it. It's one thing to claim a right, a trickier thing to enforce it.

It just occurred to me that early Texas was populated by people who were trying to make themselves forgotten - by creditors, law enforcement and others. Life was different then.

From the New Yorker: Celebrating FOIA on Independence Day

An interesting story about how the Freedom of Information Act came to be.

- Click here for the story.

In 1952, John Moss, a two-term California assemblyman, was elected to Congress, representing the state’s Third District, in Sacramento. Two years earlier, Senator Joseph McCarthy had made his fictive declaration that the State Department had two hundred and five Communists in its employ. McCarthyism represented the antithesis of Moss’s ideals. As Michael Lemov writes in “People’s Warrior,“ a biography of the congressman:

Moss knew all about the McCarthy approach. He had been a target of similar charges—of being a Communist or a Communist sympathizer—in his California campaigns, for both the state assembly and Congress. He survived the attacks but he did not forget them. In fact, they played a key role in his long campaign to secure freedom of information in government—a campaign that was, in part, grounded in his anger at being attacked with such potentially devastating charges, and by the attempt to use unsubstantiated smears against him.

If secrecy, as Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed, is best understood as a form of regulation, then the McCarthy era conjured the worst aspects of big government: oligarchic, sprawling, and inimical to individual liberty. The pressures of the Cold War were already transforming government into tiered, hermetic bureaucracies, each distinguished by its own sometimes Byzantine relationship to the idea of “national security.” The emergence of a hypersecretive ethic in national politics coincided with the very public erosion of Fourth Amendment protections—in effect transferring the right to privacy from individuals to government itself.

But, as Moss saw it, national security was an amorphous doctrine, and a corrosive one: meant to suggest the need for strength and expediency, in practice, it abetted incompetence, corruption, and the abuse of authority. “The unfortunate fact,” he remarked, is “that governmental secrecy tends to grow as government itself grows.” And so, in 1954, still in his first term, Moss introduced a bill designed to limit that secrecy.

From The Dish: Why Not Just Provide The Pill Over The Counter?

In a post about the contraception - and how the dust up over the Hobby Lobby decision might be minimized it was easier to obtain - and author points out one of the reasons why doctors, public health officials and pharmaceutical companies want to continue to require prescriptions to get them.

It's good for business.

- Click here for the post.

“Doctors regularly hold women’s birth control prescriptions hostage, forcing them to come in for exams,” wrote Stephanie Mencimer in a Mother Jones piece about her own doctor doing so. Dr. [Jeffrey] Singer described as it doctors extorting pay for a “permission slip” to get the same medication over and over again. Feminist blogger Amanda Marcotte says doctors use “the pill as bait” to make sure women come in once a year. Both doctors and public health officials publicly worry that women won’t receive annual cervical cancer and sexually transmitted infection (STI) screenings without such coercion. How much of this concern is motivated by profit, how much by paternalism, is hard to say. …

It’s not just some doctors and medical groups who want to keep things status quo. Pharmaceutical companies also gain from it. OTC sales “would drive down the prices substantially,” says Singer. Drugmakers can get higher prices from insurance companies than they could in a competitive contraceptive market. … Yet the pharmaceutical industry is the only entity with standing to challenge the prescription status of current birth control pills. In order to initiate the switch from prescription to nonprescription, a drug maker must approach the FDA.

This is a good illustration of the relationship between interest groups and executive agencies. File this under sub-governments and iron triangles. It gets to the heart of what really drives decision making.

More from Vox: Beating the odds Why one bill made it through a gridlocked Congress — and so many don't

A great story about how a bill gets through a divisive and dysfunctional Congress. It features an updated version of the "I'm just a bill video."

- Click here for it.

2305 and 2306 students will see some questions about the bill making process on the national and state level on the final, but most of it is about the standard institutional process. This takes a more expansive look at it.

This tells the story of the how the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act became law  and boils the process down to 9 simple steps:

1. Get the attention of the relevant committee chairman
2. Ease the concerns of outside groups
3. Win an ally in the federal bureaucracy
4. Find a way to pay for it
5. Make sure not even one senator has a problem with it
6. Make sure the House will pass the Senate version
7. Deal with leaks to the press
8. Smooth over the administration's concerns
9. Make some last-minute concessions to the Defense Department

From Vox: What maps of America get wrong

This is a fun video detailing the extent of the territories of the United States.

- Click here for it.

From the Atlantic: Corporations: Still Not People

The recent Supreme Court seems to disagree though. Norm Ornstein - a respected political commentator - critically discusses this trend. He does not see it as a positive development. The Hobby Lobby decision - in his eyes - was less about contraception and more about corporations acquiring power beyond that of individuals.

As the economy becomes more global, corporate interests are no longer tied into American interests.

- Click here for the article.

For many decades, corporations and corporate leaders took the long view and saw a strong American society as key to their own prosperity. But General Motors, in the global economy, is now a global company, even though it is still based in the U.S. and not yet tempted by inversion. Is what is good for a company with huge interests in dozens of countries necessarily good for America? Will it think first—or at all—about the prosperity and needs of the United States? Maybe—but can we say the same thing about "American" companies renouncing their corporate citizenship? When these companies get involved with politics—and you can be sure before long that the Supreme Court will extend the "speech rights" of corporations to include direct contributions to candidates—will they be thinking of America, or of what America can do to protect their interests in other countries? If the money comes from the "American" subsidiary of the foreign-owned company, will it only be reflecting the desires and interests of that American entity or will it reflect the interests of its parent? If a company with gambling interests in Las Vegas earns most of its money in Macau and gets involved deeply in American campaign finance, will it be most interested in promoting its interest in Macau—which might be counter to America's interest in its foreign relations with China?

From Vox: Are Republicans and big business on the brink of divorce?

Ezra Klein discusses the potential rift between big business and the Republican Party.

- Click here for the video.

Erik Cantor was a proponents of business interests and that seems to have been part of what drove ideologically oriented - Tea Party - Republicans in his district to vote him out.

They are part of a growing movement that does not think recent Republican presidents have been conservative enough.

For 2305 and 2306 - but mostly 2305 - this highlights the coalitional nature of political parties, and the fact that the Tea Party movement has had a major impact within the Republican Party. It's still anyone's guess what impact this has down the line.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

One of the major news items this week was the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling that a privately (or closely) held corporation could use religious reasons to opt out of providing birth control as part of its health insurance package.

The decision has kicked up a predictable fuss, and hits some of the topics covered in 2305's sections on civil liberties and specifically religious liberty - where we dig into the court's decisions regarding the establishment and free exercise clauses. The case mostly hits on the impact on 1993's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as well as the status of corporations under the Bill of Rights.

I'll post commentary about these separately, but as always ScotusBlog is the go to place for facts about the case itself.

- Click here for their post on the case.

Here is the basic decision the court made: As applied to closely held corporations, the regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services requiring employers to provide their female employees with no-cost access to contraception violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

2305 students should note the role the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) has played in establishing what types of accommodations governments have to make to people based on religious viewpoints.

Here are a few links related to RFRA:

- Wikipedia: RFRA.
- What is RFRA and why do we care?
- The Religious Freedom Restoration Act and complicity in sin.
- DOJ: RFRA.

Weekly Written Assignment #5 is cancelled

I'll resume with assignment #6 for 11 week students next week.

I'll have some hints for 5 week students about what to focus on for next week's final.

From Politico: How the Supreme Court Changed America This Year

I'll post separate items on the Supreme Court decisions released in the past few days, but here's an article that looks at the totality of the impact the court has had on a variety of factors in American government.

- Click here for the article.

Heres' the intro:

The justices have retired their robes for the summer (and the interns, their running shoes), after handing down decisions on issues ranging from Obamacare to affirmative action, campaign finance to school prayer. This term lacked a blockbuster decision like the court’s overturn of the Defense of Marriage Act last year or its upholding of the Affordable Care Act the year before that, so amid the back-and-forth about what the court’s 144 opinions this term really mean, we decided to pose a simpler, bigger-picture question to some of the best legal thinkers around the country: How has the Supreme Court changed America this term?

Some argued that the Roberts Court pushed the country farther to the right, while others noted the relatively low number of 5–4 decisions and high number of unanimous ones—perhaps a sign of diminished partisanship this year. Still others homed in on particular legal issues, citing the court’s commitment to freedom of speech and religion and to the right to privacy, or particular cases with the broadest political or social impact—McCutcheon, Hobby Lobby and Riley v. California seemed to top the list. Then again, there were those who thought the 2013-2014 term was a bit of a shrug. “For the most part, the Supreme Court didn’t rock the boat,” writes one. But for most, it was another year of big decisions—and big consequences for Americans.