Unit 1 Foundations '24 AP Government PDF

Unit 1 : Foundations of J. Wilson & J. Diiulio, Jr., Ch. 1, 2, 3 American Democracy AP Government Mr. Clark Unit 1 : Foundations of American Democracy Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals...

Unit 1 : Foundations of J. Wilson & J. Diiulio, Jr., Ch. 1, 2, 3 American Democracy AP Government Mr. Clark Unit 1 : Foundations of American Democracy Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action 1.1 : Ideals of Democracy Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action John Locke Summary The world, all people, and natural law come from the Creator- from above human agency ○ Natural law and natural rights therefore precede the formation of governments ○ Governments are obligated to protect (preexisting) natural rights Our ability to “reason” is how such laws are supposed to be discovered ○ The individual emerges as the fundamental unit of society Locke asserts that each person owns their “person”, aka their body, in the state of nature ○ Locke argues private property is created when people use the mind and body to alter goods found in the state of nature ○ Strong legal protections for private property, contracts, patents, etc. are important steps in the development of freer markets and capitalism Locke also argues that the people may engage in a justified revolution if the government fails to protect the natural rights of the people Fundamental Concepts of Limited Government A limited government is one in powers are formally restricted by formal structures such as constitutions, and the division of powers Crucial concepts to limited government ○ Social contract Individuals agree in a (usually informal) social contract to give up some of their natural rights in order to form/submit to a government in the first place to protect their natural rights ○ Popular sovereignty claims that the authority of government essentially comes from the consent of the governed ○ Republicanism is a form of indirect democracy in which consent of the people is expressed through the regular election of representatives. Republicanism has proven more effective large countries ○ Separation of powers - avoiding the concentration of power by separating the people with authority for executive, legislative, and judicial powers & Recall the historical context that led the colonists to rebel. What were some of the more prominent laws that were challenged before 1776? “An Emblem of the Effects of the STAMP,” a warning against the Stamp Act published in the Pennsylvania Journal, October 1765; in the New York What ideas and complaints were at the root of this Public Library. conflict? The Colonial Mind Colonial perceptions of political corruption by crown and Parliament led to escalating conflict and decreasing loyalty to the English “constitution” Colonists considered the laws passed by Parliament as violations of higher law and natural rights - rights affirmed by English tradition The meaning of higher law is perhaps easier understood in asking the following questions: Do you believe any laws are unjust? What makes a law unjust? John Dickinson claimed these rights, “are born with us; exist with us; and cannot be taken away from us by any human power.” Perhaps some historical examples will be helpful. If the American Revolution was justified as one based on the violation of the natural rights of the colonists, consider the following situations in light of the natural rights’ tradition of justified rebellion. Nat Turner’s Rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia killed at least 55 white members of slave owning families. He described his third vision to Thomas Ruffin Gray: "I heard a loud noise in the heavens, and the Spirit instantly appeared to me and said the Serpent was loosened, and Christ had laid down the yoke he had borne for the sins of men, and that I should take it on and fight against the Serpent, for the time was fast approaching when the first should be last and the last should be first... And by signs in the heavens that it would make known to me when I should commence the great work, and until the first sign appeared I should conceal it from the knowledge of men; and on the appearance of the sign... I should arise and prepare myself and slay my enemies with their own weapons." John Brown’s trial in 1859, “Brown asserted that he “never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite Slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection,” but rather wanted only to “free Slaves.” He defended his actions as righteous and just, saying that “to have interfered as I have done—In behalf of His despised poor, was not wrong but right.” Brown also told the court that he was at peace with his actions and their consequences, proclaiming: “Now if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice and MINGLE MY BLOOD FURTHER WITH THE BLOOD OF MY CHILDREN, and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments—I submit; so LET IT BE DONE.”” The goals of Turner and Brown would seem to be justified under a natural rights theory. After all the American Revolution was justified under violations that fell short of enslaving the colonists. BUT, their means were horrifying violent, imprudent, and nearly certain to fail to change the situation they intended to change. Another strand of resistance focused on non-violent civil disobedience. That is, the unwillingness to obey a law one believes to be unjust. Henry David Thoreau against the Mexican-American War in the 1840s, “Thoreau argued that the government must end its unjust actions to earn the right to collect taxes from its citizens. As long as the government commits unjust actions, he continued, conscientious individuals must choose whether to pay their taxes or to refuse to pay them and defy the government. Thoreau declared that if the government required people to participate in injustice by obeying “unjust laws,” then people should “break the laws” even if they ended up in prison. “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly,” he asserted, “the true place for a just man is also a prison.” By not paying his taxes, Thoreau explained, he was refusing his allegiance to the government. “In fact,” he wrote, “I quietly declare war with the State....”” Thoreau’s ideas on civil disobedience were taken up in India in the early 20th century. Hind Swaraj by Mohandas Gandhi, 1909 (yes, Gandhi was flawed…) “If by using violence I force the government to repeal the law, I am employing what may be termed body-force. If I do not obey the law and accept the penalty for its breach, I use soul-force. It involves sacrifice of self. …if this kind of force (soul-force) is used in a cause that is unjust, only the person using it suffers. He does not make others suffer for his mistakes…No man can claim that he is absolutely right or that a particular thing is wrong because he thinks so, but it is wrong for him so long as that is his deliberate judgment. It is therefore meet that he should not do that which he knows to be wrong, and suffer the consequences whatever it may be. This is the key to the use of soul-force…” - Gandhi, Hind Swaraj “…The real meaning of the statement that we are a law-abiding nation is that we are passive resisters. When we do not like certain laws, we do not break the heads of the law-givers but we suffer and do not submit to the laws… A man who has realized his manhood, who fears only God, will fear no one else. Man-made laws are not necessarily binding on him… Passive resistance is an all-sided sword, it can be used anyhow; it blesses him who uses it and him against whom it is used. Without drawing a drop of blood it produces far-reaching results.” - Mohandas Gandhi, Hind Swaraj, 1909 …and also… Reason, faith, conscience, and ‘best practices’ are ways various thinkers have argued natural law is best understood. “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”...one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’” Martin Luther King Jr. Letter From Birmingham Jail  ? Some rights are “inalienable”? Are other rights “alienable”, at least partially? (recall Locke’s formulation for the social contract) What were the natural rights the colonists claimed were being violated? Natural Rights and Popular Sovereignty Natural rights theory is rooted in the view that individuals possess rights that precede & supercede the creation and power of governments ○ The necessity of the people's consent to establish just authority follows from this Colonists claimed that their natural rights included life, liberty, and property The American Revolution was a war over Enlightenment principles and ideology rather than mere economic gain ○ “No taxation without representation!”  Consider the phrase, “No taxation without representation.” What are the philosophical underpinnings that make “representation” important? What do you know about the price of that delicious British East India Company tea? Consider that taxes were higher under the new government that followed the war for independence. These underpinnings are what lead Wilson and Diiulio (book authors) to their claim about the “Real Revolution.” What John Adams referred to as the, “radical change in principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people.” The Real Revolution The American Revolution was based on ideas that long preceded it ○ Including the Enlightenment, religious traditions, as well as historical events ancient, medieval, and contemporary English practices The “real revolution” was the popular adherence to the ideology supporting limited government ○ Government’s obligation to protect the natural rights of the people ○ Governing by consent of the governed & and people accepting the ‘rule of law’ ○ Written constitutions formally empower but also define & restrict governments ○ The separation of powers in government with the legislature (law-making) as the highest branch Why separate powers within government? How does this reflect the Founders’ view of human nature? The Declaration of Independence The Declaration epitomizes American democratic ideals ○ It was adopted by a young nation already violating its principles and remains aspirational - not fully realized→ which may be it’s real importance State legislatures elected delegates to attend the Continental Congress in Pennsylvania in 1776 This Continental Congress became a de facto National Congress during the Revolutionary War ○ Agreed upon and carried out political, economic, and military responses against Britain These delegates approved a resolution for independence on July 2, 1776 The Declaration of Independence was subsequently signed, and “declared”, on July 4, 1776 The Declaration of Independence The Declaration is squarely rooted in Enlightenment principles, particularly those of John Locke ○ It emphasizes the protection of natural rights through a social contract based on the consent of the governed The Declaration was written in the structure of a petition to King George III ○ Preamble (When in the course…) ○ Rationale (We hold these truths…) ○ 27 grievances to justify separation ○ Redress/remedy The Declaration is “non-justiciable” - it’s not a legal document, or legally binding ○ It is however a powerful formulation of the essential principles and goals of the United States ○ It has also proved to be a powerful sounding board used by marginalised groups to remind Americans when they fail to live up to it  I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nation’s destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost… …Fellow-citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here to-day? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political What To The Slave Is The Fourth Of freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that July? Declaration of Independence, extended to us?... Frederick Douglass, July 5, 1852 …I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us… Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal…that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. - Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, 1863 In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. -Martin Luther King Jr., I Have a Dream (video), 1963 1.2 : Types of Democracy James Madison Robert Yates Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action The American system of limited government was indeed revolutionary in its complexity and application of Enlightenment principles. It ultimately combined competing theories for how a democracy could, and should, work in practice. The Declaration & the Constitution The Declaration of Independence alludes to the principles that undergird limited government The Constitution determined the institutions and processes intended to achieve the high principles of the Declaration Competing Theories of Democracy Participatory Theory of Democracy : a model in which individual citizens directly decide and influence policy and politicians Pluralist Theory of Democracy : a model in which organized groups compete with each other to influence policy and politicians. However, no one group dominates politics Elite Theory of Democracy : a model in which a small number of elites, usually rich, well-educated, and well connected, influence policy and politicians Ultimately, the U.S. government incorporates all 3 of these theories  Participatory Pluralism Elitist Least filtered most filtered More personal involvement less personal involvement ←------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------→ Associated Behaviors Associated Behaviors Associated Behaviors *citizens representing *citizens joining *a small number of themselves together in more influential individuals with collective action connections to political power Associated Behaviors Associated Behaviors Associated Behaviors with Participatory with Pluralistic with Elitist Democracy democracy Democracy *a small number of *citizens representing *citizens joining influential individuals with themselves together in more connections to political collective action power - Voting - Special interest groups - Lobbying - Jury duty - Voter registration - Funding research - Attending school board drives - Institutional power meetings - Charitable structures that limit - Contacting local organizations access of the public representatives - Joining a political - Social media campaign - Protests - Joining civic groups - Student government - special  Some examples of Some examples of Some examples of elite participatory pluralist democracy democracy democracy Best U.S. access points are Special interest groups - Electoral college in state & local government represent collective action - Appointment of federal - Initiative united by a common judges - Referendum concern - Empowerment of - Recall - National Abortion bureaucratic officials, - Town hall meetings Rights Action League scientists, engineers, (NARAL) etc. with regulatory - National Right to Life power (NRLC - National Rifle Association (NRA) - March For Our Lives Connecting Foundational Documents Pay special attention to how Federalist 10 and Brutus 1 take up the arguments over how to implement aspects of participatory, pluralist, and elite practices into our government. 1.3 : Government Power and Individual Rights Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action How To Structure Government? The structure of the American government was trying to balance competing goals and interests ○ How would citizens be represented? Who would be represented? ○ How would taxes be passed? Collected? ○ How would power be delegated in a way to promote order, safety, and prosperity, but avoiding tyranny? ○ How to promote ‘ordered liberty’ among citizens by balancing the demands of the ‘social contract’ upon the natural rights of the people? Let’s consider Three basic models/systems of government. Unitary System of Government Unitary System - a governments with top-down centralized power (ex: British Parliamentary Monarchy) ○ Basic Theory : power delegated by God to the English king/queen who ruled the people largely unchecked ○ Events such as the Glorious Revolution, 1688, resulted in the monarch sharing power with Parliament with goal of protecting natural rights ○ Advantage : combination of executive and legislative power in Parliament promote efficiency in law-making and decision making ○ Disadvantage : greater vulnerability toward tyrannical leaders with less power sharing or checks and balances ○ The British Parliamentary system today continues to be more unitary than the American system The Prime Minister is simply the leader of the majority party rather than elected separately Confederal System of Government Confederal System - a government in which power is thoroughly spread between strong local entities/states and a relatively weaker central government ○ Example : the United States under the Articles of Confederation ○ Basic Theory of confederalism Individuals have natural rights The people delegate power to state governments which appoint representatives to the central/national government to represent the state’s interests The central government is designed with limited powers and often without the ability to act independently to fund/tax or support initiatives ○ Advantages of confederalism : state governments more accessible to the people and more likely to understand the people’s interests ○ Disadvantages of confederalism : the central government is often ineffective and unproductive; state populations are more susceptible to class infighting and stalemate Federal System of Government Federal System ○ Basic theory of federalism: Individuals have natural rights People delegate power to state and central governments BUT, the central government holds the most power The central/national government is delegated powers primarily involving economic, military, and diplomatic affairs State governments reserve/retain undelegated powers often over education, policing, health, and local interests Federal System of Government “Federalism” - The Madisonian concept of the “Compound Republic” - the power sharing relationship between states and the central government - was a novel idea at the founding ○ Madison calls it a “double security” to protect the people from tyranny States and the federal government may check one another’s power ○ Federalism is an additional layer of separation of powers, checks and balances, etc. ○ Federalism allows for greater local diversity in legislation, life styles, etc. within the same country Federal System of Government Advantages of Federal System: ○ Capable of governing a larger geographic area and population ○ Allows for greater diversity in local areas (ex: California vs Texas vs Vermont) ○ Encourages “pluralism” - multiple groups competing for power - limiting one another ○ Additional layers of checks and balances and power sharing ○ Many points of access for citizens to interact with their government Disadvantages of Federalism ○ Gridlock? ○ tendency toward elitism as the political leaders are further removed from the people ○ The complex inner working of the government can be confusing & discouraging to the public 1.4 : Challenges of the Articles of Confederation Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action What did power structures within the Articles of Confederation (AoC) reveal? State sovereignty/power preferred over centralized power ○ Legislation required ⅔ support (9 of 13 states) ○ One vote per state in Congress (regardless of population) ○ Taxes could not be forcibly collected from states - they were essentially donated by states ○ Raising a military force required support from the states Fear of tyranny from the central government outweighed desires for greater coordination between states Individual states were the dominant drivers of culture, economy, and politics Why didn’t the Articles of Confederation Work? Key weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation revealed ○ Shays’s Rebellion (see next slide) ○ territorial disputes between states were ongoing(let alone land disputes with Native Americans) ex) Green Mountain Boys & settlement of Vermont Economic recession Foreign investment discouraged as States repaid revolutionary war debt at different rates, if at all - resulting in a “poor credit rating” Stagnant trade with Britain slowed growth Poor war veterans struggled and some grew discontent The AoC Congress was too decentralized & weak to command the respect of the 13 states AND ambitious foreign nations in an age of imperialism Instability/tension between states without a judicial branch to settle disputes One state, one vote standard irritated states with larger populations and economies The requirement of unanimity for amendments proved unworkable/impossible Which system of government from our list placed the preponderance of power in local authorities at the expense of the central government? Recall : “The truth is, a common rule holds for the seasons, for all plants and animals, and particularly for political societies : excess in one direction tends to provoke excess in the contrary direction. So an excess of liberty-in the state or in the individual - seems destined to end up in slavery” -Plato Why didn’t the Articles of Confederation Work? Shays’s Rebellion the confederal nature of the Articles of Confederation became the target reformers wanted to change…what was a viable alternative to confederalism? Some favored the creation of a “federal system” of government Unitary System Confederal System Ex ) monarchy, Ex ) Articles of totalitarianism Confederation Practice #1 The next most palpable defect of the subsisting Confederation, is the total want of a SANCTION to its laws. The United States, as now composed, have no powers to exact obedience, or punish disobedience to their resolutions, either by pecuniary [fines], by a suspension or divestiture of privileges, or by any other constitutional mode. There is no express delegation of authority to them to use force against delinquent members; and if such a right should be ascribed to the federal head, as resulting from the nature of the social compact between the States, it must be by inference and construction... There is, doubtless, a striking absurdity in supposing that a right of this kind does not exist... - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist 21 Practice # 1 (using Hamilton quote from previous slide) Which of the following arguments about government would Hamilton likely agree with? A) The national government, by natural right, has more power than the state governments. B) Separation of powers means that the national government is limited to passing only legislation that all the states want. C) Under federalism, the states retain more power than the national government. D) As a practical matter, the laws of the national government ought to have supremacy over state laws. Practice #1 D Which of the following arguments about government would Hamilton likely agree with? A) The national government, by natural right, has more power than the state governments. B) Separation of powers means that the national government is limited to passing only legislation that all the states want. C) Under federalism, the states retain more power than the national government. D) As a practical matter, the laws of the national government ought to have supremacy over state laws. Practice # 2 (using same Hamilton quote) In the (same) passage, Hamilton is concerned that under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government does not have sufficient constitutional powers to gain compliance from state governments. Which of the following is a way that the Constitution allows the federal government to address this problem? A) The state governments have reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment. B) The federal government is not permitted to coin money. C) The federal government can pass laws that allow it to fine or tax individuals directly. D) A Bill of Rights was added to the United States Constitution to protect individual civil liberties. Practice # 2 C In the (same) passage, Hamilton is concerned that under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government does not have sufficient constitutional powers to gain compliance from state governments. Which of the following is a way that the Constitution allows the federal government to address this problem? A) The state governments have reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment. B) The federal government is not permitted to coin money. C) The federal government can pass laws that allow it to fine or tax individuals directly. D) A Bill of Rights was added to the United States Constitution to protect individual civil liberties. Practice # 3 (using same Hamilton quote) Which of the following scenarios illustrates a solution for the problem of getting states to comply with federal government policies, as described in the (same) passage? A) The federal government can withhold highway funds from states that do not raise the age to drink alcohol to 21. B) The federal government can place a tax on any goods that an individual regularly transports across state borders. C) Both the states and the federal government have the power to issue income taxes. D) A constitutional amendment can be passed to override a Supreme Court decision. Practice # 3 A Which of the following scenarios illustrates a solution for the problem of getting states to comply with federal government policies, as described in the (same) passage? A) The federal government can withhold highway funds from states that do not raise the age to drink alcohol to 21. B) The federal government can place a tax on any goods that an individual regularly transports across state borders. C) Both the states and the federal government have the power to issue income taxes. D) A constitutional amendment can be passed to override a Supreme Court decision. (from previous slide)“The United States, as now composed, have no powers to exact obedience, or punish disobedience to their resolutions, either by pecuniary [fines], by a suspension or divestiture of privileges, or by any other constitutional mode.” 1.5 : Ratification of the U.S. Constitution Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action The American/Madisonian System, Protecting Liberty Through Structures James Madison (“father of the Constitution) believed structural barriers would do more to protect liberty than a bill of rights alone ○ Some structural barriers include the separation of powers into our 3 branches of government, checks and balances, as well as federalism (power sharing between the national and state governments) ○ additional Madisonian structures were qualifications for office, fixed terms, different paths to power in each branch, etc. We’ll revisit these concepts throughout the course Constitutional Compromises & Resulting Structures It’s crucial to remember the context in which the COTUS was formed in order to understand the peculiarities of the document Even though the Framers tended to agree upon basic tendencies in human nature and that individuals have natural rights - the beliefs, norms, and prejudices of the times influenced and shaped the document that was formed Some of these tensions can be seen in the compromises necessary to ratify the COTUS Constitutional Compromises & Resulting Structures The Great Compromise was necessary to resolve tension between states with larger and smaller populations for the purpose of representation in Congress The resulting structure was a bicameral legislature (2 house congress) ○ The House of Representatives - representation based on population The House is the most democratic structure in the national government Direct elections by smaller districts & shorter (2 year) terms make representatives accountable to their constituents The “origination clause” (Article 1, Section 7, clause 1) was a nod by the Framers to the need for democratic accountability to new taxes ○ The Senate - the ‘upper house’ in which representation was equal (2 senators) between all states Originally, Senators were appointed by state legislatures The 17th Amendment required direct elections for senators The Framers viewed Congress as the most powerful branch of government which contributed to the decision to divided it into two houses that check one another The bicameral structure of Congress was an important adjustment from the Articles of Confederation’s unicameral - one state/one vote system Which house of Congress was intentionally made the most democratic? Given their structures, which house of congress would most likely have members that take extreme stances? Given their structures, in which house of Congress would representatives have the greatest freedom to refine the ideas of constituents and the opportunity to form relationships with other representatives? How did the 17th amendment alter the structure of the Senate? Who were Senators most accountable to before and after its passage? Let’s view more painful compromises. Compromises that led William Lloyd Garrison to call the COTUS an “agreement with hell.” Read Article 1, Section 2 & Article 1, Section 9 Compromises Involving Slavery : ⅗ Compromise The ⅗ Compromise used in calculating representation in the House of Representatives ○ ⅗ of the peoples enslaved were counted when apportioning representatives to the House of Representatives ○ Reflected the tension over slavery between North & South - legislative control would determine the future of slavery ○ This strengthened slave - owning states in the South by ~⅓ increase to theirs seats in Congress & the Electoral College ○ A monstrously absurd compromise but one in which the framers viewed a trade off between ratification and collapse of the Union The ⅗ Compromise was overwritten by the 14 Amendment Compromises Involving Slavery “Runaway Slave” Clause (Article 4, Section 2) Slave Trade Clause (Article 1, Secion 9) reflected tension over slavery between North & South R 22-12 ○ North : abolitionist stirrings amongst religious groups - especially the Quakers Geography less conducive to large scale agriculture - and the temptation for slavery Northern states had begun the process of limiting and abolishing slavery through laws Northerner politicians perceived any increases in slavery as benefitting the South ○ Border States Pro Slavery but experienced frequent revolts Transitioned from tobacco to grain crops - fewer slaves worked these crops Tended to favor the domestic slave trade over importation ○ Deep South Region most dependent on slavery for labor intensive crops (indigo, rice, etc) Frequent revolts and people fleeing slavery Southern politicians sought continuation of the international slave trade and legal protections against “runaway slaves” “person” And now for a non-controversial structure:) Compromises Over the Presidency & Electoral College The framers settled on the need for a single national executive to execute laws - a president Structural restraints Minimum age of 35, natural born citizen, US resident 14 years 4 year term limit before facing another election Washington set a crucial precedent of 2 terms BUT there was no official term limits until the 20th century The Presidency and the Electoral College The Electoral College is a structure that expresses the strength of states AND fear of direct democracy ○ Factors concerning the framers The president is the only elected office voted on by the entire United States It is therefore the office where a demagogue (political figures who appeal to passion, desire, and prejudice rather than reason and rule of law) can pose the greatest threat to the republic The framers feared a “mob” every bit as much as a king The Presidency and the Electoral College the Electoral College - we vote as states ○ As of the Jacksonian Era, citizens vote for the “electors” ○ The number of electors for each state is determined by adding the number of senators (always 2*) to the number of representatives in the House of Representatives (based on population) Each party has their own “slate” of electors that votes in the event their candidate wins the popular vote ○ After the popular vote occurs, the electors vote within the Electoral College and send the results to Congress to be counted The House of Representatives votes to break any tie in the Electoral College *this gives states with smaller populations an slightly outsized influence in the electoral college Elections in which the winner lost the popular vote. 1824 - Q. Adams over Jackson 1876 - Hayes over Tilden 1888 - Harrison over Cleveland 2000 - Bush over Gore 2016 - Trump over H. Clinton The Electoral College is perhaps in need of reform, BUT these outcomes are not illegal. Every candidate running knew this was the structure that decides the victor. Compromises with the Antifederalists : Bill of Rights The Anti Federalists insisted that an explicit bill of rights be added to the Constitution ○ Federalists argued that “enumerating” specific rights would be too long or, be dangerous if the government could violate other rights not listed ○ The Bill of Rights became the first 10 Amendments → more on these later The Bill of Rights was agreed to but added after the ratification of the Constitution Let’s talk about formal and informal ways to change the COTUS. These are important concepts for you to know as a citizen…and for the AP exam. Ratification, Amendments, Republicanism (Article 5) Article 7 required the approval of 9 states for ratification of the COTUS Amendments are a formal way change, or expand, the application of the COTUS ○ The amendment process exhibits the principles of federalism, popular sovereignty, and republicanism in how it involves multiple levels of government Typically amendments are proposed at the national level and approved at the state level Also, the POTUS, nor SCOTUS, are involved in the process (formally) ○ The balance between strength, continuity, and change was one the framers tried to correct from the Articles of Confederation by providing an relatively easier amendment process Ratification, Amendments, Republicanism (Article 5) The first ten amendments, adopted as a result of the ratification process, are collectively referred to as the Bill of Rights # 1 - 8 involve rights/civil liberties for individuals # 9-10 reserve powers (unenumerated) to the people and states Ratification, Amendments, Republicanism (Article 5) the federal government, state governments, individuals, and interest groups can also informally change to the interpretation of the COTUS ○ Informal actions that change, or expand, the application of the COTUS Informal Congressional action : legislation and regulations that change the functioning of the COTUS Informal Executive action : executive orders that change the functioning of the COTUS Informal Judiciary action : judicial review (interpretations over guns, abortion, and privacy) Informal Political parties action: filibuster etc. see chart 1.6 : Principles of American Government Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action Why Separate Powers? Why Checks and Balances? Consider whether the following strengthen or weaken checks and balances? - Political parties - 17th amendment - direct election of senators - Growth of federal bureaucracy - technology  What does Separation of Powers & Checks and Balances Mean for us? ○ Multiple “access points”, meaning there are many opportunities for stakeholders to get involved and interact with government Stakeholders includes : voters, interest groups, state/local officials, businesses, non-profit organizations, and anyone interested in policies What does Separation of Powers & Checks and Balances Mean for You and I? Access Points Knowledge of things like this are good citizenship, but also helpful on free-response questions (FRQs). Access Points : Congress Vote to elect members of Congress individuals/groups can contact/meet with a member of Congress to discuss policy impacts Join an interest group that influences the member of Congress Donate money, or time, to an election/reelection campaign contact media or public protest/march, to get the attention of Congress Start a social media campaign Access Points : POTUS Vote for, or contact, POTUS with policy concerns Contact POTUS : letter writing OR social media campaign individuals/group can meet with the POTUS to discuss policy impacts Donate money for election/reelection Protest, march, contact media with concerns toward POTUS Access Points : Federal Courts Harder for public to access due to structure insulating courts from public opinion Submit amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief on a given case and how it may impact you/ your group ○ Support interest group that influences courts Protest, march, outside courts/SCOTUS (though less influential on courts) Benefits of Separation of Powers & Checks & Balances citizens/stakeholders have multiple access to access both national and local government institutions People may act as individuals (participatory) or ally with interest groups (pluralist) to affect change in their community Benefits of Separation of Powers & Checks & Balances Checks and balances allow legal action to be taken against public officials ○ Congress can investigate the POTUS ○ POTUS, judges, etc. may be impeached and removed from office ○ Public opinion, interest groups can discourage public officials from abusing power through protest/demonstrations *“Gridlock”? Inaction, or inability of government to act due to a lack of unity in separate branches - maintains status quo ○ Examples : divided Congress, POTUS vetoes congressional legislation Downsides of Separation of Powers & Checks & Balances *“Gridlock”? Inaction, or inability of government to act due to a lack of unity in separate branches - maintains status quo General confusion can confuse and discourage citizens from engaging  1.7 : Relationship Between States and Federal Government Delegated powers - reserved powers - concurrent powers Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action What is Federalism? Federalism is the relationship of power distribution between the central (federal) and local (state) government The Constitution helps to define national and state powers  What is Federalism? Delegated Powers - powers given/delegated to the federal government in the COTUS → aka enumerated powers ○ Ex : Article 1, section 8 : immigration policy, coin money, diplomacy, etc. Reserved Powers - powers kept/reserved by the states by the COTUS General examples : Education, health, marriage, “morality” (blue laws concerning alcohol) More specific examples : legal drinking age, gambling, lotteries, freeway speed limits Examples of Reserved Powers What is Federalism? Shared or Concurrent Powers (powers exercised by both central and local governments ○ Concurrent powers are those in which both levels of government can exercise power Taxes State income taxes, sales taxes federal taxes etc, road maintenance, creation of courts (federal, state, and municipal, and borrow money Examples of Concurrent Powers 1.8 : Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action What are some of the ways federalism is found to in the Constitution? COTUS & Federalism The COTUS obligates the national and state governments to each other ○ Full faith and credit (Article 4, Section 1) - mutual recognition of official documents (marriage, divorce, birth certificates, driver’s license etc. → all are valid across state lines ○ Privileges & Immunities (Article 4, Section 2)- prevents states from discriminating against the citizens of other states ex) police protection - California can’t require someone from another state to pay for police protection while visiting ○ Extradition (Article 4, Section 2) - those accused of crimes may not flee to another state to avoid prosecution; states are obligated to return the accused to the state in which the crime was committed ○ Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8) - empowers Congress to regulate commerce (buying & selling) between states COTUS and Federalism 10th Amendment: 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. “Elastic Clause”/Necessary & Proper Clause Article 1, Section 8: Congress has the power, “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into the Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or any Department of Officer thereof.”  COTUS and Federalism Supremacy Clause, Article VI, Clause 2 : This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof...shall be the supreme Law of the Land... Clearly these establish an emphasis on the power of the federal/national government that far exceeded the “firm league of friendship” formulated in the Articles of Confederation. Let’s look at a famous example of the tension involving federalism. Historical Developments in Federalism Jefferson and Hamilton famously debated the issue ○ Jefferson’s “strict construction” insisted that the federal government is strictly limited to doing only what the letters of the Constitution say it can To what extent This view favors states’ rights by limiting the implied powers of was Jefferson’s the federal government presidency ○ Hamilton argue for a “loose construction” of the COTUS, consistent with his views insisting that powers assigned to the federal government here? “implied” additional powers he deemed necessary to effectively carrying out those powers The creation of the national bank is the classic case He claimed it was necessary to effectively regulate commerce, coin money, etc. as delegated in the COTUS Early SCOTUS decisions also had a large impact on defining federalism. Who was the most impactful chief justice in this regard? Historical Developments in Federalism: SCOTUS SCOTUS & Federalism John Marshall by Henry Inman, 1832 (Wikimedia Commons) ○ John Marshall 34 year (1801-1835) stint as Chief Justice emphasized the Federalist’s view of a strong central government long after the party had lost political influence Marshall defended federal supremacy under the following logic The people, not the states established the COTUS COTUS conferred higher authority on the federal government over the states Thus, powers exercised by the federal government are higher than those of individual states ○ A key case was that of Marbury v. Madison (1803) which established the principle of judicial review - the authority of the Supreme Court had the authority to rule acts of the federal government and/or states unconstitutional Historical Developments in Federalism: SCOTUS Another significant case is McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) ○ The state of Maryland attempted to tax the branch of the national bank located in Baltimore, but James McCulloch refused to pay the tax...and it made its way to SCOTUS Justice Marshall answered two questions in favor of the federal authority Did Congress have the authority to create a national bank? YES - he reinforced Hamilton’s implied powers concept using the “necessary and proper clause” (Article 1, Section 8) Do states have the authority to tax a federal bank? NO - following his view of federal supremacy (Article 6), since the bank had been lawfully founded by the federal government, states do not have the authority to tax it “The power to tax involves the power to destroy” - John Marshall  Clearly the Marshall court advanced the doctrine of federal power over that of the states. There was a contemporary theory of states rights that percolated up to counter this however. A fight in Congress regarding the Alien and Sedition Acts, 1798. Federalist Congressman Roger Griswold (far right, holding cane) attacks Jeffersonian Republican Congressman Matthew Lyon with his cane, who replies with fireplace tongs. Historical Developments in Federalism: Nullification “Nullification” theory developed first in response to the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts, 1798 ○ The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (by Jefferson and Madison respectively) argued that states could declare federal laws unconstitutional ○ Notice the direct conflict with the later Marbury v. Madison decision Historical Developments in Federalism: Nullification Applications of nullification ○ Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions argued for free speech/press, as well as easier immigration ○ John Calhoun argued later in the 1800s against tariffs and for slavery ○ The logical extreme of nullification theory is state’s right to secede (formally separate) from the United States ○ Nullification was among the contributing factors leading to the Civil War The Union victory in the Civil War deemed secession unconstitutional Are there ways nullification theory persists today? Did the Civil War eliminate states rights and federalism with it? Not quite... Dual Federalism and Variations Following the Civil War, the advocates of federalism promoted the concept of dual federalism - the doctrine that the national government and states governments are supreme within their own spheres - and should stay separate ○ Sometimes called “layer cake” federalism in which each level exercises great powers within its layer ○ Approximately Civil War - 1937 Cooperative federalism, aka “marble cake”, grew in influence after 1937 emphasizing the broad interpretation of federal powers *commerce clause ○ Promoted a mingling of responsibilities through shared powers Dual Federalism & Variations New Federalism was most strongly pushed by figures like Nixon and Reagan ○ It emphasized a devolution of power back to the states ○ Favored the use of block grants to allow states flexibility in using federal funding ○ States, and individuals, exercise increasing control evidenced We’ll be covering different grant by the increased adoption of the initiative, referendum and formulas, including block grants, next recall time. ○ States continued to exercise great power over Policing Public health Education Public land use ○ Keep in mind: US v. Lopez (1995) for your SCOTUS briefs 1.9 : Federalism in Action Unit 1 AP Exam weighting 15 - 22% 1.1 Ideals of Democracy 1.2 Types of Democracy 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights 1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation 1.5 Ratification of the U.S. Constitution 1.6 Principles of American Government 1.7 Relationship Between the States & Federal Government 1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism 1.9 Federalism in Action "It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." - Justice Brandeis, 1932 Federal - State Relations Surprise! Much of the relationship between states and the federal government revolve around….MONEY in various grants-in-aid aka revenue sharing ○ Simply put, grants-in-aid are money given by the federal government to the states Federalism and Grant$ The earliest grants-in-aid utilized what the nation had in abundance: land ○ land-grants to colleges ○ Railroads, canals, flood control projects also received early land-grants Federalism and Grant$ Federal government’s interest in federal grants-in-aid ○ Centrally controlled grants help establish federal standards Poverty, crime, drug war, environmental programs, etc. ○ Block grants help reduce federal bureaucracy by transferring decision making to states Federalism and Grant$ state/local interests in federal grants ○ Supplies local governments with funding Necessitated, in part by the growth of federal programs states have to administer Grants supply roughly ⅕ of state budgets ○ Helps equalize resources between rich and poor states: “fair-share formulas” Federalism and Grant$ federal grants-in-aid are popular? ○ Fair-share funding formulas tend to skew funding toward poorer In the wake of 9/11, states with lower populations Homeland security States tend to dog-pile when allocated 7x the per capita funding to funding becomes available Wyoming compared ○ States, and local politicians, to New York. benefit from funding that appears free without raising local taxes ○ popularity evidenced by their steady increase since the 1960s You too, can be among Types of Grants Categorical grants favor control by the federal government ○ Federal government strictly controls agenda with funding ○ Intended for specific purpose (ex. infrastructure such as highways and welfare) Often the lifeblood for the programs they fund ○ Often require matching funds from states ○ Hotly sought after by special interest groups How do categorical grants impact federalism? Types of Grants Block grants (favored by the 104th Congress’ devolution efforts) - favor states’ rights ○ Allow states greater flexibility to adjust funds to local needs ○ Intended for a general purpose with fewer restrictions on spending (ex. Community development or funding for local law enforcement) ○ Broad purposes of money make them less appealing to special interests/lobby groups Revenue sharing ○ Least restrictive federal funding allows states the broadest flexibility on spending ○ Often don’t require matching funds from states How do block grants and revenue sharing impact federalism? California State Capital Federal Restrictions on State Actions Mandates - federal orders imposed on states that must be met regardless of acceptance of federal funding ○ Enable federal government to push its goals/agenda onto and into states Unfunded mandates - requirements set by the federal government upon the states without offering federal funds to help offset the costs Examples ○ Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (‘90 under Bush 41) The well-intended but vague threshold of “equal access” proved costly to states ○ Environmental acts (ex. ‘88 Ocean Dumping Ban Act) ○ School desegregation Federal Restrictions on States Actions Conditions of aid - restrictions, or “strings”, set by the federal government that states must meet in order to receive federal funds ○ Examples include environmental impact reports for new construction or demonstrating non-discrimination in hiring practices How do mandates and conditions of aid impact federalism? Federal Restrictions on State Action Complaints from the states ○ financial burdens (especially unfunded mandates -ex. Federal minimum wage or requiring infrastructure upgrades) ○ Federal intrusiveness and/or abuse of power ○ Federal “blackmail” (failure to comply in one area may result in funding being pulled from others, often infrastructure funding) Devolution Revolution Devolution - gradual return of power from the federal government to the states often involving more flexible spending in federal grants ○ Prioritized block grants over categorical ○ Recall the “New Federalism” supported by Nixon, but more closely associate with Reagan in the 1980s The 104th Congress (1994), led by Republicans, heavily pushed the concept of devolution in the “Contract with America” platform Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich Example of Devolution: Welfare Reform, 1990s The 104th Congress focused on converting AFDC (Am. Families with Dependent Children) and Medicaid from categorical to block grants AFDC became controversial and unpopular making it vulnerable to reform ○ The number of women using it as well as the proportion of births out of wedlock increased dramatically leading critics to conclude the program encouraged the problem it was intended to solve The reform ended the federal guarantee of support New rules required aided women to find work within 2 years ○ They also ended aid after 5 years Though the cause is debated, by 2002, the national welfare caseload dropped by over 57% to around 2 million families Analysis from Brookings Institution Devolution Revolution Clinton’s presidency demonstrated that devolution, at least in part, bipartisan ○ Passage of a welfare reform bill in 1996 (converting Aid to Families with Dependent Children -AFDC- to a block grant) that led to dramatic reduction in aid ○ Repeal of 55 mph federal speed limit ○ Unfunded Mandate Reform Act - limited passing of them ○ An increase in block grants  Federalism Always on a Pendulum National criteria for state-issued driver's licenses - Real ID (Homeland Security) More national food safety standards More crimes considered national Patriot Act (post 9/11) Education reforms (No Child Left Behind, Common Core)  An ongoing American debate: Central power vs states’ rights "It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." - Justice Brandeis, 1932