Introduction to GOVT 2302

Review of key principles from 2301

Welcome

Or Welcome Back

As you know, GOVT 2302 is the second of two classes designed to introduce students to the United

States and Texas Constitutions, the basic language of government and

politics, and the nature of American Political institutions.

In this first set of slides I want to recall the purpose of this class, as

well as GOVT 2301, and review key principles from 2301.

Examples:

Natural RightsConstitutional Design

Civil Liberties and RightsInstitutions

ElectionsPolitical Parties

Participatory Rights

In brief, over the course of this semester we will dig deeply into

the nature of the three branches of government:

LegislativeExecutive

Judicial

In order to put these into context, we will begin by reviewing the

relevant material from GOVT 2301.

When you are finished, you will be asked to answer a series of questions regarding these

principles.

They should help this material make sense.

Let’s review why this class is even offered, much less required.

Because you are citizens in a democratic republic.

Democracies are based on the people and its actions are the culmination of the

preferences of the population.

This is expressed subtly when individuals choose to follow or not follow the laws,

pay taxes, in protecting the republic when threatened, or in deciding to participate in

public events like elections.

An educated participatory and virtuous citizenry has always been considered to be necessary to the survival of a democratic republic.

Why?

Because democratic republics are fragile. History provides many examples of them losing public support and falling into anarchy

and then despotism.

Key example: The Lessons of Ancient Rome

The nation’s founders were generally classically educated and were familiar with the history of

Rome.

(Who were the founders? Here’s the Wikipedia page on who

qualifies as a “founder.”

After almost 500 years as a Republic (509 BC–27 BC), where it

was ruled by its citizens, Rome became an empire.

The driving force behind this change was Julius Caesar.

What is a Republic?

A republic is a type of government where the citizens choose the

leaders of their country and the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its

government. -Wikipedia

In short, a governing system where the people rule themselves.

But while a republic, Rome was also chaotic, unstable, and

sometimes ungovernable. Leaders were often corrupt and unpopular.

What is an Empire?

A major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples

under a single sovereign authority; especially : one having an emperor as chief of state. The territory of such a political unit. Something

resembling a political empire; especially : an extensive territory or enterprise under single

domination or control.

During the empire, all civil and military power rested with the

emperor. The people had no say in governance, though emperors had

to appease them in order to minimize the possibility of

rebellion.

In short, a governing system where the people are ruled by an

emperor and have little ability, if any, to directly participate in public

affairs.

But these could also be times of peace and prosperity.

Again, this shift from republic to empire was driven by Julius Caesar, an ambitious general who attempted to

turn the republic into an empire under his control.

He failed because he was assassinated by Senators who were aware of his plans, now you know why he was

killed.

Here’s the scene from HBO’s Rome

But his nephew Augustus Caesar would succeed.

A quick video about him.

Here’s some irony: The chaotic republic was transformed into a more peaceful empire. After Augustus there would be over 200 years of peace in

Rome: The Pax Romana.

This creates a dilemma: Which system is preferable?

A bit more history from the movies: The emperor who would

end the Pax Romana was Commodus – the guy from the Gladiator. It is argued that the decline of the Roman Empire

began with his rule.

A few videos on You Tube try to explain this transition. Here are a

few you might want to watch:

Rome: The Fall of the Republic (1-4)

So the question became: What factors led to the decline of the Republic, and could the decline

have been prevented?

In short: Is a Republic – a system of government – based on the

people, sustainable?

As a practical matter – considering that the early empire seemed temporarily to be a successful

system – what balance ought to be struck between popular rule and a

central state?

Members of the founding generation wished to avoid this

fate.

Benjamin Franklin put it this way:

Mrs. Powel: "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"

Benjamin Franklin: "A republic if you can keep it“

- An exchange alleged to have taken place at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention.

Abraham Lincoln would also ask the question:

“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. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. …”

Abraham LincolnThe opening of the Gettysburg Address

Why are they difficult to maintain?

Human Nature

A democratic republic can only be maintained if the people are

willing to look after its general long term needs.

"Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public

virtue is the only foundation of republics." -John Adams

Public Virtue

But people tend to be more focused on short term personal

needs.

CorruptionAmbitionWealth

ComplacencyFactions

All create problems for the maintenance of a republic.

[Note: A key philosophic dispute underlying governmental design is

whether human nature can be improved.]

What’s worse, democratic republics tend to develop the very

factors that will lead to their demise.

Conflict over how government ought to be run and over who

ought to be in charge can lead to the dismantling of the republic.

But this conflict develops because people are free to develop,

articulate and act on their own opinions.

American Government is founded, in a sense, on a contradiction. While it is

based on the people (popular sovereignty) historically the people

have demonstrated themselves not to be a solid foundation for government.

At least the elites thought so.

The country’s founders did not necessarily expect the republic to last. Previous republics had not. One of history’s lessons is that

democracies tend to be very short lived.

“For my part, I am not much attached to the majesty of the multitude, and therefore waive all pretensions (founded on such conduct), to their countenance. I

consider them in general as very ill qualified to judge for themselves what government will best suit their

peculiar situations; nor is this to be wondered at. The science of government is not easily understood. Cato

will admit, I presume, that men of good education and deep reflection, only, are judges of the form of a government; whether it is constituted on such

principles as will restrain arbitrary power, on the one hand, and equal to the exclusion of corruption and the

destruction of licentiousness on the other” - (Caesar #2) Alexander Hamilton

Which raises an important question:

Is self-government possible?

That is the essence of the American Experiment, to discover

whether this is in fact possible.

Can the population of a country govern itself?

Alexander Hamilton would claim that this was the question America

was to answer for the world.

“It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”

- Publius (Alexander Hamilton), Federalist #1

Reflection and choice

Accident and force

American government, Texas included, is based on popular

consent. The governmental system is a choice, It only survives to the

degree that people choose to maintain it.

American government is based on consent, but is the general

population capable of offering informed consent?

What are people willing to consent to?

Is the general population willing to be persuaded to support one party or the other, or one candidate or

the other, for superficial short sighted reasons harmful to the

long term interests of the community?

Bread and Circuses

Can the support of the people be bought? At what price?

Government based on popular consent requires an educated

population capable of providing a solid basis for governing.

An educated choice

An understanding of the principles of government is argued necessary

to maintain the republic

But here’s the problem:

Most public opinion surveys demonstrate that people lack the knowledge about governmental

issues, and attentiveness to politics that was expected necessary

by the founders.

Actually, many founders expected that the mass public would be

incapable of self-government and purposely limited participation to a

ruling class that would have the ability to govern effectively.

Those who own America ought to govern it

- John Jay

But since the early years of the republic, efforts have been made to broaden participation. Public

education has been seen as being central to this effort. An educated

citizenry can more effectively govern itself.

Civic Education

Thomas Jefferson

Preamble to a Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge

A link to the entire bill.

Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to

good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and

the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

-- The Northwest Ordinance (1787)

It [the Mexican Government] has failed to establish any public system of education, although possessed of almost boundless

resources, (the public domain,) and although it is an axiom in political science, that unless a

people are educated and enlightened, it is idle to expect the continuance of civil liberty, or the

capacity for self government.

- one of the grievances in the Texas Declaration of Independence.

As a result, a government can be chosen by the population which

can then offer consent to it based on its evaluations of its

performance.

The alternative is coercion.

As mentioned above, this class focuses on the nature of the three basic institutions of government

LegislativeExecutive

Judicial

We will define each, explore their historical evolution, how each is designed in the U.S. and Texas Constitutions, how they have

evolved over the years and how their current design.

An exploration of British history and the organic development of British institutions will be central

to this effort.

Our institutions were based on British institutions. Our history is in many ways an extension of theirs. Our institutions were designed to learn from the lessons of history.

They are not based on theory, they are based on reality.

This requires that we understand the importance of basic historical

text.

Charter of LibertiesMagna Carta

Petition of RightBritish Bill of Rights

British Common Law

Together these, and select other documents, establish the British Constitution. In many places, our

Constitution uses the same terminology found in the British

Constitution.

To the extent possible, we will try to establish these relationships this

semester.

Why is this important? If we want to preserve our constitutional

structure is crucial to know this history.

It should also give us a renewed appreciation for the structure established by the document.

It is the product of experience – trial and error – dating back

centirues.

Examples

Our bicameral legislature is similar in form to the bicameral legislature

in Britain. A lower branch is connected closely to the general

population, while an upper branch is removed from it.

The development of the legislature can be traced to Magna Carta, which was a response to the

abuses of King John. Part of the function of legislatures since then

has been to check abusive, potentially abusive executives.

Our singular executive and administrative structure is similar –

with exceptions -- to the singular executive which has existed over

British history and the administrative apparatus which

has evolved to carry out the laws.

Concerns over the potential abuse of executive power recur

throughout British – and American – history. These conflicts peaked during the Stuart monarchy, and

led to our constitutional understanding of the role of the

executive.

Our judicial system, the concept of judicial independence, and our

common law, is based on British experience.

We will follow the following format for each of the three principle

governing institutions.

First – We will define the powers of each institution, investigate their evolution through British

history, discovery what was stated about each power in the

Declaration of Independence, and how they were established in the

Articles of Confederation.

Second – We will read how each institution is established in the United

States and Texas Constitutions. We will also understand the principle

controversies associated with each institution and how these were handled in the Constitutional

Convention and the Federalist Papers.

Third – We will investigate the principle changes each institution

has weathered over American history.

Fourth – We will conclude with an analysis of the contemporary state of each institution and the issues and controversies associated with

each institution.

Hopefully this will allow us to effectively trace the evolution of the powers of each institution.

Now for a quick review of the central concepts of 2301.

Again, be prepared to answer questions about this material.

Some Definitions:

A Couple Definitions of “Government”

The institution, or institutions, with the monopoly on the legitimate use of

coercion in society

The institutions and procedures through which a land and its people are ruled.

Governments do three things

They Pass LawsThey Implement LawsThey Adjudicate Laws

In the American Constitutional system, these three functions are

vested in three separate institutions:

LegislativeExecutive

Judicial

These are the separated powers.

The concentration of those powers in the hands of one person or

entity is tyranny.

The purpose of the separated powers is to prevent tyranny.

The purpose of the checks and balances is to maintain the

separated powers.

Governments are based on sovereign power.

What is “sovereignty?”

“supreme power, especially over a body politic”

“the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory”

“the power to do everything in a state without accountability”

The only question is where sovereignty lies.

Autocracy – rule of oneOligarchy – rule of the few

Democracy – rule of the many

Each has advantages and disadvantages

Autocratic rule is efficient but arbitrary.

Oligarchic rule is knowledgeable but biased.

Democratic rule is legitimate, but subject to mob rule.

In the American system of government, sovereignty rests

with the people (“We the People), but the precise design of the

constitution incorporates aspects of autocracy, oligarchy and

democracy.

The Executive – AutocraticThe Judiciary – Oligarchic

The Legislature - Democratic

The American Governing System is best defined as a republic.

Defining “Politics”

What is Politics?

The authoritarian allocation of values in society.

The struggle over who gets what, when and how.

Intrigue or maneuvering within a political unit or group in order to gain control or power

While “government” refers to those institutions that can rule

with authority, “politics” refers to the effort to determine what those

institutions will do.

Political institutions are largely private organizations developed to

influence the activities of government.

Principle Examples

Political PartiesInterest Groups

The Media

A political party is a group that competes in elections in order to hold public office and organizes governing institutions once in

power.

Political parties are not mentioned in the Constitution but they have

evolved as effective ways to organize both the electorate and governing institutions, especially

the legislature.

In addition to recruiting and running candidates for elective office, parties provide voters a

limited opportunity to influence the course of public policy.

The winner take all voting rules in most American elections has led to

the development of two major political parties. Third parties are

uncompetitive beyond one or two electoral cycles.

The Democratic and Republican Parties have dominated American

politics since 1856.

Interest Groups are similar. They organize to influence how

government officials establish public policy in a particular area.

They do not complete in elections.

They engage in lobbying and other activities.

All these activities are constitutionally protected under the right to peacefully assemble and petition government for a

redress of grievances.

The U.S. has had a vibrant press since the colonial era. The press

was central not only to the revolution, but to the expansion of

political participation.

A free press is necessary for the electorate to get the information necessary to form opinions about

governmental activities.

The press is also constitutionally protected. Congress cannot pass

laws abridging the freedom of the press.

Ideology

A key source of political conflict: differences in attitudes about

values and interests

Ideology: A set of positions on issues based on some underlying

value or interest.

Two dominant ideologies in the U.S.

ConservatismLiberalism

While there is tension within each, they can be defined somewhat

simply.

Conservatism tends to prioritize freedom over equality and also

seeks to uphold traditional relationships in society.

Liberalism tends to prioritize equality over freedom and seeks to

expand participation and social benefits to the lower classes.

We covered the development and application of the concept of

natural rights.

Over the course of British history, the doctrine of the Divine Right of the Monarchy was replaced with the doctrine of the Natural Rights

of the Individual.

The Divine Right of King held that people are born into a divine social

order that must be maintained

Natural Right Theory argued that each individual has natural, or unalienable

rights and it is the purpose of government to secure them.

The American governing system begins with the idea that rights are innate in individuals, not granted

by a government or another individual, like a king for example.

This is Jefferson’s argument in the Declaration of Independence

“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; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers

from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these

ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its

foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely

to effect their safety and happiness.”

The argument is presented as a mathematical proof.

A central point of the argument is that it is rational to consent to a

properly designed governing system.

Be able to answer questions about consent and the unalienable rights.

The Declaration of Independence is does not establish a government,

so it is not a constitution.

The powers of government are defined in written Constitutions on the national and state levels. These establish governmental institutions

and define the relationship between them and between

government and the individual.

The men who adopted the Declaration of Independence also

wrote the Articles of Confederation.

All power rested with the states.

The commercial interests did not find this arrangement acceptable

and called for a constitutional convention to correct the

document’s alleged deficiencies.

Not everyone was in favor of the convention.

Patrick Henry thought the federalists meant to undermine

the authority of the states. He was right.

Simply put, state control did not allow for coordination between

the states. Interstate transactions were difficult if not impossible.

Business suffered. The Federalists reflected the interests of business.

The principle ringleaders:

Alexander HamiltonJames Madison

Both Hamilton and Madison presented proposals to the

Constitutional Convention that would have further expanded

national power.

But they were unsuccessful.

The U.S. Constitution was the product of several compromises.

3/5ths CompromiseGreat Compromise

Bill of Rights

The Constitution contains several principles. We dug into four

dominant ones:

RepublicanismSeparated Powers

FederalismIndividual Liberty

Principle #1:Republicanism

(indirect democracy)

The United States is more accurately described as being a

republic (a representative democracy), not a democracy – or

at least a pure democracy.

The founders – at least those that wrote the constitution – believed that direct (or pure) democracies

were unstable and prone to tyranny of the majority.

The founders believed that indirect, or representative,

democracy is preferable to direct democracy since it would be less

subject to the passionate, unsteady preferences of the mob. Elites were granted a special status

in early American history.

It was assumed that people in general were more prone to conflict than

cooperation and that given the chance, the majority would persecute the minority.

Pure democracy provided the majority that opportunity.

This is the argument in Federalist #10

But as the country grew, democracy grew, expansion

expanded, and more direct control of governing institutions were

instituted. Texas government is more “democratic” than the United States government.

The U.S. has become more democratic over its history

primarily due to the expansion of suffrage.

Basic Democratic Principles

Majority RulesMinority Rights

Universal Adult Suffrage

An ongoing problem with democracy is the tension between majority rules and minority rights

The majority can tyrannize the minority.

Principle #1: Separated Powers

backed up with the Checks and Balances

Here we discussed the purpose of the separated powers, how powers are separated and maintained, and

the logic behind the system of checks and balances.

Concentrated legislative, executive, and judicial powers allow for the development of a

tyrannical system.

They must be separated in order to resist tyranny.

The Constitution vests governing powers in three institutions that

are made as independent as possible.

This explains why each is elected uniquely, and has a separate term

of office.

House – election by the peopleSenate – originally elected by state

legislaturesPresident – Electoral College

Courts – Nomination and Confirmation

But it was assumed that each institution would be controlled by people of great ambition, and that

continued ambition would lead members of one institution to seek

to control the others.

The powers granted in the Constitution to those institutions

are largely meant to allow one institution to resist the threats

posed by the other two.

Examples:

Impeachment Veto

Judicial Review

Principle #3Federalism

The federal system: The U.S. Constitution splits sovereignty

between the national and state governments. Conflict continues

between these two levels of government.

The Constitution delegates certain powers to the national

government and reserves the rest to the states.

Some national powers are implied by loose readings of the commerce and necessary and proper clauses.

The nature of these powers has been an ongoing source of conflict between advocates of national and

state power respectively.

Key Terms:

Delegated (Enumerated) PowersReserved PowersImplied Powers

While the Constitution only mentions the national and state governments, thousands of local

governments exist throughout the country.

They exist by the authority of the state constitutions.

Principle #4Individual Liberty

orCivil Liberties

Here we discussed the justifications for individual liberty –

civil liberties -- and the way that the Bill of Rights, and other

features of the Constitution secure them them.

The Bill of Rights places limits on the powers of the government.

Until the 14th Amendment, it applied only to the national

government.

Two types:

Substantive: What government can pass laws about

Procedural: How someone can be searched, tried and punished.

Certain specific substantive and procedural limitations are placed

on the powers of government. These establish the idea that

people are free in those areas. These are primarily found in the

Bill of Rights.

Substantive Liberties are established by limiting the ability

of Congress to pass laws on certain subjects, for example free exercise

or religious belief, press, and speech.

Procedural liberties are established by removing the ability of

government to arbitrarily search, try and imprison individuals.

Civil liberties are not absolute. They can be limited based upon

whether the courts determine that a particular use of right has

violated the greater interest of society.

Shouting fire in a crowded theater.

The breadth of civil liberties is an ongoing source of controversy in

the United States.

Does, for example, a right to privacy exist?

An additional source of controversy is the consequence of

the 14th Amendment. By nationalizing citizenship the

citizens of the state could use the national courts to seek redress against the state government.

This gave the national government additional power against the

states.

Civil Rights and the Equal Protection Clause

The concept of civil rights and the impact of the 14th Amendment,

most notably the equal protection clause, on the constitutional order.

As a consequence of the 14th Amendment, No state shall deny

to persons within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.

The 14th Amendment made the U.S. Bill of Rights applicable to the

states.

States had to treat people the same before the law.

But what exactly does this mean?

It can be controversial depending on what criteria is being used to

distinguish between people.

RaceGenderAge

The Supreme Court has had to weigh in over time to determine

what types of criteria can be used to treat people differently and

what types are not.

Distinctions based on race and citizenship are “suspect

classifications” meaning that they must survive the most rigid

analysis by the courts.

The conflict continues.

Elections

We covered the purpose of elections in a democracy, the

nature of the electoral system on all three levels of government, with a special emphasis on the

consequences of the winner take all system.

Most, but not all, offices are staffed with periodic elections. Many judicial and bureaucratic

positions are appointed in order to ensure professionalism in the

occupant, but this minimizes the democratic nature of American

government.

While suffrage was limited in the early years of the republic, over the course of American history it

has expanded to include most groups in society.

Turnout varies among different groups in society. Wealth, age and education are good predictors of

voter turnout.

A democratic society is dependent upon an informed electorate.

Political Parties, which were mentioned above, are the key players in an electoral system

Participatory Rights

The Participatory Freedoms

The First Amendment limits the ability of Congress to pass laws

restricting the ability of people to participate politically. This has led

to the development of political organizations.

The Freedoms Are:

SpeechPress

AssemblyPetition

These are considered to be fundamental rights.

Freedom of Speech allows people to develop and communicate their

own opinions. As a result, public opinion has evolved as a distinct

force in society.

It is a hard earned right. At one point government could curtail both speech and the press with

claims that such acts were seditious.

Sedition: Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the

authority of a state.

Much of what people engage in today politically would have been

considered to be sedition in previous centuries.

While there is more to cover, this is a reasonable review and should place the governing institutions in

proper context.

In the next set of slides we will outline the basic features of the legislative branch and discuss its

historical evolution.