Sunday, May 13, 2007

Final Exam Review sheet!

FINAL EXAM REVIEW FOR POL 100

Chapter 9 – Campaign, Elections, and the Media

Candidates
Presidential primaries
Caucus
Primary election
Opinion polls
Focus groups
Financing campaigns
Federal Election Campaign Act
PACs and Contributions
Soft money
Electoral College
Vote Fraud
Low voter turnout
Media
Functions of the media
Influence of television on elections

Chapter 10 – The Congress

Bicameralism
Lawmaking
Representation
Trustee vs delegate view
Service to constituents – casework
Ombudsperson
Oversight
Public Education
Resolving Conflict
Senate powers
House of Representatives Powers
Power of incumbency
Committee Structure
Standing committee
Select committee
Speaker of the House
Whips
Senate Majority Leader
Senate Minority Leader
Preparing the Budget
Spring Review
Fall Review
Appropriation
Chapter 11 – the President

Head of state
Chief executive
Power of appointment and removal
Power of reprieves/pardon
Commander-in-Chief
Chief Diplomat
Proposal of Treaties
Executive Agreements
Chief Legislator
Vetoing Legislation
Line-Item Veto
Statutory powers
Expressed Powers
Inherent powers
Emergency powers
Executive orders
Abuse of Power/Impeachment
Executive Office of the President

Chapter 12 – Bureaucracy

Public and private bureaucracies
Three models:
Weberian
Acquisitive
Monopolistic
Executive Branch:
Cabinet Departments
Independent Executive Agencies
Independent Regulatory Agencies
Deregulation vs regulation
Government corporations
Political appointees
Civil service
Spoils system
Civil service reform
Government in the Sunshine Act
Sunset laws
Privatization
Public-private partnership

Chapter 13 – The Courts
Common law tradition
Precedent
Stare decisis
Federal court system
Jurisdiction
Federal courts
Federal Question
Diversity of Citizenship
US District Courts
US Court of Appeals
US Supreme Court
FISA Court
Alien “Removal Courts”
Amicus Curiae
Procedural Rules
Majority opinion
Dissenting opinion
Judicial appointments
Policy-making
Judicial review
Judicial activism
Warren Court
Judicial restraint
Strict vs broad construction
Executive checks
Legislative checks
Political question

Chapter 14 – Domestic and Economic Policy
Policy-making process
Agenda – building
Policy formulation
Policy adoption
Policy implementation
Policy evaluation
Health care
Medicare
Medicaid
Uninsured
Welfare reforms
Welfare-to-work
Supplemental security income
Food stamps
Juvenile crime
Prison population
Incarceration rates
National Environmental Policy Act (1969)
Clean Air Act (1990)
Kyoto Protocol
Global warming debate
Fiscal policy
Keynesian economics
Deficit spending
Monetary policy
Federal reserve system
Loose monetary policy
Tight monetary policy
Free trade
Common markets
World Trade Organization

Chapter 15 – Foreign Policy

Iraq Study Group report
Foreign policy
Diplomacy
Economic aid
Technical assistance
Military intervention
National security policy
Morality/Idealism
American Exceptionalism
Political realism
Realpolitik
Presidential leadership
State Department
National Security Council
Intelligence Community
CIA
Executive Order (1976)
Attentive public
Military-industrial complex
Formative Years
“Entangling Alliances”
Monroe Doctrine
Isolationism
Internationalism
Cold War
Containment Policy
Superpower relations
Détente
Post-Cold War World

Essay Choices:

Here are five potential essay questions. Three of these questions will be choices on the exam. You will only have to choose ONE.

A. Political scientists have noticed that the strength of the executive branch has increased, while the ability of Congress and the courts to check this branch has been weakened. Discuss the various methods that the judicial and legislative arms can take to check the executive branch, and debate whether these are sufficient to check the growth of executive power.
B. What is the difference between judicial review and judicial activism? Explain both, and provide specific examples.
C. Outline and describe the most important functions of Congress. In which have they been most successful? In which have they been least successful? Try to provide concrete examples.
D. What is the role and influence of the news media in American politics? What is "setting the agenda"? What are the differences between print and broadcast news? Give an example of the effect of the news media on American politics.
E. Why is voter turnout so low in the United States? Cite three reasons from the textbook and explain.

Friday, May 04, 2007

Just for the record...

Stuart got elected!!


First Asian leads the parade of new MSPs
Check the state of the parties

THE first Asian MSP in Scotland led a host of new faces yesterday who will change the make-up of the Scottish Parliament and the country's future over the next four years.

Most of the gains were by the SNP, though other main parties also acquired new representatives because of smaller parties being squeezed out.

Bashir Ahmad was one of four SNP MSPs voted in for the Glasgow region.

Of the other SNP members to win seats in the regions, some are well-known fundamentalists for the Nationalist cause, while others are gradualists on the issue of independence - suggesting there will certainly be debate within the parliamentary party.

Labour too brought in some interesting new faces including a lord and Donald Dewar's press spokesman for Labour.

The Liberal Democrats triumphed in Dunfermline West by bringing in a computing student, but most of their fresh faces were in the regions.

There are 129 seats in the Scottish Parliament, 73 of which are first-past-the-post constituencies, while 56 are regional seats voted through proportional representation.

New SNP MSPs through the constituency system include Angela Constance in Livingston, Dr Alasdair Allan in Western Isles, Kenneth Gibson in Cunninghame North, Joe Fitzpatrick in Dundee West and Willie Coffey in Kilmarnock and Loudon.

However, most gains were made in the regions.

In Glasgow, Mr Ahmad, who is already a councillor in the region and has been on the party's national executive, was at the top of the list.

The new MSP, born in India but brought up in Pakistan, came to Scotland aged 20 and worked as a bus conductor and driver as he saved to buy his first shop. He then opened a restaurant and a hotel.

In the West of Scotland, Bill Wilson, from the fundamental wing of the party, was voted in alongside Gil Paterson and Stuart McMillan.

In contrast, Mike Russell, who is a gradualist, was voted in the South of Scotland.

A professor of British and Irish studies, Chris Harvie gained a seat in Mid Scotland and Fife.

Aileen Campbell won a seat in Scotland South and Jamie Hepburn, Christina McKelvie and John Wilson won seats in Scotland Central. Nigel Don was the only new name in the North East.

Labour saw the arrival of Lord George Foulkes, the former Hearts chairman, and the return of Iain Gray, the former MSP who has been working as a special adviser in the Scotland Office, in East Lothian. David Whitton, the former press officer for Donald Dewar, won in Strathkelvin and Bearsden.

Mr Foulkes, list MSP for Lothians, said: "I've always been an enthusiast for the Scottish Parliament [but] it needs some energy and inspiring debate."

In the regions, Claire Baker, John Park and Richard Simpson all won seats in Mid-Scotland and Fife.

The Tories brought in young blood in lawyer John Lamont in Roxburgh and Berwickshire. Another new face was Liz Smith in Mid-Scotland and Fife. And Jim Tolson, a computing student, won a constituency seat for the Lib Dems in Dunfermline West.

Comment: A considerable shambles
By Anthony King
Last Updated: 2:22pm BST 04/05/2007

Have your say Read comments


Live: Scottish, Welsh and local elections
Labour avoids 'meltdown' amid Scottish fiasco
The confusing ballots
Quite apart from their outcome - or, rather, their outcomes - yesterday’s elections were a considerable shambles.

In Scotland and to a smaller extent south of the border, the newly introduced technology simply failed to work. One of the few confident predictions one can make in human affairs is that new technologies usually fail to work. But there was an additional problem.

There used to be only one electoral system in mainland Britain: first past the post in single-member constituencies. Whichever candidate got more votes than any other candidate was declared the winner. And that was that.

Now Britain operates more electoral systems than any other country.

Yesterday Scottish voters could take advantage - simultaneously - in three different systems: old-fashioned first past the past in the constituency elections for the Scottish Parliament; a party-list system in the regional parliamentary elections and a system known as the single transferable vote in the elections, which also took place yesterday, to Scotland’s local authorities.

Voters south of the border have a right to complain of relative deprivation. In voting for their local councillors, they were confined to using first past the post. But even in parts of England new-fangled machines for counting the votes were used - mostly unsuccessfully.

The outcome, at least north of the border, was predictable. Tens of thousands of Scottish voters - confronted by ballots of unbelievable complexity - failed to complete them in the manner the law required and thereby forfeited, or seem to have forfeited, their votes.

Small wonder that some sixteen hours after the polls closed only just over two thirds of the seats in the Scottish Parliament have been allocated to individual candidates and parties and that a large proportion of Scotland’s local authorities have likewise yet to declare.

In both Scotland and Wales it looks almost certain that either minority or coalition administrations will now take power.

In Wales, Labour will be the largest single party, though probably without an overall majority.

In Scotland, it is still nip and tuck between Labour and the SNP, though the SNP will probably in the end have more seats. Post-election negotiations among the parties are therefore about to begin.

The story south of the border - and east of it - is complicated but in essense fairly straightforward.

The Conservatives have done well, but not very well. They still need to make substantial progress if they are to be in with a chance of winning outright the next general election.

Labour did badly, but not cataclysmically badly. Labour leaders can take comfort from the fact that they were doing just as badly in the 2004 local elections before they went on to win nationally in May 2005. All the same, Gordon Brown must have hoped for a more auspicious electoral send-off.

The Liberal Democrats have entirely lost momentum in electoral terms. They gained a few councils yesterday but they also lost a few and now have considerably fewer councillors than they did a year ago.

Even so, they could still emerge as powerbrokers after the next general election if the two major parties do almost equally well - or badly.

Anthony King is professor of government at Essex University

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Scottish election!!

Just wanted to share this:

My dear old buddy Stuart is running on the SNP ticket in Greenock/Inverclyde tomorrow. Here's some info:

5. Stuart McMillan
(Also standing in Greenock & Inverclyde constituency)
Scottish National Party
Stuart has been a member of the SNP for 14 years. He was a founder member of the re-formed Port Glasgow Branch and recently joined the Greenock and Inverclyde Branch and has become the Branch Press Officer. Stuart was also a founder member of the Dundee Young Scottish Nationalists whilst studying in Dundee and was an active member of the Abertay Nationalists.
Stuart was born in Barrow in Furness in 1972, graduated with an MBA (European) from the University of Abertay Dundee in 1997 and was married in 2003. After graduating, Stuart began employment as a Supply Analyst with IBM UK Ltd., then left to work for the SNP group in the Westminster Parliament before returning to Scotland in 2003 to be the Office Manager for Bruce McFee MSP. Stuart's studies took him to Angouleme and Toulose in France, Dortmund in Germany and Ronneby in Sweden.
Stuart is a keen piper and currently plays with the London Scottish Pipes and Drums. He has busked around Europe twice visiting friends on the way. Stuart was the SNP candidate for Inverclyde at the Westminster Election in 2005. He increased the SNP vote by 5.6%, went from 3rd to 2nd place and achieved a swing of 2.5 % from Labour.
Stuart will be contesting the Greenock and Inverclyde Constituency for the SNP at the Scottish Parliamentary elections in 2007.

Recent electoral experience
2005 Westminster election, Inverclyde, 7,059 votes (19.56 %)


--

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Bureaucracy Chapter

What is bureaucracy?

Large organization that is structured hierarchically to carry out specific functions

Public and Private Bureaucracies

- they exist outside of government as well

- for instance – McGill is FAMOUS for its red tape

book maintains that handling complex problems requires a division of labor – in order to get all parts of the job done, it must be completed by a variety of departments

Differences between public/private: Private has a SINGLE leadership bloc

Public B.: answers to a variety of leaders – President, agency head, Congress. Being pulled in all directions.

Other difference: Private is for profit, government is for services.

Three Models of Bureaucracy:

Weberian Model: Max Weber, argues that the growing complexity of modern life made bureaucracy necessary.

Organized hierarchically, governed by formal procedures

Top-down power structure

Decisions – shaped by detailed technical rules

Bureaucrats – SPECIALISTS – can only function in one area of a topic

Advancement – based on merit, not on connections

Bureaucracy – should not be political

Acquisitive Model – model of b. that views top-level bureaucrats as seeking to expand the size of their budgets and staffs to gain greater power

Is not apolitical

Bureaucrats want to increase their power – so increase budgets and staffs

Top level bureaucrats are always trying to “sell” their agencies to the public/Congress, to convince them to give them more funding

Monopolistic Model

Compares bureaucracies to business monopolies. Lack of competition leads to inefficient/costly operations

Not penalized for inefficiency

So, do not create/implement cost-saving measures

Bureaucracies Compared

In US – fairly autonomous and independent

Lines of authority – not always clearly defined, gives agencies a lot of leeway

Federalism – national agencies must provide funds to their state and local offices

In Europe, many bureaucracies are national and top down – no need to devolve power or have other offices

Important Agencies – Administrative Agencies – created and authorized by legislative bodies to administer and enforce specific laws

Size of Bureaucracy

1789 – 3 depts (State, War, and Treasury

Now – 2.7 million government employees

However – does not include the # of subcontractors or consultants

All govt employees (local, state, national) – account for 15% of the workforce

Organization of Federal Bureaucracy

Executive Branch

Four structures: Cabinet depts., independent executive agencies, independent regulatory agencies, and government corporations

Cabinet Departments

15 in total
Also referred to as LINE ORGANIZATIONS – means it is directly accountable to the president

Perform government functions

A president can ask to create a new one (as Homeland Security was created in 2003), but must do so with Congressional approval

SECRETARIES lead each dept. Lots of undersecretaries and assistant secretaries

The top officials in each dept are directly chosen by the Pres – but beyond that, it is staffed by permanent employees, who may have their own way of doing things. So, while the Pres has power over it, Cabinet depts. Do not always follow Pres’ orders

Independent Executive Agencies

Federal agency that is not part of a cabinet dept but reports directly to the president

Ex: Environmental Protection Agency, CIA, NASA

Congress determines what powers it will have, who it will be accountable to

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Agency outside the major executive depts. Charged with making and implementing rules/regulations

First one – Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) – made decisions about rates, profits and rules that would facilitate interstate trade

Other examples – FCC, Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Purpose of Reg. Cmtes – Originally created to serve as experts on a specific policy area, so that Congress wouldn’t have to legislate on areas it didn’t have familiarity with

Combine all 3 branches of govt
Legislative – create rules/regulations
Executive – enforce rules
Judicial – decide disputes arising over laws

Members are appointed by President with consent of Senate, but do not report to Pres

Legally, must be from different political parties

If vacancies occur – President appoints members from own party
Agency Capture – supposed to be independent – but sometimes they’re not

An industry that is regulated by govt agency can gain direct/indirect control over an agency

Deregulation/Regulation – Reagan’s mantra was “smaller government,” and had many industries DEREGULATED (remove regulatory oversight) – although Carter began the process

Under Bush I, the public wanted more industries to be regulated – Clean Air Act of 1991 and Disabilities Act of 1990 increased regulation

Clinton – ICC eliminated, banking and telecoms deregulated

Government Corporations

Agency of govt that administers a quasi-business enterprise. Only used when services are commercial

Has a board of directors/managers – but no stockholders

If it makes a profit, doesn’t have to distribute it or pay taxes

Ex: FDIC, USPS

Staffing the Bureaucracy

Political Appointees

Serve a variety of functions: Pres can pay off political debts (favors he promised to get elected)

But can also draft the services of highly talented people

Aristocracy of Fed Govt – are the top dogs, nobility

But aren’t as powerful as they may appear

Only has position for a brief time (compared to permanent staff)

Avg length of term – 2 years

Usually have little background in the policy area, and are heavily reliant on civil servants for information

Problems Firing Civil Servants – fewer than 0.1 been fired for incompetence. Firing can result in years of hearings and appeals – so no one really wants to go down that road

History of the Federal Civil Service

For a long time, used Spoils system – whoever won, got to usher in all those who voted for him/supported his campaign

Gradually – began to see the appeal of the merit system – selection and promotion of govt employees based on exams – originated in Germany

Civil Service Reform Act of 1883/Pendleton Act
Created the Civil Service Commission – manage employees/examinations

Now covers over 90% of federal employees

Upheld twice by the SC – first by Elrod v. Burns (76) and Branti v. Finkel (’80) – both dealt with civil service employees who did not support political party in power – could not be discharged for that

Rutan v. Repub Party of Illinois (90) – can’t hire someone because they share partisan loyalties

Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 – abolished Civil Service Commission

Added Office of Personnel Management (OPM) – recruits, interviews, tests job applicants

Merit Systems Protection Board (MPSB) – evaluates charges, hears appeals, and orders corrective actions

Federal Employees/Political Campaigns – 1933, many staffers at the newly created New Deal agencies actively campaigned for the Dem party

Harch Act of 1939 – banned employees from actively participating in campaigns

Some claim federal bureaucrats are robbed of their First Amendment rights. Do you agree?

Modern Reform

Government in the Sunshine Act (1976)

Requires all committee-directed fed agencies to conduct business in public session

Information Disclosure – general trend in policies that originated in 60s. Open disclosure on housing market, Freedom of Information Act

Curbs on Info Disclosure – Changing since 9/11

Restriction on information – closing down websites, and recalling documents

Military restricted information on activities, FBI also

State and local governments have followed feds’ lead

Sunset Laws – require that programs be reviewed regularly for effectiveness and be terminated unless specifically extended as a result of reviews

First suggested by FDR – understood that the New Deal agencies he created should not be allowed to continue indefinitely

But it was never implemented

Sunset legislation first adopted by CO in 1976

Privatization

Replacement of government services with services provided by private (for profit) firms

Ex: government may allow private firms to administer/maintain prisons

Also – providing “vouchers” for services – NYC Education uproar, “vouchers” for private schools

Vouchers work best on local level –

Public-private partnership (PPP) is a system in which a government service or private business venture is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private sector companies. These schemes are sometimes referred to as PPP or P3.

First begun in UK – maintenance of London Underground.

Now in US: Maintenance of Central Park

Incentives for Efficiency/Productivity

Federal Incentives – Government Performance and Results Act 1997 – tried to improve efficiency

All agencies describe goals and create benchmarks to measure progress
Goals may be BROAD – and apply to general agency procedures – or NARROW – very specific functions

Bush II – “Performance based budgeting” – links agency funding to agency performance. Rewards efficient agencies, punishes ineffective ones

Has Bureaucracy Changed? Some say govt must be more responsible and flexible to adequately respond to demands of modern economy

Others maintain the fault lies with those who run the agencies – they must be specifically trained for their tasks, not just political appointees cashing in on a favor

E-Government: A Good Idea? Can communicate with bureaucrats via email

Federal agencies now have websites where people can access information from home/computers

Helping Whistleblowers –

Someone who brings gross inefficiency or an illegal action to public’s attention

1978 CSA – prohibits punitive action from being taken against whistleblowers – but it still happens

Now – some federal agencies have free hot lines to report inappropriate behavior – 35% of calls result in follow-up

Whistle-Blower Protection Act 1989 – established Office of Special Counsel – OSC – an independent body to investigate complaints by employees who have been punished or fired for reporting fraud

But – whistleblowers are still not adequately protected

Ex: Colleen Rowley

EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Mothers all want their sons to grow up to be
president but they don't want them to become
politicians in the process

- John Fitzgerald Kennedy


"As to the Presidency, the two happiest days of my life were those of my entrance upon the office and my surrender of it." – Martin van Buren

"If it were not for the reporters, I would tell you the truth." – Chester A. Arthur

""My God, this is a hell of a job! I have no trouble with my enemies . . . but my damn friends, they're the ones that keep me walking the floor nights." – Warren G. Harden

"I like the job I have, but if I had to live my life over again, I would like to have ended up a sports writer." – Richard M. Nixon

Calvin Coolidge Story

Presidents – have much more varied experiences than the average Congressperson

Reagan – movie star. Many governors, some Senators, some business people

Woodrow Wilson – was President of Princeton University first

Must be an American citizen and American-born – what about Schwarzenegger?

You have to be 35 years old at least. Avg age – 54

Some concern about former Congressmen/Senators becoming Presidents – are usually accused of being too political, too “in” with DC – presidents lately have won on the image of being an outsider to Washington

Roles of the President

Head of State

Represents the US to the rest of the world. Is the figure that other nations first think of when they think of the US.

Many ceremonial tasks – throwing ball out at baseball games, cutting ribbons, representing the US in foreign embassies/events, etc

Critics say these duties take away from actual time spent “governing” – but presidents have realized that additional exposure doesn’t hurt for upcoming campaigns

Chief Executive

Head of the executive branch

Powers of Appointment/Removal

Bureaucracy – 2.5 million strong, but only those in the executive office are actually hand-picked by president

Imagine how long it would take to hand-pick every single member of the bureaucracy

The bulk of the bureaucracy is made up of civil servants – work on “merit system,” so that there isn’t too much cronyism and things are actually accomplished (debatable)

Appointment Power - president appoints his cabinet (Treasurer, Post Office, Defense, State, Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, Justice, Labor, Education, Health, Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, Housing/Urban Development)

Also – agency heads, judgeships, and other staff assisting these people

Pres also has power of removal – if he disagrees with the way someone is running an agency, or a scandal is erupting, he has the right to replace them with someone more capable

It’s been challenged in 1926, and now the Pres has a more difficult time removing those who have been approved by the Senate

Power of Reprieves/Pardons

Reprieve – commutes the sentence handed by a court of law (usually for death penalties)

Pardon - sentence is absolved

Some constitutional discussion with this – judicial branch maintains that it was fully within its power to grant these sentences, and executive interference violates checks and balances

Most famous pardon – Ford pardoning Nixon for his involvement with the Watergate scandal

Commander-in-Chief

Supreme commander of the military forces of the US

Which is why Clinton was given such a hard time on the campaign trail about dodging the draft

Recent examples: Truman dropping the A-bomb on Japan, LBJ stepping up the war in Vietnam, Bush Sr. leading a coalition to eject Iraq from Kuwait

“Football” – contains all nuclear codes, only president can activate them

Congress hasn’t formally declared war since 1941, but US has been involved in military conflicts since then

War Powers Resolution – Congress got tired of being leapfrogged, so against Nixon’s wishes they passed this resolution.

President must consult with Congress within 48 hours of sending troops

Troops can only stay for 60 days without Congressional approval to continue their presence abroad

Once troops are out – it’s really hard to bring them back

Ex: Reagan in Beirut (18 months)

Chief Diplomat

It’s why those Bush-speech-jokes actually mean something sometimes

Dominates US foreign policy

Advice and Consent – may make treaties and agreements with other heads of state as long as it is in the same vein of previous agreements approved by the Senate

Importance of Diplomatic Recognition

When you acknowledge a state, and give it diplomatic recognition, you’re recognizing the government as LEGITIMATE and will directly deal with the government.

Sometimes, withholding recognition can be a political statement in itself. Most of the world refused to acknowledge Afghanistan’s Taleban government as legitimate

Taiwan – still hasn’t been granted formal recognition by the rest of the world, because China would flip out if people did

US didn’t recognize the USSR until 1933 – when it realized that world war was approaching and it was better to have the Soviet Union as an ally

Proposal/Ratification of Treaties

President can negotiate treaties (although often the SOS does that in his place)

All treaties must be ratified by the Senate

Wilson negotiated the Treaty of Versailles (to end WWI) and created the League of Nations. However, he had a rival in the Senate (Henry Cabot Lodge) who wanted to undermine him, and the Senate would only accept the treaty if the LofN was significantly weakened. Senate approved THAT version, but Wilson refused to acknowledge it, and the US never joined League

Carter – neutralization of Panama Canal

Clinton – passage of NAFTA

Bush before 9/11 – didn’t see the point in international agreements, and in his first 9 months, pulled the US out of many treaties/negotiations

Most notably, Kyoto

Executive Agreements

International agreement made by a president with a foreign head of state

Needs no formal Senate approval

Done in “best interest” of the US

Currently, international agreements are executed by executive agreement rather than treaties at a rate of 10:1.

Ex: NAFTA

Chief Legislator

Some presidents have been more successful than others

Some have had little success pushing legislative agendas through (Clinton)

Others (FDR/LBJ) made sure they accomplished their programs

President creates the constitutional agenda – STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS. Gives you direct knowledge of what the Pres will be focusing on in the next year, and which programs he will try to push through Congress

Passing Legislation – Pres can PROPOSE legislation, but that’s it. He has to work with people on “The Hill” to be sure they introduce the legislation to the floor and attempt to get it passed. Requires a lot of feather-stroking

Has a direct relationship with the Majority Leaders and Minority Leaders of the House and Senate

Vetoing Legislation - can veto a bill he’s against. However – it’s a big political risk, and you can squander whatever political power/influence you have if you decide to veto a very popular measure

Veto Message – a detailed explanation of why the Pres vetoed the bill

After Congress passes the bill, it always gets sent to the President to be signed. He has a few options:

a. sign it – it immediately becomes law
b. don’t sign it for 10 days – automatically becomes law
c. Reject the bill (veto) and state his objections. Congress can then change the bill and resubmit it OR can override the veto (needs 2/3 approval in both Houses) Only 7% of all presidential vetoes have ever been overridden – usually only happens to deeply unpopular presidents (Andrew Johnson)
d. Other option – pocket veto. At the end of the legislative calendar, if there are less than 10 days when Congress is still in session, Pres can choose not to sign it, and it expires (pocket veto)

W has issued no veto in his first term – actually went five years before vetoing a bill. First veto – stem cell research bill

Line-Item Veto

A matter of real contention in the Clinton years

Power of executive to veto individual lines or terms of a piece of the bill without vetoing the entire bill

Reagan used it first

Then, Congress passed the Line Item Veto Act in 1996 (prohibited use of it)

Think of this of wrestling between the legislature and the executive

Clinton signed the bill into law, then attempted to use the LIV in 1997. (Military construction projects). Congress tried to rescind the vetoes, also challenged in the Supreme Court. Exec branch argued it was an unlawful attempt to control the activities of the executive branch. SC agreed, overturned LIV Act.


Other Presidential Powers

All these powers we’ve discussed are Constitutional Powers

But they also have Statutory Powers – powers created by Congress for the President

Ex: Before passage of Patriot Act, pres. Did not have power to willfully incarcerate people and suspend habeas corpus, but after passage of bill, Congress granted him that power

Expressed Powers – include the statutory and constitutional powers (because they are written directly in the Constitution)

Inherent Powers – a very loose interpretation of the “executive powers” mentioned in the Constitution – defined through practice and custom, not express law

Ex: FDR used inherent power to intern Japanese-Americans during WWII

President as Party Chief and Superpolitician

First – he is the chief of his Party

Sets the legislative tone, and also is able to appoint people within his party to government or public service jobs

Now – his power is in fundraising and stumping for candidates

Constituencies and Public Approval

Presidents always have their “ear to the ground” – want to make sure they’re courting the public’s favor

Responsible to: citizens of the US, their party, members of the opposing party who hold the key votes to Pres’ legislative programs.

Washington Community – individuals in DC

Bush and the Opinion Polls

Bush did not have a standard segue into office – remember the official declaration of his Presidential victory took 2 months and a Supreme Court decision

After he was named, still a very deep split within the country – really constrained his public image

Then, his unilateral foreign policy also threatened to divide the country further

Then – 9/11. Bush really showed his mettle, managed to reach the highest popularity ratings ever. Then, he’s been in a decline ever since

Going Public – as technologies have changed and mass communications became ever more accessible, presidents have taken the opportunity to speak directly to the public. A few reasons:

Presidents, unlike Senators or Representatives, have the unique ability to directly address the entire nation with that level of authority. They use the opportunity to convince the populace that their programs are the right way, and gain popular support for them , which is helpful in defeating opposing camps within Washington

Examples – FDR’s fireside chats, special televised presidential messages

Special Uses of Pres Power

Emergency powers, executive orders, executive privilege

Emergency Powers – can only be exercised in times of national crisis. First used by FDR to prevent ships selling warfare to two warring South American nations. SC upheld it, saying the national government has primacy in foreign affairs

Lincoln declared martial law during Civil War

Executive Orders
Rule/regulation issued by Pres that has the effect of law

Can implement statutes already passed by Congress

Forceful execution of acts already passed by congress

Ex: Emancipation Proclamation, Truman’s desegregation of the Armed Forces

Executive Privilege

Right of president/presidential aides to withhold information from Congress, or refuse to testify in congressional inquiries

Done ostensibly to protect “national security” – but usually just to protect officials

For example – Cheney invoked Executive Privilege so he would not have to testify about his role in the Energy Policy Task Force/California Brownouts

Limiting Executive Privilege

Started to hear more about it after Watergate

Nixon refused to hand over the tapes, invoked exec privilege

In US vs Nixon, SC ruled that he had to turn over the tapes, which led to his resignation (rather than being impeached, which was almost a certainty)

Clinton and Exec Privilege

Monica Lewinsky mess – aides were summoned to testify, went through several rounds of court before it was determined that they had to testify in court

Abuse of Power/Impeachment

How many presidents have been impeached?

How many have been convicted?

First, a president must be charged with willfully violating the office and abusing its powers (House responsibility). Then, there is an extensive inquiry conducted by the Senate.

Executive Organization

Recognize that the president’s job is a HUGE task, and he needs help, advisors, secretaries, etc.

Watch West Wing – you’ll see what really goes into it.

White House staff – usually around 600

About 300 have direct access to the president – usually worked with him on his campaign, are always looking towards re-election

President has a Cabinet (which we discussed)

President may enlist the advice of others as well – advisor to the UN (John Bolton), director of OMB, VP at times

Kitchen cabinet – originated with Andrew Jackson (a populist who rejected formal offices and stuffiness)

Usually refers to the people the president trusts the most – in Bush’s case, Karl Rove would have been a key member of his kitchen cabinet

Presidents and their Cabinets

Constitution does not explicitly discuss cabinets, and nowhere is it formally written. So the pres’ relationships with his cabinets are entirely up to them. Sometimes they consult them extensively. Other times, they do not consult them to coordinate policy (they’ll meet with Secretaries individually, if at all).

Executive Office of the President

Created by FDR after a Senate Committee suggested that a support staff for Pres be created

Consists of 1800 staff members who work in the West Wing

Chief of Staff, Deputy Chief of Staff, WH Chief of Communications (speechwriting/PR), Press Secretary, etc.

Who’s WH Chief of Staff now?

White House Office – personal office of the president

Chief of Staff – directs the WH office and advises the president on domestic and legislative matters (and sometimes, on foreign affairs)

Staff is enormously powerful – have direct access to the president and any legislative positions/foreign heads of state, help the President arrive at crucial decisions

Critics claim the staffs are too powerful, and are usurping the power of actual elected officials


So we left off with the Executive Office of President.

Discuss OMB

Office of Management and Budget – part of the EOP. Director creates the annual budget (huge job), which will be presented to Congress in January

All agency budgets must be submitted to the OMB

Some have questioned how powerful the OMB is in making financial decisions, saying its power really lies in blocking legislative proposals by agencies

National Security Agency - advises president on national security

Coordinates policy on national security issues

Headed by a National Security advisor and staffed with high-ranking officials from military, intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement

Advises on security and foreign policy

Chaired by the President, but includes: the VP, Secretary of State, Sec. of Treasury, Sec. of Defense, and National Security Advisor (was Condoleezza Rice before becoming Sec. of State)

NSC staff runs the famous Situation Room

The Vice Presidency

Presides over the Senate – but this is largely a ceremonial job (in the rare instance of a tie, VP can vote to break it)

VPs are usually chosen to balance the presidential ticket, and appeal to the greatest number of voters (if Pres from North, VP from South, etc)

Bush picked Cheney because he had extensive DC experience, which Bush didn’t

Kerry picked Edwards because Edwards was young, articulate, and from the South

Supporting the President – VPs never come out to directly criticize their president. They’re supposed to assist the Pres in achieving legislative victory (tweaking/convincing Congresspeople to vote for Pres’ program), or shoring up presidential support throughout US and abroad

Gore – also carved out a niche for himself in his forthright support of environmental reforms and policies

VP is often seen as a way to secure the presidency (former VPs who became Pres include Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush)

If Pres dies, VP will succeed him. 8 times, this has been done. Happened first to John Tyler (not Andrew Johnson, sorry), and there was a real question as to his legitimacy and whether he had the power to actually act as President

If a president dies but is incapacitated (unable to perform duties), Constitution isn’t very clear on this. Book points to James Garfield (shot, lived for 2.5 more months), but his VP (Chester A. Arthur). At the end of Wilson’s presidential term (1919), he had a serious stroke and was majorly incapacitated – his wife kept him out of view, especially from his VP, and it is conventionally understood that Edith Wilson carried out the function of president until the end of his term.

25th Amendment – If a president cannot fulfill his duties, he must inform Congress in writing.

VP will then serve as “Acting President” until president can handle the job again

If Pres unable to communicate, a majority of the cabinet can tell Congress

VP will automatically serve as “Acting Pres” in that case

If it’s unsure whether or not the President should continue, there will be a vote in Congress

2002 – Bush conferred the title of “Acting President” to Cheney while he underwent a 20-minute colonoscopy

Was also used after Reagan was shot, but that was seen as more of an attempted grab of power by Alexander Haig (sec of state)

When VP becomes vacant – pres nominated a VP candidate who must be approved by the majority of both houses of Congress

Only happened once, to Nixon

Spiro T. Agnew – another one who was corrupt, was involved with illegal kickbacks and resigned

Replaced by Gerald Ford (was the Minority Leader of the House)

When Nixon resigned, Ford became president, and nominated Nelson Rockefeller as VP – first time in nation’s history neither pres nor vp had been elected

Unitary Executive Theory

Proponents of the theory argue that the President possesses all of the executive power and can therefore control subordinate officers and agencies of the executive branch. This implies that the power of Congress to remove executive agencies or officers from Presidential control is limited. Thus, under the unitary executive theory, independent agencies and counsels are unconstitutional to the extent that they exercise discretionary executive power, not controlled by the President

Discuss role of Ex-Presidents in policy

Also, discuss the real role of the President in policy – is it the most important level of governance, or does it just feel that way?


Many of the issues raised by President Truman’s seizure of the steel mills continue to be debated today,
particularly questions about Presidential powers to protect Americans during times of war. Most
recently after news reports in the New York Times, the Bush Administration has admitted it authorized
the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists within the United States without
obtaining court approval.

THE CONGRESS

Who’s up for election in NY for Congress? NJ?

Founding

Founding Fathers believed that CONGRESS, not the executive branch, should be the most powerful branch in the government. Is this true today?

BICAMERALISM

Resulted in 2 houses (due to Great Compromise) – balancing equal representation and population strengths

Remember – the House of Representatives was always directly elected by citizens. Senators were indirectly elected until 1913)

The idea behind this – balance property and wealth with the whole population

TENURE DIFFERENCES – HOR sit for 2 years, Senators sit for 6

WHAT DOES CONGRESS DO?

Lawmaking

Process of establishing the legal rules of a society

Ex: Brady Gun Law, health care reforms, welfare reform

How are laws decided on?

Compromise and Log-Rolling (an arrangement by which 2 or more Congressmen agree to support each other’s bills)

Representation

Representing the desires and demands of constituents in members’ home district or state

There often is a conflict between national interest and state interest – and it is up to the representatives to decide which interests they will fight for (usually it’s state)

Fulfilling the Representation Function

Trustee View – Legislator who acts according to her or his conscience and the broad interests of the entire society

The idea is – they elected individual based on their competence and intelligence – not to represent dairy farmers only or Christian conservatives only

Instructed Delegate View – delegate should mirror the views of the majority of the constituents that elected them

So, if you’re elected in a very pro-2nd amendment city (where most of the constituents are against bans on firearms), it is not your right as a delegate to assume you know better and vote against their wishes

However – this is not clear-cut either. Sometimes, the constituents’ views are not well-researched and would lead to more problems if implemented (for instance – say 80% of New Yorkers are adamant that all troops be removed from Iraq immediately. This would be a disaster if this were to occur). Or, sometimes a constituency will be divided on a particular issue (privatization of Social Security), and the delegate has no clear direction on how to vote.

Usually – delegates combine these two approaches when deciding policy.

Service to Constituents

Is a major part of any delegate’s job. Congressmen/women and Senators are often the only access citizens have to the federal government, and will descend up on them with a myriad of favors to ask

Also known as CASEWORK – personal work for constituents. If a constituent has a difficulty obtaining a passport, for clerical reasons, the delegate can fix that. Or the delegate can promise to rename a local park in the honor of someone. Etc, and so forth.

OMBUDSPERSON – person who hears and investigates complaints by private individuals against public officials or agencies.

In many Euro countries, this is an independent position that is not elected. In US politics, delegates are supposed to serve in this function.

Ex: A British ex-pat needed to set up an Adjustment of Status (AOS) interview (part of the immigration experience) and had his file lost in the system, his interview pushed back again and again…so he wrote NY Senator Chuck Schumer, who conducted an inquiry and forced the INS to move his interview up

Oversight Function

Oversight – process by which Congress ensures that the laws and programs it has passed are being enforced throughout the country
Usually done through holding committee hearings, interviewing agency heads, and changing agency budgets to fit their objectives

Public Education Function

Congressmen/women understand that the American public needs to know that Congress is accomplishing something, and so they seek to publicize their accomplishments, hearings, etc (love the publicity). Also where AGENDA-SETTING comes into play. (Discuss)

Resolving Conflict

Politics is conflict. If one program is implemented, there are going to be groups who benefit and those who don’t. Deciding which laws to pass/programs to implement is a way to resolve this conflict, or decide it definitively

Powers of Congress – Enumerated Powers

These are: right to levy taxes/impose tariffs
Borrow money
Regulate interstate commerce
Establish weights and measures
Naturalizing citizens
Regulate copyrights/patents
Declare war
Raise/regulate army/navy

Let’s split up the houses and see what each does.

Senate: Ratifies treaties
Accept/reject presidential nominations of ambassadors, Supreme Court justices, and other officers of the US. Senate is generally the more powerful of the two houses.

Differences between Houses:

Senate is much smaller, and members are more powerful, and less loyal to the party.

Senate has fewer rules/restrictions, because there are only 100 people in there – in the HOR, 435, and harder to keep order, so many more rules
Rules Committee – standing committee in HOR that provides special rules of order through which bills can be debated, amended and considered by House

Senate has national leadership – whereas HOR has only very local leadership, if that

Nature of Debate

Filibusters – are very important. Use of senate’s tradition of unlimited debate as a delaying tactic to block a bill.
Strom Thurmond – holds the record for the longest filibuster ever, speaking for 24 straight hours to block the passage of a 1957 civil rights bill
In the Senate,, debate can only be ended through CLOTURE – shuts off discussion of a bill, and initiates voting on it. Can be difficult to achieve – 16 Senators must first sign a resolution to end debate, then wait 2 days, and 3/5 of entire membership (not just those present, so that’s 60 Senators) vote for cloture. Even then, each Senator is allowed 1 hour each to discuss the bill.
Now – a final vote must be taken on the bill before 100 hours has passed after cloture.
Prestige – Because there are only 100 Senators in the nation, who usually pursue their own politics (as opposed to the party’s), they are more well-known among citizens. Most people can’t name their representatives, also because they are up for election every 2 years and may change frequently.

Who are the Congress?
Are usually older, white, male, lawyers or legally trained
Annual Congressional salary: $157,000
Much wealthier – 1/3 of all Congresspeople are millionaires (helps with campaigns too)
Diversity – 66 women (out of 435) in HOR, 14 in Senate (out of 100)
Minority – 15% of the house

Congressional Elections
Elections – conducted by state governments, but must adhere to Constitution
All states must have at least 1 Rep (but usually have many more)
Guam, PR, DC do not have voting representatives – should they?

Candidates
Sometimes, a candidate will come out of the blue and decides he wants to run.
More frequently, in areas that have very strong party affiliations, parties will go through their ranks and choose someone to stand for office
When running for national office, most (BUT NOT ALL) will have run for office before.
Exception: John Corzine – was Chairman/CEO of Goldman Sachs, before he decided to run for US Senate, now Gov of NJ
Congressional Campaigns: like most campaigns, more expensive
Avg costs for Senate - $5 million, for HOR - $890,000
Most candidates must win a direct primary to get their party’s nomination

Effect of the President – Congressional elections are very dependent on what is currently going on in DC. After the Clinton scandal with Lewinsky, Democrats in mid-term elections suffered, as they lost many races for Congress across the country.
Republican political analysts are concerned that the fallout from the Foley scandal will have a negative effect on ongoing Republican campaigns – we’ll see on Nov 7
Also called the “coattail effect” – if the president is popular and doing well (esp. in his first term), it’s expected his party will pick up seats in midterm elections (elections when the president is not up for election).
Usually – in the president’s second term, mid term elections will swing towards the other party. No president has really enjoyed spectacular late term popularity.
POWER OF INCUMBENCY
What is an incumbent?
An incumbent is the individual already holding office who is running for re-election.
Incumbents win a majority of races. 95% of House incumbents have been reelected. Fewer than 10% of House seats (30/435) “competitive.” But it’s very hard to defeat an incumbent because an incumbent has:
a. experience in the job
b. name recognition
c. influence in the Senate/House
d. have an easier job in fundraising for their campaign – more contacts, more support, than their competitors

Also – the process of GERRYMANDERING helps a huge amount.
Gerrymandering – Drawing of a legislative district for the purpose of obtaining partisan or factional advantage. An area is GERRYMANDERED when its district is manipulated by the dominant party in state legislature to maximize electoral returns.
In 1986, the SC ruled that it was not unconstitutional to do this. And so it’s continued, after every census.
Texas State Legislature: (read excerpt from BBC news)
Redistricting after 2000 Census
Done in two ways – “packing” and “cracking”
“Pack” – try to put all of the opposition’s supporters into one small district if possible – this way, they won’t elect as many party members
“Crack” – spread your party’s supporters over as many congressional districts as possible

Should redistricting be allowed? Does it allow for constituents to have their voices clearly heard? Or is it just politics, status quo?
The SC has moved from its 1986 ruling a bit – In 2000, the SC began to strike down redistricting that was largely racial in character (Louisiana). In 2001, famous Interstate 85 – electoral district basically followed Interstate 85 and included nothing else. SC knocked it down, saying this too was racially discriminating.
Why become a Congressmember? Perks and Privileges
Franking – enables members to send material through mail for free by substituting their signature for postage
Now – Congressmembers send out an equivalent of $60 mill each year
Permanent Professional Staffs
In order to stay on top of all activity on ‘The Hill,’ they need legislative staffers and assistants. Also, they answer constituent enquiries, manage media publicity, write bills and amendments, do necessary research on the impact of bills, and maintain local offices in home constituencies.
Some criticism – some critics wonder if all these staffers are necessary to support the senator, and if they’re just trying to win more votes for the election by doing extra favors
Legal Privileges
Cannot be arrested during their tenure in office
Cannot be tried for slander or arson – so they can call people whatever they want
Congressional Caucuses
Everybody joins one
Democrat/Republican caucuses – provide information to voters, guidelines on how to vote
Also, there are others – Congressional Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus
Used to be supported by public funds, but in 1995 restrictions were placed on this
More than 200 caucuses exist now- paid for by businesses/special interests
COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
Both houses work completely through committee. Allows for people to specialize in a given area, and not have the responsibility of being knowledgeable on every single bill (there are thousands) that come onto the discussion floor
Power of Committees – have the final say on legislation. They can kill a bill by holding it up in committee indefinitely, or usher it through to a vote by putting it on the floor immediately
Discharge petition – a way a Senator/rep can force a bill out of committee and onto the floor for discussion and voting. Usually, not successful – only 24 successful ones from 1909 to 2005.
Chairpersons – very powerful. Decide committee matters, decide who/what gets a hearing, when those hearings take place, etc. You do not want to annoy your chairperson if you hope to accomplish anything in Congress.
Types of Committees
Standing Committee
Permanent committee in House or Senate, usually deals with a certain policy area (foreign affairs, veteran affairs, ways & means, etc)
Most standing committees have sub-committees, get the bulk of the work done, enable standing committees to work efficiently
Certain committees are VERY prestigious, and you have to pay your dues to get on them (usually given to high-ranking members of Senate who have been there a long time)
Appropriations Committee/Ways & Means Committee – control spending
If you control the $, you control everything – tremendous amount of influence
But, congresspeople also want to represent their constituents, so if they come from an agricultural district, they’ll want to sit on the Agri Committee
Select Committee- temporary legislative committee established for a specific purpose and limited time
Select Committee on Intelligence – an exception, continues indefinitely
US Select Committee on Ethics, US Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
Joint Committee – created by both Senate and House, and has members from each. Have handled economic and tax issues
Conference Committee – also created by Senate and House together. This is done to ease the passage of a law and write it together, to ensure greater success.
House Rules Committee – sets laws of debate/how long delegates may speak, determines how/if bill is amended. Can initiate legislation on its own.

Selecting Committee Members
Steering Committee – is the committee in Dem/Repub parties that decides who sits where
To choose a Chair – usually, long-serving Senators/House members are up for these positions
Seniority system – applies when designating who sits on what committee

THE FORMAL LEADERSHIP
IN THE HOUSE
Speaker of the House – now Dennis Hastert
Supposed to be non-partisan – but it’s always the leader of the majority party
3rd in the line of succession
Formal powers:
Presides over meetings, appoints member of joint and conference cmtes
Schedules legislation for the floor
Referring bills/resolutions to appropriate committees

Majority Leader of the House – exactly what it sounds like. Chosen to foster cohesion and unity among party members, and asks as spokesperson
Miniority Leader of the House – leads the minority, serves as spokesperson – who is it now?
Whips – member of Congress who aids the majority or minority leader
Passes info from party leadership to party members
Used to: keep all party members in line, impose strict party discipline – everyone from one party votes in one way
Who was it until recently?
In the Senate
President Pro-Tempore: Technically, the VP is the President of the Senate. When he’s not there, someone takes that position – presides over Senate.
Senate Majority Leader – Leader of the Majority party in Senate – who is it?
Senate Minority Leader – serves as spokesperson for minority party, who is it?
Voting
Party leadership tries to build consensus, make sure the bills they want to pass will pass
Sometimes, form coalitions – doesn’t always have to be a D/R thing
Ex: Christian Coalition – alliance of Republicans and southern Dems who are socially conservative
“Crossing Over” – voting with the other party because you like the bill. Doesn’t happen too often, though
Government spending
Congress controls government spending, has to approve all budgets, also referred to as the “Executive Budget” – prepared by President, submitted to Congress for approval
Control Act of 1974 – requires president to spend the funds that Congress appropriates (Presidents used to kill programs by refusing to fund them)
One of last arenas in governance where Congress still reigns supreme
Preparing the Budget
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)- very important agency on the Hill
Manages the budget in the following way:
Spring Review – all agencies are asked to carefully comb through their budgets and programs, and see how well the budget has served them. On the basis of these reports, agencies will submit requests for the next year’s budget
Fall Review – OMB evaluates all budget requests, usually trims them down
Congress and the Budget
Authorization – formally declaring that x amount of dollars is available to a specific agency
Appropriation - when the money is actually given to an agency
Determining the Size of the Budget
Every year, the budget process is different – sometimes, politicians are looking to cut the budget, other times they’re looking for funding for specific programs and aren’t worried about financial constraints.
First Budget Resolution – passed by Congress in May that sets overall revenue/spending goals for the year
So – they guess how much money they’ll be receiving in taxes
And then decide how much of it they want to spend next year

Second Budget Resolution - Passed by Congress in September that sets limits on taxes and spending for the next year – so it formalizes the first budget resolution

Continuing Resolution – temporary funding guideline that Congress passes, only if appropriations have not been decided by October 1

Lesson Outline – Campaigns, Elections, and the Media

First – how many campaigns are running in the area?

Name a few.

Importance of Candidates

Must be more than one – give examples of one-sided races, or races with one strong man and one weak implausible candidate

It’s not always easy to get candidates for every elected position – water control boards, postmaster general, don’t generally have people leaping to be considered

Also, smaller parties and parties that are not likely to win have difficulty finding candidates – might not want to put in the effort, money, time, etc to participate in an election you know you’re going to lose

Ex: Dylan and the Conservative Party ticket

Presidential Primaries – probably the greatest example of American democracy. Colorful characters that have run:

Lamar Alexander – wore plaid everywhere

Steve Forbes

Dennis KUCINICH – (find article, pass out)

Why do they run?

Ask around

Two types: Self-started and appointed

Self-Starters:

Believe that they can solve America’s problems

Also feel that the other candidates/parties will not do anything to fix these issues

Not the only reason for running though

Resume – building – local lawyers/activists might want to move into the bigger political circles, and need a few political offices to get them there

Also – blind ambition leads some to scale impossible heights – Dennis Kucinich, what were his motivations?

It’s an Honor to Be Nominated….

Follow state laws, which favor two largest parties

Candidates submit petitions to local elections board (political parties may assist them in this)

Easier to get on the ballot if you’re a D or R – small parties (Greens, Conservatives, Libertarians, face significant obstacles)

Occasionally, a CAUCUS (small group) may make the final decision on who will stand as a candidate for the party

If this can’t be resolved, then a PRIMARY ELECTION (open only to REGISTERED party members to vote on the candidate). Ex: Mayoral election in NYC, Democrats couldn’t decide, so it was between Alan Hevesi and Mark Green (September 11, 2001)

Eligibility – you can read those.

Do you think 35 years is old enough to be President? Not young enough?

Who are Candidates?

Who do you think winds up being a candidate?

Overwhelmingly white and male – is this representative?

Women as Candidates

In Senate – 14/100 are women (9D, 5R)

In HOR – 59/435 (38D, 21R) – THREE PERCENT OF SEATS

US ranks as #10 on the % of seats held by women candidates

Ahead are: Norway, Iceland, Australia, Luxembourg, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Ireland, Belgium

Quotas: A certain % of electoral races must be led by women. Would we do better by introducing this system?

Too many lawyers? Lawyers are most drawn to drafting laws – understand legalese, and comprehend the implications of the bill

Also – have more flexible hours, more likely to be involved politically

CAMPAIGNS

Campaigns are also using new technologies, realizing how effective they can be in mobilizing voters and getting the message out

Campaigns are getting longer and longer – even now, it’s 2006, and we’re already getting ready for the 2008 presidential season. Ex: Wesley Clarke at Wagner (Comparison – in Britain, elections only take six weeks – legally mandated)

Campaigns start earlier now for a few reasons:

Need more money than ever: Presidential campaigns in 2004 cost: $367 m (Bush), $328 m (Kerry)

Already, there is speculation that, in order to be considered as a serious candidate in the 2008 elections, you will have to raise $100 MILLION

What is the money spent for?

Political consultants – who tell candidates how to wage campaign, which states to focus on, which issues to focus on

Political commercials and advertising – costs lots of money, but necessary to reach as many voters as possible, as well as respond to attacks by opponent

Polls – Candidates must conduct their own polls to find where they’re trailing, where they’re winning, etc, in order to plan an effective campaign

Letters, mailings, etc – direct mail is a crucial component of the campaign

Headquarters rent – Spitzer is located in a post Madison Avenue address. This costs serious money.

Campaigning is even more crucial now because of the dealignment of parties – candidates can’t expect party loyalty to propel them to victory any more, they have to reach as many voters as possible

Strategy of Winning

Anyone watch West Wing?

Candidate visibility and appeal – no candidate wins by being invisible. Also, they can’t be a clod. People point to Gore’s stiffness as a reason why he lost the election.

Opinion Polls – candidates are likely to bend their positions to capture the most popular opinion.

Focus groups – small group of individuals who are led in discussion by a professional consultant to gather opinions on/responses to candidates and issues

Usually are segments of population – Urban African-Americans, Protestant Midwest farmers, etc so forth

How do candidates finance the campaign?

Donations, PAC contributions, party contributions, sometimes out-of-pocket from the candidate him/herself

It’s been recognized as a problem for a long time –

Corrupt Practices Acts – tried to limit size of contributions to candidates in campaigns, starting in 1925

Hatch Act of 1939 – restricts political involvement of government employees. Concerned that they were using work hours/influence to get certain people elected

Federal Election Campaign Act - 1971 – you can donate however much you want, but candidates can only spend X amount on television advertising

All contributions over $100 must be disclosed

1974 Reforms:

Federal Election Commission created - must oversee campaign contributions

Public financing is provided for presidential elections - done to make it seem more democratic, that the average man could enter into the race without being a millionaire

Presidential spending is limited

Buckley v. Valeo – decided by the Supreme Court in 1971. Declared the 1971 law unconstitutional – said no law could determine how much a candidate could spend on his own behalf

PACs and Contributions

Support candidates, but in a roundabout way that circumvents existing laws on campaign spending

PACs - committee set up and representing a group (corporation, organization, interest group)
1973 – spent $19 million
1999-2000 – spent $900 million


Soft money – not given directly to candidates, but given to party committees which then funnel the money to candidates

Issue Advocacy Advertising – advertising paid for by interest groups that support or oppose a candidate or his position on an issue without mentioning voting or election

Now the catch is – if it’s going to run in October/Nov of an election year – of COURSE it has to do with elections

Good example: MoveOn.org (hand out print outs)

Do these groups clarify candidates’ positions to the voters?

Independent expenditures - money donated that are not coordinated with a particular candidate – a favorite loophole of candidates. So, “Paid for By Friends of…”

Do you feel that all this backroom financing is an issue for democracy? It’s an open ended question

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002

Banned large, unlimited contributions to political parties (soft money)

Places limits on issue ads placed by outside special interest groups


Consequences

Democratic and Republican parties are no longer protected from growth of smaller parties


PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS

Reforming the Primaries

1968 Chicago Riots outside DNC – with the escalation of the Vietnam War, voters really felt like parties were not responding to their needs at all

So now – public has more of a say, in determining who will stand as the party rep for president. Ex: Howard Dean was done after Iowa because voters rejected that approach to campaigning

Types of Primaries

Closed primary – only official members of the party may vote.. So, you must be a registered democrat to vote in a closed Democratic primary

Open Primary – open to all voters, regardless of party affiliation

Blanket primary – you can vote for whomever you want for a variety of offices – for instance, you can vote for a Democratic candidate for governor, and a republican candidate for senator

Run-off primary – If nobody emerges as a clear winner in the first primary, they hold a second one.

Campaign strategy

It dawned on candidates that winning as many primaries as possible helps cement their bid for president. Hence, why NH and Iowa become so important

National Convention time –

Credentials Committee – determines which delegates can participate in the convention

Does it really matter? Conventions appear to be more predictable than ever – no “dark horse” candidates emerge anymore

The Big, Bad Electoral College

So the Founding Fathers didn’t trust the public enough to leave the election of the presidency to a popular vote – they set up a system which could, theoretically, prevent a despot from arising to the presidency

There are 538 Electors in total – presidents need 270 to win

How they determine it: States’ number of electors = states’ number of senators (two) plus # of reps

So, CA has 55, Florida has 27, Ill. Has 21, NY has 31, TX has 34

So, typically, the elector can vote however he/she wants – but, if the state votes in favor of a party, all the electoral votes go to that candidate. If NY votes Democratic, Gore gets 31 electoral college votes. There is no splitting.

EC does not always mirror popular vote. Bush in 2000, Ben Harrison in 1888.

Criticisms

Does not accurately reflect the wishes of the people

Critics also argue that the nature of the US government has changed – while it was founded as a “republic,” where representatives made decisions for the citizens, it is now more of a formal “democracy,” where public opinion should be the deciding factor

Elections Themselves

Opted for the “secret ballot,” also known as the Australian ballot – decreases vote manipulation, more people will vote how they really want instead of how their boss, party, family, wants, etc

Two ways that voting can be organized:

Office-block voting – where candidates are listed under the offices they’re seeking (disliked by parties), encourages split-ticket voting

Party-block voting – candidates are grouped by political party

October 8, 2006
News of an unexpected career break could come your way now, jax. This can be very exciting, and should make a bigger difference in your life than you think. However, this is definitely a time when some modesty is called for. If you act too proud or too thrilled, you might excite some envy among your not-so-lucky colleagues, and this could come back to haunt you later. Save your excitement for your family.

Voting by mail
Absentee ballots – when you are physically unable to be in your registered location on election day

But interesting situation in Oregon (discuss)

Increases voter participation

Problems with this – can’t verify who’s actually doing the voting

Also – is the voter informed? Has he/she heard all the candidates?

Vote Fraud

A serious issue, but not easy to prevent

Voting by felons, unregistered voters – very hard to catch in absentee ballots as well

Mistakes by Voting Officials – Kathryn Harris in Florida

Low Voter Turnout – has never been very high in the States. In 2004, 51%. Midterm elections (when a president is not up for election) are even lower.

Effects: Disengagement with politics, change the nature of our government (is it still a democracy is nearly half don’t participate?), possibility of more radical leaders

However, some say low voter turnout just means people are pretty happy with the way things are

Factors Determining Voter Turnout

1. Age - the older you get, the more likely you are to vote.

2. Educational attainment – the higher you get, the more likely you are to vote

3. Minority status – whites still have the highest voter turnout

4. Income level – the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to vote

5. two party competition – how competitive elections are. In hotly contested races, ex: Forrester and Corzine, people are more likely to vote. In less contested races, or races perceived as a runaway (Spitzer vs. Faso), voter turnout will decrease

Why don’t people vote?

Bad media coverage/negative campaigning People get sick of attack ads pretty quickly, and just assume that both candidates are equally unappetizing. Also, lack of real journalism coverage on issues leads voters to be frustrated by elections that don’t deal with real problems

Rational Ignorance Effect If you think your vote will not matter in the end anyway, you will have no motivation to vote.

Improving voter turnout
Internet voting
Absentee ballots
Registering to vote when you apply for a driver’s license
Make Election Day national holiday
Give voters 3 weeks to vote
Voting on Sunday, like they do in most European countries?

Who can vote?

At founding of country, only white males with property

Now, it’s nearly all naturalized citizens over the age of 18

Felons are not allowed to vote – is this a good thing?

REGISTER TO VOTE NOW

Media and Politics

Functions of the media:

1. Entertainment

TV and Radio would be long gone if it didn’t devote hours to entertaining programs – and some of them get political

West Wing, other news coverage of major stories – AIDS, medicare, etc

2. Reporting the news

Gathers information from around the globe to give people a clearer idea of what is happening in the world

Can you imagine a world without a source for news?

3. Identifying public programs

Setting the public agenda – issues perceived by the political community as meriting public attention and governmental action

Media decides what will be discussed in politics, it is claimed. This is why so many interest groups have their own media campaigns to raise awareness of issues.

4. Socializing new generations

Youth and immigrants – are taught by the media how to be Americans.

5. Providing a Political Forum

Politicians need to reach as many voters as they can to be elected – and so use the media for their own ends as well. Chuck Schumer, senior Senator of NY, is very adept at this – he holds a press conference every Sunday, and it’s usually carried by news stations.

6. Making Profits

Advertising revenue is key – so they have to be careful (TV stations, newsmagazines, etc) not to piss off advertisers. Example: SUVs accounted for a substantial amount of Newsweek’s ad revenue, and they couldn’t do a story on carbon emissions from SUVs for years because of it. ALSO – CBS AND TOBACCO (The Insider)

PRIMACY OF TELEVISION

Politicians were not immediately aware of the impact television could have if they used it for their purposes.

News Programming

In the past, only took about an hour of total programming time. But with the advent of 24-hour news channels (CNN in 1980), the big three needed to catch up. Now – 2 hours a day of local news, half hour of national/international.

Interesting tidbit: The total budget of NBC News is 0.5% of the entire GE budget. Yet, international news desks are closing. Go figure.

TV’s Influence

It’s a VISUAL medium – so IMAGES assume a new importance.

Think: Mission Impossible Bush stunt

Also – sound bites reign supreme – quotations can only last 30 seconds max, and so politicians who want to get their face on the news must sum up their arguments in this time

Leads to an OVERSIMPLIFICATION OF THE ISSUES

Media and Political Campaigns

The Daisy advert was really the turning point in using television as a means to lure voters. A landmark ad. I’ve put the link up on the website if you want to see it.

Management of News Coverage

Candidates are always competing for face time on television – is this diluting their message/position?

Presidential Debates

JFK vs Nixon – one was tv savvy, knew how to work it

Wore a blue shirt

It’s really all about perception – if you look competent, have good answers, are unfazed by attacks on your opponent, the American voter will be attracted

Political Campaigns and the Internet

How many people have received some sort of political email in the past 3 weeks?

Candidates are becoming more internet-savvy…

Gerstein said the Lamont crew "did a brilliant job of using technology to build a support base and organize a campaign" in the primary. The campaign benefited from its own and a nationwide crop of independent blogs , from e-mail fund-raising and volunteer-drafting efforts, as well as from a general Internet buzz that catapulted a political unknown into a contender against an internationally recognized three-term incumbent . "Ten years from now it will probably be looked at as a model for how campaigns will be run," Gerstein predicted. Soon, he said, voters will receive get-out-to-the-polls text messages on their cell phones on election day.

Media’s Impact on Voters

Very hard to quantify

Some people are more affected by tv ads than others – some are blasé about it


Government Regulation of the Media

Telecommunications Act (1996) – meant that companies could own more than one type of media enterprise (phones, internet, movies, cable, etc)

Led to…

Media Conglomerates – Clearchannel, NBC Universal, Bertelsmann, Time Warner, Viacom, Walt Disney Company

FCC wanted to expand those rules, let media conglomerates run amok and amass media markets everywhere – is this good?

Govt control of Content – FCC and American Family Association

MSN Tracking Image
MSNBC.com
Newsweek.com
Clift: A Third-Party Ticket in 2008?
Fred Thompson isn't the only 'Law and Order' character eyeing the 2008 presidential campaign. Inside Sam Waterston’s efforts to help promote a third-party ticket.
A WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Eleanor Clift
Newsweek
Updated: 4:08 p.m. ET April 27, 2007

April 27, 2007 - The actor Sam Waterston, who plays the hard-hitting assistant D.A. in “Law and Order,” has a confession to make. “I’m a moderate,” he declared in a speech at the National Press Club. “You’re looking at a bird rarely seen in Washington, even in springtime.” Waterston was in town to promote Unity ’08, an Internet scheme to launch a third-party ticket, made up of a Republican and a Democrat, to run together against the two major party nominees.

Waterston is much more animated in person than is his character on the show; he smiles a lot and defers to the political pros seated with him who founded Unity ’08. He calls himself a skeptic but comes across more like an idealist. Tall and angular, he’s played Lincoln so much that he’s easy to typecast as a president. Asked if he might run, he said no, but thinks his costar Fred Thompson will get into the race. Waterston just wants to do his part to shake up the system. “I know I’m just a bug running around in the sun who doesn’t know he’s about to be squashed,” he said at one point. “To me, this is a liberating thing to say what I think.”

Only in Hollywood is coming out of the closet as a moderate considered bold. Waterston actually lives in Connecticut, but concedes his Hollywood friends are having a hard time getting their heads around the notion of a third-party candidacy. “Part of it is fear,” he says. “Ralph Nader fear.” Democrats don’t want another election stolen from them by an allegedly well-meaning idealist wanting to reform the system. Republicans are skittish, too. They like control, and the Internet by definition is an uncontrollable force. With the field already crowded with candidates, will there be room for a third party?

There’s a sense that politics as we know it could come apart this election season. With an unpopular war, scandals consuming the White House and a two-party system paralyzed by partisanship, voters are looking for an outsider, somebody who’s not tainted by politics as usual. If the two parties don’t satisfy this yearning with their nominees, there will be a third-party candidacy, maybe more than one. Even if the Republicans and Democrats choose candidates who are broadly acceptable, those choices will be made in early February--leaving nine months for buyer’s remorse to set in, or for the nominees to implode. Of course, the notion of third parties have come and gone in the past, usually falling victim to the institutional power and financial might of the two parties. Still, the political landscape is readymade for more choices to emerge in a culture geared to the next new thing.

Republican consultant Doug Bailey and Democrats Jerry Rafshoon and Hamilton Jordan, who worked in the Carter White House, originally planned to collaborate on a book about the broken political system. Then they decided not to just write about it, but to do something. Their idea: to attract 10 million people who would become delegates by simply going to the Unity ’08 site and registering. If 10 percent of them give $100, that would raise 10 times the $10 million to $12 million Unity ’08 needs to get off the ground and hold its virtual convention in June ’08. “The [Howard] Dean phenomenon was not some kind of fluke,” says Bailey, referring to the fund-raising potential of the Internet. The site is inviting “Dream Team” submissions, and the founders are briefing potential candidates. Among them: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who’s pro-gun control and pro-environment, and Nebraska GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel, an antiwar Republican. The founders don’t quite say it, but Bloomberg is the one they’re really after. He could inject big ideas into a policy debate that is already threatening to be overly careful and focus-grouped. It doesn’t hurt that he’s a billionaire, and could fund a campaign out of his own pocket.

Unity ’08 is determined to get on the ballot in all 50 states. If that happens, the group will become a force for the other parties to reckon with. Bailey told NEWSWEEK that he could envision one of the two major-party nominees deciding to seek the Unity ’08 nod rather than run against a third-party ticket. “But he or she would have to name a vice president from the opposition party,” Bailey adds. That could prove a major stumbling block, of course. But Bailey sees it as an opportunity to also showcase cabinet choices that would be a mix of Republicans and Democrats. It all sounds rather fanciful, and with the front runners in both parties tending more toward political centrism than extremism, Bailey’s concept of a centrist ticket could give way to something far different. George Vradenberg, a former AOL executive who’s backing Unity ’08, told NEWSWEEK that if the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton, who voted for the war, and the Republicans choose John McCain, who is pro-war, Unity ’08 could become the vehicle for an antiwar ticket that pairs Hagel with Barak Obama. Once you empower people via the Internet, anything can happen, which is the promise and the peril of any start-up.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18355633/site/newsweek/

The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition

Iran and the Democrats
, THE JERUSALEM POST Apr. 27, 2007

This week, Democratic candidates for US president spoke to the National Jewish Democratic Council. What do their speeches tell us about where they would lead American foreign policy in a post-Bush era?

Among the Democrats, Sen. Barack Obama raised eyebrows by saying that, while Israel should not be asked to "take risks with respect to its security," the US "can ask Israel to say that... [there is] more than just the status quo of fear, terror, division. That can't be our long-term aspiration."

This is an unfortunate statement, since it wrongly implies that Israel has not repeatedly said such things. Worse, it suggests that Israel must be prodded to seek peace, as if this is not something that almost every Israeli citizen and leader has yearned for more deeply, perhaps, than most Americans can imagine.

It would be a mistake, however, for Israelis - who will be dramatically affected by American foreign policy - to measure American candidates solely by their attitudes toward the Arab-Israeli conflict. All express strong support for Israel, which should be accepted as sincere and reflective of the great majority of Americans.

The more pertinent question is how these candidates will steer the American ship of state through the wider storm - the global conflict between Islamo-fascism and the West, between Iran and the United States. As this conflict goes, so go the prospects for peace in this region and in the world.

On this, it is instructive to go back to what, to many Americans, now seems a strikingly prescient speech by Obama to an anti-war rally, before the US toppled Saddam Hussein.

"After September 11th... I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don't oppose all wars...

"What I am opposed to is a dumb war... What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."

Setting aside the troubling attempt to pin the war in Iraq on two Jews, one of whom was long out of government, what is striking here is Obama's distinction between necessary and "dumb" war.

Whether and how the war in Iraq should have been fought is the subject of heated debate. The burning question now, though, is not just how to end it, but whether the confrontation with Iran is another "dumb war" in the Democrats' book.

Here, Sen. Hillary Clinton stood out slightly among the Democrats at the National Jewish Democratic Council, in that she went beyond the usual "all options on the table" formulation. "If we do have to take offensive military action against Iran, it would be far better if the rest of the world saw it as a last resort, not first resort, because the... consequences would be global," she said.

It is somewhat absurd to suggest, given years of European-led negotiations and painstaking UN Security Council deliberations, that the US could be understood as pursuing force as a first resort. Such statements make one wonder, for all the talk that Iran must be stopped, whether the Democrats would confront only terrorist groups, like al-Qaida, or also the regimes behind them.

Dennis Ross, who cannot be suspected of disbelief in diplomacy, wrote recently of Iran, "Why have sticks been more effective than carrots? Because... no combination of inducements can match the value of having nuclear weapons. But the value of nuclear weapons has to be weighed against the potential cost."

Ross continued: "I favor [engaging Iran], but only if it is guided by an understanding that penalties, more than inducements, are the key to altering the Iranian position."

So far, the Democratic position on Iran seems to be two parts engagement, one part hamstringing the White House, and no parts urging stronger and faster international action. If the Democrats want anyone - Americans, Israelis or Iranians - to take their foreign policy stance seriously, this balance should change.

Gun Crazy - Where does the Virginia Tech massacre leave America's weapons policy
America was united in mourning after its worst-ever school massacre when Cho Seung-Hui shot dead 32 in two incidents two hours apart. But it refuses to face the folly of its weapons policy. By David Usborne
Published: 22 April 2007

The scene he found inside Norris Hall was too much for the state trooper who had retreated back into the cold, snow-flecked air outside to catch his breath. Suddenly, he doubled up and vomited on the grass. In the back of a nearby van another police officer crouched, covered his face and quietly sobbed.

It was the middle of Monday morning on the campus of Virginia Tech, and these men knew what the rest of America had yet to learn. A gunman had gone berserk, fatally shooting 30 people inside. Some of the dead were still in their chairs where they had been attending French and German lessons; others were slumped, bloodied in the hallways and stairwells. Most were students but two were teachers, including a Holocaust survivor who had died trying to shield his pupils. Almost all had been shot three times.

This was the dénouement of the deadliest rampage in modern American history. The killer, a 23-year-old English student originally from South Korea, Cho Seung-Hui, had started his day's satanic work more than two hours earlier, when he walked up to the fourth floor of a huge co-ed dormitory hall, West Ambler Johnston, on the other side of campus, and killed two other young and innocent adults. In between, he had found time to pay a visit to the post office in Blacksburg, Virginia Tech's college town.

The faux-Gothic Norris Hall, clad in the grey Hokie stone that gives students at Virginia Tech their nickname - Hokies - is sealed off today, and will remain so for months. Indeed, what to do with a building now so infamously defiled is just one of many difficult dilemmas facing the university authorities.

Others, however, are probably more pressing, including how to answer critics who ask why the campus was not locked down when the first two murders were discovered at 7.15am, and why the many early warning signs of Cho's defective circuitry went virtually unaddressed until it was too late.

In truth, those of us not directly touched by the tragedy should be patient in demanding answers. That goes for the media in particular - we exhausted our welcome very quickly in Blacksburg last week. "VT Stay Strong," declared a handwritten poster on a stone wall close to Norris Hall yesterday. "Media Stay Away."

Danny Axsom, a professor of social psychology on campus, was among those pleading for us to hold back a while. "There is a disconnect between those on the outside who want to get those questions answered soon, and people more on the inside, who have other priorities right now," he said. What he means, of course, is mourning. The police officers and rescue workers who went inside Norris Hall may never erase what they saw.

Fortunately, Americans are extremely good at the exercise of collective grief. That is not meant disrespectfully: it comes naturally to them to gather, hold hands and ease their pain through public tears and prayer. At Virginia Tech they began the process on Tuesday with a memorial assembly in its main sports hall, where President George Bush strived to soothe so many torn hearts. The same night, 10,000 flooded the drill field, the green heart of campus, to light candles for the dead. On Friday, the field once again was the place for hundreds to mark a minute of silence.

Healing will come. Even today, you see the first signs of Hokies grasping that most fundamental of human responses to terrible loss, the one that says that for those that remain life does go on. That's why a baseball game was played on Friday night on campus, and why the student association last night held a "Hokie Barbeque" on the drill field. Tomorrow classes will start again. And it is not too soon to speculate, at least, over what this country's response over the longer term will be.

A panel of experts has already been appointed to investigate how the campus authorities might have better handled the crisis and better identified the threat that Cho represented. It will recommend new technologies to enhance campus security, and tougher standards for ejecting students who are on the brink of going haywire.

This sounds like tinkering, and it probably will be. Indeed, it is curious that a country that will deploy billions of dollars and its entire military to counter the threat of terrorists coming from the outside seems so unable to tackle home-grown dysfunctions. Jonesboro, Columbine, the Amish schoolhouse ... the list is long. And as for guns - still America cannot stand to confront its affection for them. Yet it is willing to sacrifice all the norms of civil rights to protect itself from supposed members of al-Qa'ida.

Who knows exactly when Cho began to jump the rails of normal social behaviour? Family members from South Korea have attested to his curious, catatonic demeanour even as a youngster, before his parents brought him to America at the age of eight. Former school peers said his strangeness led to bullying and taunts that he should "Go back to China".

Then he arrived at Virginia Tech, and by the autumn of 2005 two female students complained that he had made "annoying" advances by phone and email. Teachers caught him taking pictures of girls' knees under the desks with his cell phone. He frightened fellow students with his mean looks, to the extent that Lucinda Roy, the head of the English department born in Battersea, south London, took him out of one class to tutor him individually. Talking to him, she said, was "like talking to a hole".

One of the female student's complaints started a process that might have prevented Monday's massacre. Campus police issued a temporary detention order and took him to a local mental health facility, where he spent one night before being brought before a special justice, who determined that Cho was an "imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness".

He recommended outpatient treatment at the clinic. This was crucial. If he had committed him as an in-patient, it would have gone on his record. But he did not, which meant that nothing showed up in background checks when Cho decided the time had come to take revenge on the society he had grown to loathe.

In February this year, Cho obtained a Walther 22mm handgun from a pawnshop near the campus. He apparently decided he needed still more firepower - we can therefore assume he was meticulously plotting his deadly assaults weeks ago - and last month he travelled 30 miles to Roanoke Firearms, where he purchased a Glock 19 for a little over $500 (£250). With no red flag appearing on his background check regarding his brush with mental professionals, the sale of those weapons appeared to be legal. Federal officials said yesterday, however, that if the system had worked properly his purchases should have been blocked.

Why Monday? Why the first two victims in West Ambler Johnston, Emily Hilscher - "Pixie" on her MySpace page - and Ryan Clark, a resident adviser in the hall? We still don't know. And what about that trip tothe post office between the two rounds of killings, the most startling of the details to emerge all week? For at 9.01am, he posted to NBC News what its anchorman Brian Williams unfortunately referred to as his "multimedia manifesto", featuring pages of ranting, still photographs of himself and video footage of him brandishing the guns that he used to kill his victims.

Many on campus remain furious at NBC for broadcasting its contents. "This is what he wanted," said Daniel Aguilera, a fifth-year student from Peru. "He wanted us to see him by keeping on playing that video."

Disbelief remains at Virginia Tech. Gaze beyond campus to the Blue Ridge Mountains, and two things come to mind. This was once frontier America, where the original instinct to allow citizens to bear arms made eminent sense. In this age, however, students and their parents are drawn to Blacksburg for a clear reason: it is not, as Professor Axsom says, "plopped in a big city" with all the urban distractions and dangers that that might imply. Blacksburg is a peaceful place, a place of community - of Hokie spirit. Now that spirit has almost too much to overcome.