Debating Reform

2. Auflage 2013
ISBN: 978-1-4522-4002-2
Verlag: CQ Press

Buch, Englisch, 400 Seiten, Format (B × H): 152 mm x 226 mm, Gewicht: 537 g

Getting students to engage in debate always makes for a lively classroom. Yet when students only parrot partisan lines, an instructor is left to question if there is real pedagogical value in the exercise. Ellis and Nelson offer a fresh take on the traditional debate-style Reader. With pieces written specifically for this volume by top scholars in the field, each pro or con essay considers a concrete proposal for reforming the political system, from making it easier to amend the Constitution to adopting compulsory voting. By focusing on institutions, rather than liberal or conservative public policies, students tend to leave behind ideology and grapple with claims and evidence to draw their own conclusions and build their own arguments. Students will explore how institutions work in their American government text, but this reader helps them to understand how they can be made to work better.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Ellis, Richard J.

Nelson, Michael

Fachgebiete

• Sozialwissenschaften Politikwissenschaft Politikwissenschaft Allgemein

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Preface
Contributors
Pro: Resolved, Article V should be revised to make it easier to amend the Constitution and to call a constitutional convention - Sanford Levinson
Con: Resolved, Article V should be revised to make it easier to amend the Constitution and to call a constitutional convention - David E. Kyvig
Pro: Resolved, Congress should restore each state’s freedom to set its drinking age - John M. McCardell
Con: Resolved, Congress should restore each state’s freedom to set its drinking age - James C. Fell
Pro: Resolved, the Constitution should be amended to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United - Jamie Raskin
Con: Resolved, the Constitution should be amended to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United - John Samples
Pro: Resolved, Congress should pass the Democracy Restoration Act restoring the right to vote in federal elections to people with criminal records - Erika L. Wood
Con: Resolved, Congress should pass the Democracy Restoration Act restoring the right to vote in federal elections to people with criminal records - Roger Clegg
Pro: Resolved, the United States should adopt a national initiative and referendum - Todd Donovan
Con: Resolved, the United States should adopt a national initiative and referendum - Richard J. Ellis
Pro: Resolved, the United States should adopt compulsory voting - Martin P. Wattenberg
Con: Resolved, the United States should adopt compulsory voting - Jason Brennan
Pro: Resolved, Congress should bring back the fairness doctrine - Marjorie Randon Hershey
Con: Resolved, Congress should bring back the fairness doctrine - James Gattuso
Pro: Resolved, political parties should nominate candidates for president in a national primary - Caroline J. Tolbert
Con: Resolved, political parties should nominate candidates for president in a national primary - David P. Redlawsk
Pro: Resolved, states should require open primaries - Mark A. Siegel
Con: Resolved, states should require open primaries - Seth E. Masket
Pro: Resolved, earmarks for special interests should be abolished - Jeffrey Lazarus
Con: Resolved, earmarks for special interests should be abolished - Scott A. Frisch and Sean Q Kelly
Pro: Resolved, proportional representation should be adopted for U.S. House elections - Douglas J. Amy
Con: Resolved, proportional representation should be adopted for U.S. House elections - Brendan J. Doherty
Pro: Resolved, the redistricting process should be nonpartisan - Elaine C. Kamarck
Con: Resolved, the redistricting process should be nonpartisan - Justin Buchler
Pro: Resolved, the Senate should represent people, not states - Bruce I. Oppenheimer
Con: Resolved, the Senate should represent people, not states - John J. Pitney, Jr.
Pro: Resolved, Senate Rule XXII should be amended so that filibusters can be ended by a majority vote - Steven S. Smith
Con: Resolved, Senate Rule XXII should be amended so that filibusters can be ended by a majority vote - Wendy J. Schiller
Pro: Resolved, the electoral college should be abolished - George C. Edwards III
Con: Resolved, the electoral college should be abolished - Gary L. Gregg II
Pro: Resolved, the president should be granted a line item veto - Michael Nelson
Con: Resolved, the president should be granted a line item veto - Robert J. Spitzer
Pro: Resolved, bring back the spoils system - Domonic A. Bearfield
Con: Resolved, bring back the spoils system - Marissa Martino Golden
Pro: Resolved, the terms of Supreme Court justices should be limited to eighteen years - David Karol
Con: Resolved, the terms of Supreme Court justices should be limited to eighteen years - Ward Farnsworth
Pro: Resolved, the United States should adopt a balanced budget amendment - David M. Primo
Con: Resolved, the United States should adopt a balanced budget amendment - John B. Gilmour
Pro: Resolved, Congress should pass the War Powers Consultation Act - Nancy Kassop
Pro: Resolved, Congress should pass the War Powers Consultat

Über Autor(innen)

Nelson, Michael
Michael Nelson is Fulmer Professor of Political Science at Rhodes College and a senior fellow at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. A former editor of the Washington Monthly, his most recent books include Trump’s First Year (2018); The Elections of 2016 (2018); The Evolving Presidency: Landmark Documents (2019); The American Presidency: Origins and Development (with Sidney M. Milkis, 2011); and Governing at Home: The White House and Domestic Policymaking (with Russell B. Riley, 2011). Nelson has contributed to numerous journals, including the Journal of Policy History, Journal of Politics, and Political Science Quarterly. He also has written multiple articles on subjects as varied as baseball, Frank Sinatra, and C. S. Lewis. More than fifty of his articles have been anthologized in works of political science, history, and English composition. His 2014 book, Resilient America: Electing Nixon, Channeling Dissent, and Dividing Government, won the American Political Science Association’s Richard E. Neustadt Award for best book on the presidency published that year; and his 2006 book with John Lyman Mason, How the South Joined the Gambling Nation, won the Southern Political Science Association’s V.O. Key Award.

Ellis, Richard J.
Richard J. Ellis is Mark O. Hatfield Professor of Politics at Willamette University. His books include The Development of the American Presidency (2015; 2nd ed.); Debating Reform: Conflicting Perspectives on How to Fix the American Political System (with Michael Nelson, 3nd ed., 2016); Judging the Boy Scouts of America: Gay Rights, Freedom of Association, and the Dale Case (2014); Judging Executive Power: Sixteen Supreme Court Cases That Have Shaped the American Presidency (2009); and Presidential Travel: The Journey from George Washington to George W. Bush (2008). In 2008 he was named the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Oregon Professor of the Year.