Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Review for Exam #1


Exam #1 takes place during class time on Friday, September 20.  You simply need to bring pen and photo ID.  The exam will consist of 5 sections; 4 of these will be short essays, and the other will be 5 true-false questions.  Each section is worth 5 points, and you must do a total of 3 sections (either 3 short essays, or two short essays and all of the true-false).  DO THREE SECTIONS, BUT ONLY THREE SECTIONS.

To prepare for the exam, you should read through the blog assignments, especially the one due on September 16 (conditions of aid).  You should be familiar with my posts, the articles I link to, and the comments of your colleagues.  In terms of material covered in class, you should be familiar with the first two sets of lecture notes (white packet on comparing states, and federalism; blue sheet on interest groups and parties, and the first portion of the pink packet—just the section on voter turnout).  Specifically, from class, you should be familiar with:
Why we compare states.
The three types of political culture.
The origins of the federal system.
The major events in the development of federalism over time.
The different types of fiscal federalism.
The importance of conditions of aid.
The changes to fiscal federalism under Ronald Reagan.
Why some states get more federal aid than do others.
The interaction between Dillon's Rule and Home Rule
Why some states give more power to local government than do others.
Why some interest groups are more likely to form than others (the "Free Rider" problem).
The reasons for the decline of political parties in the states.
The difficulties facing third parties (with perhaps extra emphasis on single member plurality).
Why third parties sometimes overcome these difficulties.
Why voter turnout is higher in some states than it is in others.

I will have my usual office hours on Wednesday, September 18, in case you want to ask questions.  You can also email them to me at the email address on the syllabus, until 9 pm on September 19.  I will also be in my office most of the 18th.  Finally, you may post questions to the blog under this topic.  I’ll answer any questions posted on the blog by 9 pm, on September 19.  Good luck!--NB

19 comments:

  1. Regarding the major events in the development of federalism over time… Do you mean events like the shift from state to national control and the shift from dual federalism to cooperative federalism? Or are you talking about specific events such as the ratification of the 13-16th amendments?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Both. You should be aware of the specific events (amendments, court cases, etc.) and the two general trends you mention.--NB

    ReplyDelete
  3. How did the Louisiana Purchase and McCulloch v. Maryland effect federalism?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Louisiana Purchase involved Jefferson (who was an anti-Federalist, someone who was against expanding the power of the national government) buying the Louisiana Territory (more than doubling the size of the country) without consulting Congress or the states. He did this because it was too good a deal to pass up, but it increased the power of the national government.

      McCulloch v. Maryland was a court case where the national government established a national bank and put a branch in Maryland. Maryland thought this was unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment (all powers not listed go to the states), so it taxed the bank heavily. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Marshall (a Federalist, who wanted to increase the power of the national government) ruled that under the "Necessary and Proper Clause" (or "Implied Powers Doctrine", or "Elastic Clause") of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, not only does the Congress have specific powers, but it also has the powers necessary and proper to carry out the other powers. Since the national government has the power to regulate commerce and coin money, it also has the power to have a bank (because it's necessary and proper in order to do the other stuff). Thus, Maryland can't tax the bank (if they could, they could destroy it). This decreased the power of the 10th Amendment, and thus increased the power of the national government.

      Delete
    2. Thank you! I've actually encountered another question-how does single-member plurality negatively effect third parties?

      Delete
    3. Single member plurality means that a state is divided into districts, each of which elects one representative. In order to get any representation, a third party needs to actually get the most votes in a district. This is hard to do; it also leads to the major party candidates trying (often with success) to convince voters that a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote and that they should vote for whichever major party candidate is closer to their views (the lesser of two evils). More to the point, if a third party gets 10% of the vote in single member districts across a state, it gets no seats in the legislature. Under the proportional voting system used in many countries in Europe, you vote for a party and legislative seats are distributed based on the percentage of the vote for each party. Thus, if you get 10% of the votes, you get 10% of the seats in the legislature.--NB

      Delete
  4. When you ask "what are the different types of fiscal federalism" are you referring to the Level of discretion list and the Method of Allocation list on the printed notes?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Can you briefly explain what the problems were with the Articles of Confederation (Lack of national unity and lack of coordination) and why they were an issue/occurred?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People saw themselves not as Americans, but as Pennsylvanians, Virginians, etc. Concern was that they wouldn't be able to unite if the British returned to fight again. And they had different money, different sets of tariffs, etc. All very inefficient.

      Delete
    2. Thank you! Can you briefly explain the Marbury v Madison case? I understand it brought Judicial Review to the system, and something with Jefferson Madison, but I'm confused on the case as a whole...

      Delete
    3. You don't need to know the gory details. The key element is indeed that Chief Justice Marshall, a Federalist (a believer in strong power for the national government) used the case to establish the precedent for judicial review (where the courts can decide whether laws are constitutional). Since that time, when they have decided that laws are unconstitutional, 90% of the time, those have been state laws. So judicial review gives the national government (through the courts) more power over the states

      Delete
  6. Im having trouble finding reasons for the decline of political parties in the states

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I gave a lecture last Wednesday that was entirely on that topic. See lecture notes #2. I talked about the shift from labor-intensive to capital-intensive campaigns, the shift way from smoke-filled rooms, the shift from closed to open primaries, the decline of political patronage, the end of political parties providing welfare, and the increase in non-partisan local elections. Try to get notes from someone who has them.

      Delete
  7. Why do some states give more power to local governments than others?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. States that are more homogenous (everyone is the same) keep more power in the hands of state government. States that are more heterogeneous give more power to local government. For instance, people in New York state can't agree on gun control policy, so they don't have one statewide. They let local governments decide.

      Delete
  8. What are the three types political cultures? I know one is traditionalistic, not sure about the other two.

    ReplyDelete