CH-13-15 The Federal Bureaucracy: Administering the Government – We The People: An Introduction to American Government : Chapter Notes

This Document Contains Chapters 13 to 15 Chapter 13 The Federal Bureaucracy: Administering the Government Learning Objectives Having read the chapter, the students should be able to do each of the following: • Describe the evolution of the federal bureaucracy. • Summarize the organizational structure of the federal bureaucracy. • Outline the evolution of national environmental policy. • Explain the budgetary process. • Summarize the sources of bureaucratic power. • Outline the ways the federal bureaucracy is held accountable. • Categorize federal bureaucrats. Chapter Outline I. Origin and Structure of the Federal Bureaucracy A. Types of Federal Agencies B. Federal Employment II. The Budgetary Process A. The President and Agency Budgets B. Congress and the Agency Budgets III. Policy and Power in the Bureaucracy A. The Agency Point of View B. Sources of Bureaucratic Power 1. The Power of Expertise 2. The Power of Clientele Groups 3. The Power of Friends in High Places IV. Democracy and Bureaucratic Accountability A. Accountability through the Presidency 1. Reorganization 2. Presidential Appointments 3. OMB: Budgets and Rule-Making B. Accountability through Congress C. Accountability through the Courts D. Accountability within the Bureaucracy Itself 1. Senior Executive Service 2. Administrative Law Judges 3. Whistleblowing 4. Demographic Representativeness V. Summary Focus and Main Points This chapter examines both the need for bureaucracy and the problems associated with it. The chapter describes the bureaucracy’s responsibilities, organizational structure, and management practices. The chapter also explains the “politics” of the bureaucracy. Although the three constitutional branches of government impose a degree of accountability on the bureaucracy, its sheer size confounds their efforts to control it fully. The main points discussed in this chapter are: • Bureaucracy is an inevitable consequence of complexity and scale. Modern government could not function without a large bureaucracy. Through authority, specialization, and rules, bureaucracy provides a means of managing thousands of tasks and employees. • Bureaucrats naturally take an “agency point of view,” seeking to promote their agency’s programs and power. They do this through their expert knowledge, support from clientele groups (those that benefit from the agency’s programs), and backing by Congress or the president. • Although agencies are subject to oversight by the president, Congress, and the judiciary, bureaucrats exercise considerable power in their own right. Chapter Summary Bureaucracy is a method of organizing people and work, based on the principles of hierarchical authority, job specialization, and formalized rules. As a form of organization, bureaucracy is the most efficient means of getting people to work together on tasks of great magnitude and complexity. It is also a form of organization that is prone to waste and rigidity, which is why efforts are always being made to reform it. The United States could not be governed without a large federal bureaucracy. The day-to-day work of the federal government, from mail delivery to provision of social security to international diplomacy, is done by federal agencies. About 2.5 million federal employees work work to administer thousands of federal programs through cabinet departments, independent agencies, regulatory agencies, government corporations, and presidential commissions. Most of those employees are hired through a merit system, though some are appointed by the presidential administration. The bureaucracy is more than simply an administrative giant. Administrators have discretion when making policy decisions. In the process of implementing policy, they make important policy and political choices. Administrative agencies operate within budgets established by the president and Congress, and they participate in the budgetary process. The process begins with the president’s budget instructions, conveyed through OMB, to the agencies. They then develop their budgets, which are consolidated and sent by the president to Congress, where the House and Senate budget and appropriations committees do the bulk of the work, including holding hearings involving agency heads. Throughout, Congress, the president, and the agencies seek to promote their respective budgetary goals. Once the annual budget has been passed by the House and Senate and signed by the president, it takes effect on October 1, the starting date of the federal government’s fiscal year. Administrators are actively engaged in politics and policymaking. The fragmentation of power and the pluralism of the American political system result in a contentious policy process, which leads government agencies to compete for power and resources. Accordingly, civil servants tend to have an agency point of view: they seek to advance their agency’s programs and to repel attempts by others to weaken them. In promoting their agencies, civil servants rely on their policy expertise, the backing of their clientele groups, and the support of the president and Congress. Administrators are not elected by the people they serve, yet they wield substantial independent power. Because of this, the bureaucracy’s accountability is a central issue. The major checks on the bureaucracy occur through the president, Congress, and the courts. The president has some power to reorganize the bureaucracy and the authority to appoint the political head of each agency. The president also has management tools (such as the executive budget) that can be used to limit administrators’ discretion. Congress has influence on bureaucratic agencies through its authorization and funding powers and through various devices (including sunset provisions and oversight hearings) that can increase administrators’ accountability. The judiciary’s role in ensuring the bureaucracy’s accountability is smaller than that of the elected branches, but the courts have the authority to force agencies to act in accordance with legislative intent, established procedures, and constitutionally guaranteed rights. Internal checks on the bureaucracy— the Senior Executive Service, administrative law judges, whistleblowing, and demographic representativeness—are also mechanisms for holding the bureaucracy accountable. Major Concepts administrative law judge An official who presides at a trial-like administrative hearing to settle a dispute between an agency and someone adversely affected by a decision of that agency. agency point of view The tendency of bureaucrats to place the interests of their agency ahead of other interests and ahead of the priorities sought by the president or Congress. budgetary process The process through which annual federal spending and revenue determinations are made. bureaucracy A system of organization and control based on the principles of hierarchical authority, job specialization, and formalized rules. bureaucratic accountability The degree to which bureaucrats are held accountable for the power they exercise. cabinet (executive) departments The major administrative organizations within the federal executive bureaucracy, each of which is headed by a secretary or, in the case of Justice, the attorney general. Each department has responsibility for a major function of the federal government, such as defense, agriculture, or justice. clientele groups Special interest groups that benefit directly from the activities of a particular bureaucratic agency and therefore are strong advocates of the agency. demographic representativeness The idea that the bureaucracy will be more responsive to the public if its employees at all levels are demographically representative of the population as a whole. formalized rules A basic principle of bureaucracy that refers to the standardized procedures and established regulations by which a bureaucracy conducts its operations. government corporations Government bodies, such as the U.S. Postal Service and Amtrak, that are similar to private corporations in that they charge for their services but differ in that they receive federal funding to help defray expenses. Their directors are appointed by the president with Senate approval. hierarchical authority A basic principle of bureaucracy that refers to the chain of command within an organization whereby officials and units have control over those below them. independent agencies Bureaucratic agencies that are similar to cabinet departments but usually have a narrower area of responsibility. Each such agency is headed by a presidential appointee who is not a cabinet member. An example is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. job specialization A basic principle of bureaucracy holding that the responsibilities of each job position should be defined explicitly and that a precise division of labor within the organization should be maintained. merit system An approach to managing the bureaucracy whereby people are appointed to government positions on the basis of either competitive examinations or special qualifications, such as professional training. neutral competence The administrative objective of a merit-based bureaucracy. Such a bureaucracy should be “competent” in the sense that its employees are hired and retained on the basis of their expertise and “neutral” in the sense that it operates by objective standards rather than partisan ones. patronage system An approach to managing the bureaucracy whereby people are appointed to important government positions as a reward for political services they have rendered and because of their partisan loyalty. policy implementation The primary function of the bureaucracy; it refers to the process of carrying out the authoritative decisions of Congress, the president, and the courts. presidential commissions Organizations within the bureaucracy that are headed by commissioners appointed by the president. An example is the Commission on Civil Rights. regulatory agencies Administrative units, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), that have responsibility for monitoring and regulating ongoing economic activities and regulating industrial pollution, respectively. rule-making The process by which bureaucratic agencies develop and make known the details on how legislation will be implemented. Rule-making is a main source of bureaucratic power. Senior Executive Service (SES) Top-level career civil servants who qualify through a competitive process to receive higher salaries than their peers but who can be assigned or transferred by order of the president. spoils system The practice of granting public office to individuals in return for political favors they have rendered. whistleblowing An internal check on the bureaucracy whereby employees report instances of mismanagement that they observe. Lecture Outline This lecture outline closely follows the text in its organization. The instructor can use this outline as a lecture aid. This chapter describes the nature of the federal bureaucracy and its personnel. Bureaucratic responsibilities are discussed, as well as organizational structure and personnel management practices. The chapter also contains a discussion of bureaucratic policymaking and the ways in which agencies acquire the power they need in order to maintain themselves and their programs. The power imperatives of the bureaucracy are assessed, along with the ways in which bureaucratic accountability is maintained and could be increased. Government agencies are seldom in the headlines unless they do something wrong, as in the case of the Minerals Management Service and the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon. Nor do federal agencies rank high in public esteem. Even though most Americans respond favorably to personal encounters with the federal bureaucracy (as, for example, when a senior citizen applies for social security), they have a low opinion of the bureaucracy as a whole. A Pew Research Center poll found, for example, that roughly two-thirds of Americans see the bureaucracy as “inefficient and wasteful.” I. Origin and Structure of the Federal Bureaucracy Bureaucracy, the most effective existing form of organization, is based on hierarchical authority, job specialization, and formalized rules. All large-scale organizations, both private and public, are bureaucracies. The U.S. federal bureaucracy has grown over time from its roughly 3,000 employees in 1800 to about 2.5 million employees who have responsibility for thousands of programs. Bureaucratic growth has been a response to political demands arising from socioeconomic change and crises. For example, industrialization created an increasingly national and interdependent economy, compelling the federal government to assume greater responsibility for economic regulation. There are five general types of organizations within the federal bureaucracy. • There are fifteen cabinet (executive) departments, each of which is served by a cabinet secretary who has responsibility for setting general department policy and overseeing operations. • Independent agencies such as NASA and the CIA have a more narrow area of responsibility than cabinet departments. • Regulatory agencies such as the EPA are responsible for regulation of economic activity designated by Congress, particularly public safety, welfare, and competition. Some are independent from political control. • Government corporations such as Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Amtrak are like private corporations in that they charge clients for services and are governed by a board of directors. They receive federal funding to help defray operating expenses, and their directors are appointed by the president with Senate approval. • Presidential commissions are sometimes permanent bodies that provide recommendations to the president in particular areas of responsibility. Some presidential commissions are temporary and disband after making recommendations on particular issues. Most federal employees are hired by merit criteria. Merit hiring protects government workers from being fired for partisan reasons. • The administrative objective of the merit system is neutral competence; employees are hired and retained on the basis of their skills, and they are “neutral” in the sense that they are not partisan appointees and are expected to be of service to everyone. • The patronage system was the post-election practice of filling administrative offices with people who had supported the winning party; it governed federal hiring practice for much of the nineteenth century. Abuse of this system resulted in the “spoils system” label. • Federal employees are classified in GS (Graded Service) rankings that range from GS-1 to GS-15. • Federal employees have few rights of collective action. They may join unions but may not strike. • The Hatch Act (though relaxed in 1993) prohibited federal employees from holding key jobs in election campaigns. II. The Budgetary Process The executive agencies derive their authority from grants of power by the three branches of government. The budgetary process is the process through which annual federal spending and revenue determinations are made, and agencies are completely dependent on the outcome of this process. • The budgetary process lasts a year and a half, beginning when the president establishes general budgetary guidelines in consultation with the OMB. • The agencies develop a detailed budget based on the presidential guidelines, and they tend to seek additional funding for their programs. • In January, the president’s budget is submitted to Congress and goes to the House and Senate budget committees. The budget undergoes varying degrees of change during this time. • The budget then goes to the House and Senate appropriations committees for review and more changes by subcommittees. The budget is then reconciled in conference committee and then voted on by the full House and Senate and sent to the president for signing or veto. III. Policy and Power in the Bureaucracy Administrative agencies’ main task is policy implementation—the carrying out of decisions made by Congress, the president, and the courts. • Implementation is relatively straightforward in the case of agencies that are charged with the delivery of services. But many agencies have wide discretionary authority in some areas, as in the case of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) created in 2010. How the agency’s assigned tasks were to be implemented was left up to the agency itself. The necessary rule-making process is the chief way administrative agencies exercise control over policy. • Agency administrators also develop policy ideas that they then propose to the White House or Congress. • Bureaucrats naturally take an agency point of view: they seek to procure funding, attention, and support for their particular agency. • Agency professionalism and careerism tend to cement agency loyalties. There are three main sources of bureaucratic power. • All agencies acquire power through their professional expertise; this power of expertise can be substantial. • Clientele groups are special interests that benefit directly from an agency’s programs; these groups tend to protect the agency associated with their interests. An example is Department of Agriculture career bureaucrats who are strong allies of farm interests. • The president and Congress are often at odds over the bureaucracy as part of a larger institutional rivalry, and agencies promote their cause by aligning themselves with either side when the two branches collide. IV. Democracy and Bureaucratic Accountability Accountability is the capacity of the public to hold officials responsible for their actions. Bureaucracies are held accountable through the presidency, Congress, and the courts. • The president can use reorganization, the system of presidential appointees, and budget allocations to influence the bureaucracy. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is the president’s chief tool in handling budget allocations. • Congress utilizes legislative oversight, including calling agency heads into hearings, and other devices such as sunset provisions, to restrain the bureaucracy. Congress can also eliminate an agency’s budget or program. Because the oversight function is so massive, Congress has shifted much of the job to the GAO. • The judiciary promotes bureaucratic accountability primarily by ensuring that bureaucrats abide by certain legal standards, thus protecting the public from severe bureaucratic abuses. The courts, however, have tended to support the bureaucracy if its actions are at least somewhat consistent with the law they are administering. The bureaucracy also has internal mechanisms of accountability. • The Senior Executive Service was designed to mitigate the influences of the agency point of view among top administrative leadership. It has had mixed success, as most senior executives end up working in their original agency. • Administrative law judges handle disputes between individuals and federal agencies. • Whistleblowing is the act of reporting instances of bureaucratic corruption or mismanagement by fellow bureaucrats. • Demographic representation is the idea that the bureaucracy will be more responsive if its employees at all levels are demographically representative of the population as a whole. Complementary Lecture Topics Below are suggestions for lectures or lecture topics that will complement the text. In general, these topics assume that students have read the chapter beforehand. • According to opinion polls, most Americans hold a negative view of the federal bureaucracy. Is this view justified? Consider that in many countries the national bureaucracy is obviously corrupt and incompetent, while most observers would agree that the U.S. federal bureaucracy is relatively honest and efficient. • Opinion polls indicate that Americans are concerned about the bureaucracy’s accountability and responsiveness. How do the patronage and merit systems address this problem? • Americans are critical of the size of the federal bureaucracy, but its growth historically has been a response to the political demands of the American people. Given the expectations of the American people of their government, is small government a realistic possibility? • In the American system of divided powers, both the president and Congress can claim to control the bureaucracy. Would the nation be better served if the president had sole responsibility? Why or why not? • A president’s policy goals often conflict with those of career bureaucrats. Are there concrete ways that a president might try to obtain cooperation from bureaucrats who do not share his or her policy goals? • Representativeness and whistleblowing are internal checks on the bureaucracy. What are their strengths and weaknesses as mechanisms of accountability? How do they compare in effectiveness with the more traditional checks that are employed through the president, Congress, and the courts? • Clientele groups contribute to the growth of bureaucratic organizations. From a democratic theory perspective, how is this a positive relationship? What are some of the negative consequences of this relationship? Class Discussion Topics 1. Would the nation be better served if presidents had sole responsibility over the bureaucracy? Why or why not? Answer: Advantages of Sole Presidential Responsibility: • Unified Leadership: Centralizing control under the president could streamline decision-making and ensure that bureaucratic policies align with presidential priorities. • Accountability: A single point of responsibility might make it easier to hold the president accountable for the performance of the federal bureaucracy. Disadvantages of Sole Presidential Responsibility: • Complexity and Scope: The federal bureaucracy is vast and complex, covering a wide range of functions and services. A president might struggle to manage this complexity effectively on their own. • Overreach and Micromanagement: Concentrating power could lead to overreach and micromanagement, where the president is involved in day-to-day operations that could be better handled by specialized bureaucrats. • Political Influence: Centralizing control might increase the potential for political influence and patronage, as the president might favor political allies over experienced professionals. Conclusion: • While having sole presidential responsibility could offer more coherent policy direction, the complexity and scale of the federal bureaucracy suggest that a more decentralized approach, with specialized oversight and management, may be more effective. Balancing presidential leadership with bureaucratic expertise is likely to serve the nation better. 2. Locate the regional service center for the federal bureaucracy nearest to you. Look at what offices and agencies are available. Compare them to those in your state bureaucracy. Explore similarities and differences in coverage and services offered. Discuss how accessible they are for delivering services. Answer: Finding and Comparing Regional Service Centers: 1. Locate the Regional Service Center: • Find the nearest federal regional service center by checking the official website of the federal agency or contacting local government offices. For example, the General Services Administration (GSA) or other federal agencies might have regional offices. 2. Offices and Agencies: • Review the types of offices and agencies located at the regional service center. These might include offices for Social Security, Veterans Affairs, Environmental Protection Agency, etc. 3. Comparison with State Bureaucracy: • Similarities: Both federal and state bureaucracies might offer similar services, such as social services, environmental protection, or public health. • Differences: Federal offices might handle broader national issues, while state offices focus on state-specific concerns. For example, a state office may handle local education policies, whereas a federal office addresses national education standards. 4. Accessibility: • Federal Service Centers: Consider the accessibility of federal regional service centers in terms of location, hours of operation, and services offered. • State Bureaucracy: Compare this with state services regarding accessibility and the scope of services provided. Discussion Points: • Accessibility and Service Delivery: Evaluate how both federal and state service centers meet the needs of their respective populations. Consider the efficiency, coverage, and ease of accessing services. Conclusion: • Understanding the similarities and differences between federal and state service centers helps in assessing the effectiveness of service delivery and identifying areas for improvement. 3. Does the remaining use of the patronage system still fulfill its original intention to provide a better link between a presidential administration and the people that elected it? Does this benefit outweigh the potential drawbacks of presidential appointments that lack the experience or expertise to perform the work? Answer: Patronage System: • Original Intention: The patronage system was designed to create a direct link between a presidential administration and the electorate by rewarding political supporters with government positions. • Current Use: Despite reforms like the Pendleton Act, which introduced merit-based appointments, some level of patronage remains in presidential appointments. Benefits: • Political Alignment: Patronage appointments may ensure that the administration's policies are implemented according to its agenda, providing consistency and alignment with campaign promises. • Political Support: Helps in securing and maintaining political support and loyalty from party members and supporters. Drawbacks: • Lack of Expertise: Appointments based on political connections rather than merit can result in less qualified individuals in key positions, impacting the effectiveness and efficiency of government operations. • Potential for Corruption: Patronage can lead to corruption and favoritism, undermining the integrity and professionalism of the bureaucracy. Conclusion: • The patronage system's benefits in terms of political alignment need to be weighed against the potential drawbacks of appointing individuals who may lack the necessary experience or expertise. Ensuring that appointments are both politically and professionally appropriate can help balance these considerations. Chapter 14 The Federal Judicial System: Applying the Law Learning Objectives Having read the chapter, the students should be able to do each of the following: • Explain the structure of the court system. • Demonstrate knowledge of the Supreme Court’s judicial process. • Describe the nature of the judicial selection process. • Demonstrate knowledge of the checks and balances on the courts. • Explain the role of the Court in the creation of public policy. Chapter Outline I. The Federal Judicial System A. The Supreme Court of the United States B. Selecting and Deciding Cases C. Issuing Decisions and Opinions D. Other Federal Courts 1. U.S. District Courts 2. U.S. Courts of Appeals E. The State Courts II. Federal Court Appointees A. Supreme Court Nominees B. Lower-Court Nominees C. Personal Backgrounds of Judicial Appointees III. The Nature of Judicial Decision Making A. Legal Influences on Judicial Decisions B. Political Influences on Judicial Decisions 1. Inside the Court: Judges’ Political Beliefs 2. Outside the Court: The Public, Interest Groups, and Elected Officials IV. Judicial Power and Democratic Government A. Judicial Restraint versus Judicial Activism B. What Is the Judiciary’s Proper Role? Focus and Main Points This chapter describes the federal judiciary. Like the executive and legislative branches, the judiciary is an independent branch of the U.S. government, but unlike the other two branches, its top officials are not elected by the people. The judiciary is not a democratic institution, and its role is different from and, in some ways, more controversial than the roles of the executive and legislative branches. This chapter explores this issue in the process of discussing the following main points: • The federal judiciary includes the Supreme Court of the United States, which functions mainly as an appellate court; courts of appeals, which hear appeals; and the district courts, which hold trials. Each state has a court system of its own, which for the most part is independent of supervision by the federal courts. • Judicial decisions are constrained by applicable constitutional law, statutory and administrative law, and precedent. Nevertheless, political factors have a major influence on judicial appointments and decisions; judges are political officials as well as legal ones. • The judiciary has become an increasingly powerful policymaking body in recent decades, raising the question of the judiciary’s proper role in a democracy. The philosophies of judicial restraint and judicial activism provide different answers to this question. Chapter Summary At the lowest level of the federal judicial system are the district courts, where most federal cases begin. Above them are the federal courts of appeals, which review cases appealed from the lower courts. The U.S. Supreme Court is the nation’s highest court. Each state has its own court system, consisting of trial courts at the bottom and one or two appellate levels at the top. Cases originating in state courts ordinarily cannot be appealed to the federal courts unless a federal issue is involved, and then the federal courts can choose to rule only on the federal aspects of the case. Federal judges at all levels are nominated by the president, and if confirmed by the Senate, they are appointed by the president to the office. Once on the federal bench, they serve until they die, retire, or are removed by impeachment and conviction. The Supreme Court is unquestionably the most important court in the country. The legal principles it establishes are binding on lower courts, and its capacity to define the law is enhanced by the control it exercises over the cases it hears. However, it is inaccurate to assume that lower courts are inconsequential (the upper-court myth). Lower courts have considerable discretion, and the great majority of their decisions are not reviewed by a higher court. It is also inaccurate to assume that federal courts are far more significant than state courts (the federal court myth). The courts have less discretionary authority than elected institutions do. The judiciary’s positions are constrained by the facts of a case and by the laws as defined through the Constitution, legal precedent, and statutes (and government regulations derived from statutes). Yet existing legal guidelines are seldom so precise that judges have no choice in their decisions. As a result, political influences have a strong impact on the judiciary. It responds to national conditions, public opinion, interest groups, and elected officials, particularly the president and members of Congress. Another political influence on the judiciary is the personal beliefs of judges, who have individual preferences that affect how they decide issues that come before the courts. It’s not surprising that partisan politics plays a significant role in judicial appointments. In recent decades, as the Supreme Court has crossed into areas traditionally left to lawmaking majorities, the issue of judicial power has become more pressing, which has prompted claims and counterclaims about the judiciary’s proper role. Advocates of judicial restraint claim that the justices’ personal values are inadequate justification for exceeding the proper judicial role; they argue that the Constitution entrusts broad issues of the public good to elected institutions and that the courts should be exceptionally deferential to their judgment. Judicial activists counter that the courts were established as an independent branch and should seek to protect and advance fundamental constitutional principles even when such action conflicts with the policies adopted by elected institutions. Major Concepts appellate jurisdiction The authority of a given court to review cases that have already been tried in lower courts and are appealed to it by the losing party; such a court is called an appeals court or appellate court. concurring opinion A separate opinion written by a Supreme Court justice who votes with the majority in the decision on a case but who disagrees with the reasoning. decision A vote of the Supreme Court in a particular case that indicates which party the justices side with and by how large a margin. dissenting opinion The opinion of a justice in a Supreme Court case that explains his or her reasons for disagreeing with the majority’s decision. facts (of a court case) The relevant circumstances of a legal dispute or offense as determined by a trial court. The facts of a case are crucial because they help determine which law or laws are applicable in the case. judicial activism The doctrine that the courts should develop new legal principles when judges see a compelling need, even if this action places them in conflict with precedent or the policy decisions of elected officials. judicial restraint The doctrine that the judiciary should broadly defer to precedent and the judgment of legislatures. The doctrine claims that the job of judges is to work within the confines of laws set down by tradition and lawmaking majorities. judicial review The power of courts to decide whether a governmental institution has acted within its constitutional powers and, if not, to declare its action null and void. jurisdiction (of a court) A given court’s authority to hear cases of a particular kind. Jurisdiction may be original or appellate. majority opinion A court opinion that results when a majority of the justices is in agreement on the legal basis of the decision. opinion (of a court) A court’s written explanation of its decision, which serves to inform others of the legal basis for the decision. Supreme Court opinions are expected to guide the decisions of lower courts. original jurisdiction The authority of a given court to be the first court to hear a case. plurality opinion A court opinion that results when a majority of justices agrees on a decision in a case but does not agree on the legal basis for the decision. In this instance, the legal position held by most of the justices on the winning side is called a plurality opinion. precedent A judicial decision that serves as a rule for settling subsequent cases of a similar nature. writ of certiorari Permission granted by a higher court to allow a losing party in a legal case to bring the case before it for a ruling; when such a writ is requested of the U.S. Supreme Court, four of the Court’s nine justices must agree to accept the case before it is granted certiorari. Lecture Outline This lecture outline closely follows the text in its organization. The instructor can use this outline as a lecture aid. The author discusses the federal judiciary and the work of its judges and justices. The role and composition of the American judicial system are described, with a particular emphasis on the Supreme Court. The politics of federal court appointments is also analyzed. An important topic in this chapter is judicial policymaking and how legal and political factors come together to influence the Court’s decisions. In addition, the author examines the controversy that surrounds the judiciary’s policy role in the American political system. Through its ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in all states. A majority of the Supreme Court justices (in the 5 to 4 ruling) concluded that bans on same-sex marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process and equal-protection clauses. The ruling illustrates three key points about court decisions. First, the judiciary is an important policymaking body. Second, the judiciary has considerable discretion in its rulings. Third, the judiciary is a political as well as legal institution. I. The Federal Judicial System The Supreme Court, the nation’s highest court, is created by the Constitution and is given both original and appellate jurisdiction. • Original jurisdiction is the authority to be the first court to hear a case, and is exercised by the Supreme Court in legal disputes involving two or more states or foreign diplomats. • Appellate jurisdiction is the authority to review cases originating in lower courts and appealed by the losing party. The Supreme Court does most of its significant work through this jurisdiction. The Supreme Court’s work as an appellate court is not to correct other courts’ rulings but to resolve major legal issues. • The Supreme Court’s ability to set legal precedent is strengthened by its discretionary authority to choose its cases, most of which reach the Court through a writ of certiorari. • Judicial conferences after oral and written arguments are attended only by the nine justices, and these private discussions form an important part of the decision-making process. • Supreme Court decisions indicate which party the Court sides with and by how large a margin—a majority or a plurality opinion. • Supreme Court opinions are explanations of the reasons behind its decisions, and are meant to serve as precedent for lower-court decisions. Opinions are the most important part of a Supreme Court decision. In addition to the majority opinion there may be concurring and dissenting opinions. Contrary to the upper-court myth, the lower courts do not dutifully follow the rulings handed down by the courts above them. • U.S. district courts are trial courts that hear most federal cases and exercise considerable discretion in their judgments. Most of their decisions are not appealed to a higher court. • Cases are appealed from the district courts to the federal courts of appeals. Courts of appeals offer the only real hope of reversal for many appellants, because the Supreme Court hears so few cases. • As part of American separation of state and federal governments, each state has its own system of laws and courts which, contrary to the “federal court myth,” possess considerable autonomy and authority. State judges are selected in a variety of ways. About 95 percent of court cases originate in state or local court systems and are resolved there. • Some issues traditionally within the jurisdiction of the states can become federal issues through the rulings of federal courts. II. Federal Court Appointees Presidents have always sought to appoint federal judges who share their political and ideological beliefs. • Because they serve for life until retirement, nomination of a Supreme Court justice is an opportunity for a president to influence judicial policy long after the presidential term is over. • Roughly 80% of Supreme Court nominees have been confirmed by the Senate. The few rejections have been made on the grounds of judicial qualification, political views, personal ethics, or partisanship. • Partisanship is a crucial test for potential appointees. Some observers argue merit should play a larger role in the selection process. • Recent appointees, with the exception of Elena Kagan who was solicitor general, have all come from the appellate courts. III. The Nature of Judicial Decision Making Judges serve in a legal institution and make their decisions in a legal context. • The facts of a case are the relevant circumstances of a legal dispute or offense, determined by trial courts. The Supreme Court must respond to the facts of a dispute, relating them to legal provisions. • The laws of a case are constitutional provisions, legislative statutes, or judicial precedents that apply to the particular dispute. The Supreme Court justices must base their decisions on interpretations of the relevant laws. • The large majority of cases that arise in courts involve issues of statutory and administrative law rather than constitutional law. • The U.S. legal system developed from the English common-law tradition, which includes the principle that a court’s decision on a case should be consistent with previous judicial rulings—the concept of precedent. The Court can exercise powers of judicial discretion in interpreting the laws, which is influenced by political factors, both outside and inside the Court. • Judges’ political beliefs are a strong internal influence on judicial discretion inside the courts. Studies have shown that the Supreme Court justices tend to vote in line with their political attitudes. • The vague wording of the Constitution and of some statutory law can require judges and justices to exercise discretion in their ruling on an issue. • Public opinion is one of the outside influences, though the courts give it less importance than do other officials. • Interest groups often exert pressure on the Court through amicus curiae (friend of court) briefs or lawsuits. • Both the president and Congress have direct and indirect means of influencing the Supreme Court’s decisions. Congress can rewrite legislation, while the executive branch plays a vital role in influencing the political and ideological membership of the Court. The personal views of individual justices have a strong influence on the positions they take on issues and cases. Many scholars contend that the justices’ personal beliefs are the most significant influence on their legal opinions. IV. Judicial Power and Democratic Government Since the Supreme Court’s decisions inevitably reflect the political philosophy of its justices, they constitute a small political elite wielding significant power. This power is most dramatically evident when courts declare laws enacted by Congress to be unconstitutional. The judiciary has become more extensively involved in policymaking in part because social and economic changes have required government to play a larger role in society, which has generated more legal controversies. • The power to declare a law unconstitutional, called judicial review, was established in the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. • The dispute over judicial activism and judicial restraint is a dispute between majority rule and minority rights, reflecting competing values which cannot be resolved by appeal to dogma or fact. • Critics of an activist Court point out that it has adopted the legislative role in enforcing broad social policies. This point of view supports the doctrine of judicial restraint, which holds that the judiciary should respect precedent and defer to the judgment of legislatures. • Supporters of an activist Court claim that judicial activism is both necessary and proper. A dominant view of judicial activism holds that the Court is obligated to promote social justice by vigorously protecting and expanding the rights of individuals. Complementary Lecture Topics The following are suggestions for lectures or lecture topics that will complement the text. In general, these topics assume that students have read the chapter beforehand. • The appointment and confirmation of Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch came after the Republican-controlled congress refused to consider an Obama nominee until his presidency had ended and the nomination became invalid. Was this level of intereference by Congress a valid use of their power, or overstepping the intent of the Constitution? What does it suggest about the effect that increasing levels of partisanship are having on the Supreme Court, if any? • Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said that the United States would survive if the Supreme Court did not have the power to declare an act of Congress or the president unconstitutional, but not if the same was true of actions of the state governments. What did Justice Holmes mean by this statement? Is it a valid assertion? • Precedent plays an important role in influencing judicial decision making. What importance does precedent hold for policymakers? What are some of its limitations? • Analyze the force exerted by external factors such as public opinion and congressional pressure on the Supreme Court. How responsive should the Court be to such influences, and why? • The Supreme Court has traditionally distinguished between political questions (within the authority of elected officials) and judicial questions (within the authority of judiciary). Has this distinction has been blurred in recent decades by judicial activism, as some have claimed? What is the appropriate position on this issue, and why? • Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. claimed that law is properly founded on the precept of reasonable expectations: people make choices on the assumption that the law will not change overnight. Should precedent be awarded such priority? Why or why not? • Discuss the influence of partisanship and ideology on judicial decision making. How are personal beliefs translated into policy decisions? How can legal reasoning be used to justify a decision based on personal ideology? What is the relationship between political bias (liberal or conservative) and judicial activism or restraint? Class Discussion Topics 1. An important presumption is that the United States is a government of laws, not people. However, it is alleged that the Supreme Court is heavily influenced by the personal convictions of its justices. If justices do act from partisan positions, should this be permitted? If not, what recourse does the American public have to reduce partisanship on the Court? Answer: Influence of Personal Convictions: • Allegation of Partisanship: It is alleged that Supreme Court justices may be influenced by their personal convictions, which can sometimes align with partisan viewpoints. This can lead to perceptions of bias in their rulings. Should Partisan Influence Be Permitted? • Arguments Against: Ideally, justices should base their decisions solely on legal principles and the Constitution, rather than personal or partisan beliefs. Partisan influence can undermine public confidence in the judiciary's impartiality and integrity. • Arguments For: Some argue that personal convictions are inevitable and can reflect broader societal values. Since justices are appointed for life, their personal views may influence their interpretations of the law. Recourse for the American Public: • Institutional Reforms: To reduce partisanship, reforms could include: • Term Limits: Implementing term limits for justices to ensure a regular turnover and reduce the impact of any single justice’s long-term partisan influence. • Appointment Process Changes: Revising the appointment process to emphasize qualifications and non-partisan criteria, possibly involving more diverse input from different branches of government or non-partisan committees. • Increased Transparency: Enhancing transparency in the judicial decision-making process to better understand the basis for decisions and address concerns about bias. Conclusion: • While personal convictions are inherent in any individual's decision-making, ensuring that the Supreme Court operates impartially and upholds the rule of law is crucial. Reforms aimed at reducing partisan influence can help maintain the Court's credibility and effectiveness. 2. Analyze the force exerted by external factors such as public opinion and congressional pressure on the Supreme Court. How responsive should the Court be to such influences, and why? Mention, for instance, court actions in the area of prayer in schools and termination of pregnancies. Answer: Force of External Factors: • Public Opinion: The Supreme Court is aware of public opinion, though it is not supposed to be directly influenced by it. Significant shifts in public opinion can indirectly affect the Court’s decisions over time. • Congressional Pressure: While the Court is independent, it can be influenced by legislative actions, such as changes in laws or constitutional amendments. Congress can also influence the Court indirectly through its power to confirm or reject judicial appointments. Responsiveness to Influences: • Court Actions: • Prayer in Schools: The Supreme Court's decisions on prayer in public schools, such as Engel v. Vitale (1962) and subsequent cases, reflect responses to evolving interpretations of the Establishment Clause and societal values regarding religion in public life. • Termination of Pregnancies: The Court’s rulings on abortion, notably Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), illustrate how judicial decisions can be influenced by changing societal attitudes and political pressures. How Responsive Should the Court Be? • Ideal Responsiveness: The Court should balance responsiveness to societal values with its role in protecting constitutional rights and principles. While it should consider the impact of its decisions, it must prioritize legal reasoning and the Constitution over transient political or public pressures. • Why: Maintaining judicial independence is essential to upholding the rule of law and protecting minority rights from the potential tyranny of the majority. Conclusion: • The Supreme Court’s role is to interpret the Constitution and laws impartially, though it operates within a broader societal context. While responsiveness to public opinion and congressional pressures is inevitable, it should not compromise the Court’s commitment to legal principles and constitutional protection. 3. The power relationship between the federal government and the state governments (federalism) became one of the more interesting facets of decisions made by the Rehnquist court. Outline the traditional conservative position of federal versus state sovereignty. Using examples from the text (or other sources), discuss whether the decisions by the Roberts Court illustrate or confront the traditional conservative assumptions about federalism. Answer: Traditional Conservative Position on Federalism: • Conservative View: Traditionally, conservatives have emphasized the importance of state sovereignty and limited federal power. This perspective advocates for a strict interpretation of the Constitution that favors state authority over federal intervention. Rehnquist Court Decisions: • Federalism: The Rehnquist Court (1986-2005) is known for reinforcing state sovereignty. Key decisions include: • United States v. Lopez (1995): Limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, reinforcing state power over local matters. • Printz v. United States (1997): Invalidated federal laws that imposed duties on state officials to enforce federal regulations, emphasizing state independence. Roberts Court Decisions: • Federalism and State Sovereignty: • National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012): Upheld the Affordable Care Act but limited the federal government's ability to coerce states into expanding Medicaid. • Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, reflecting a shift in the Court’s approach to federal oversight of state election laws. Illustration or Confrontation of Conservative Assumptions: • Illustration: Both the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts have often supported conservative views on federalism by limiting federal power and reinforcing state authority. • Confrontation: However, some decisions by the Roberts Court show a more complex approach, where the Court sometimes upholds federal power in areas such as health care but also limits federal intervention in others. Conclusion: • The Rehnquist and Roberts Courts illustrate a general trend towards reinforcing state sovereignty while navigating complex federal-state relationships. While they align with traditional conservative views on federalism, their decisions also reflect a nuanced approach to balancing state and federal powers. Chapter 15 Economic and Environmental Policy: Contributing to Prosperity Learning Objectives Having read the chapter, the students should be able to do each of the following: • Identify the American economy. • Describe government’s role in the health of the economy. • Explain the goal of government regulatory policy. • Define the nature and scope of public policy. • Summarize U. S. fiscal policy. • Describe monetary policy and the Federal Reserve system. • Describe measures of economic health. Chapter Outline I. Government as Regulator of the Economy A. Efficiency through Government Intervention 1. Promoting Competition 2. Deregulation and Underregulation B. Equity through Government Intervention C. The Politics of Regulatory Policy II. Government as Protector of the Environment A. Environmental Protection B. Climate Change and Energy Policy III. Government as Promoter of Economic Interests A. Promoting Business B. Promoting Labor C. Promoting Agriculture IV. Fiscal Policy as an Economic Tool A. Demand-Side Policy B. Supply-Side Policy C. Fiscal Policy: Practical and Political Limits V. Monetary Policy as an Economic Tool A. The Fed B. The Fed and Control of Inflation C. The Politics of the Fed VI. Summary Focus and Main Points This chapter examines economic and environmental policy. As was discussed in Chapter 1, public policy is a decision by government to follow a course of action designed to produce a particular result. In this vein, economic policy aims to promote and regulate economic interests and, through fiscal and monetary actions, to foster economic growth and stability. This chapter presents the following main ideas: • Through regulation, the U.S. government imposes restraints on business activity for the purpose of promoting economic efficiency and equity. Regulatory action includes protecting the environment from the harmful effects of business and consumer activity. • Through promotion, the U.S. government helps private interests achieve their economic goals. Business in particular benefits from the government’s promotional efforts, including, for example, tax breaks and loans. • Through its taxing and spending decisions (fiscal policy), the U.S. government seeks to generate a level of economic supply and demand that will maintain economic prosperity. Fiscal policy can be conducted through the use of either demand-side or supply-side tools. • Through its money supply decisions (monetary policy), the U.S. government—through the Federal Reserve System (“the Fed”)—seeks to maintain a level of inflation consistent with sustained, controllable economic growth. Chapter Summary Although private enterprise is the main force in the American economic system, the federal government plays a significant role through its policies to regulate, promote, and stimulate the economy. U.S. government regulation of the economy is designed to achieve efficiency and equity, which require the government to intervene, for example, to maintain competitive trade practices (an efficiency goal) and to protect vulnerable parties in economic transactions (an equity goal). Deregulation and underregulation are two forces constantly in play in the use of regulatory agencies, and these forces can be taken too far in either direction. At times, some businesses or industries have proven capable of achieving a high level of influence over particular regulatory agencies. Newer regulatory agencies (such as the Environmental Protection Agency) are somewhat less prone to this weakness, as they have policy responsibilities that are broader in scope and apply to a larger number of firms than those of the older agencies. Newer agencies are also more likely to be headed by a single individual and thus are more responsive to presidential control. Republicans and Democrats tend to differ strongly in their philosophy and use of regulatory agencies. The U.S. government pursues policies that are designed to protect and conserve the environment. A few decades ago, the environment was not a policy priority. Today, there are many programs in this area, and the public has become an active participant in efforts to conserve resources and prevent exploitation of the environment. The continuing challenge is to find a proper balance between the nation’s natural environment, its economic growth, and its energy needs. Climate change is by far the highest-profile environmental issue today. The U.S. lags behind most developed democracies in seeking to reduce carbon emissions, and many policymakers in the United States question the need and science behind efforts to reduce climate change. Business is the major beneficiary of the federal government’s efforts to promote economic interests. A large number of these programs, including those that provide loans and research grants, are designed to assist business firms, which are also protected from failure through measures such as tariffs and favorable tax laws. Labor, for its part, obtains government assistance through laws covering areas such as worker safety, the minimum wage, and collective bargaining. Yet America’s individualistic culture tends to put labor at a disadvantage, keeping it less powerful than business in its dealings with the government. Agriculture is another economic sector that depends substantially on government’s help, particularly in the form of income stabilization programs such as crop insurance subsidies. Through its fiscal and monetary policies, Washington attempts to maintain a strong and stable economy—one characterized by high productivity, high employment, and low inflation. Fiscal policy is based on government decisions in regard to spending and taxing, which are aimed at either stimulating a weak economy or dampening an overheated (inflationary) economy. Fiscal policy is worked out through Congress and the president and consequently is responsive to political pressures. However, because it is difficult to raise taxes or cut programs, the government’s ability to apply fiscal policy as an economic remedy is somewhat limited. Monetary policy is based on the money supply and works through the Federal Reserve System, which is headed by a board whose members hold office for fixed terms. The Fed, as the Federal Reserve is commonly called, has become the primary instrument from managing the economy. It can affect the amount of money circulating in the economy by raising or lowering the interest rate that banks are charged for borrowing from the Fed, by raising or lowering the percentage of their funds (reserve rate) that member banks are required to keep on hand, and by buying and selling securities. Major Concepts balanced budget The situation in which the government’s tax and other revenues for the year are roughly equal to its expenditures. budget deficit The situation in which the government’s expenditures exceed its tax and other revenues. demand-side economics A form of fiscal policy that emphasizes “demand” (consumer spending). Government can use increased spending or tax cuts to place more money in consumers’ hands and thereby increase demand. deregulation The rescinding of excessive government regulations for the purpose of improving economic efficiency. economic depression A very severe and sustained economic downturn. Depressions are rare in the United States: the last one was in the 1930s. economic efficiency An economic principle holding that firms should fulfill as many of society’s needs as possible while using as few of its resources as possible. The greater the output (production) for a given input (for example, an hour of labor), the more efficient the process. economic equity The situation in which the outcome of an economic transaction is fair to each party. An outcome can usually be considered fair if each party enters into a transaction freely and is not unknowingly at a disadvantage. economic recession A moderate but sustained downturn in the economy. Recessions are part of the economy’s normal cycle of ups and downs. economy A system for the exchange of goods and services between the producers of those goods and services and the consumers of them. externalities Burdens that society incurs when firms fail to pay the full costs of production. An example of an externality is the pollution that results when corporations dump industrial wastes into lakes and rivers. fiscal policy A tool of economic management by which government can attempt to maintain a stable economy through its taxing and spending policies. inflation A general increase in the average level of prices of goods and services. laissez-faire economics A classic economic philosophy holding that owners of business should be allowed to make their own production and distribution decisions without government regulation or control. monetary policy A tool of economic management based on manipulation of the amount of money in circulation. national debt The total cumulative amount that the U.S. government owes to creditors. regulation A term that refers to government restrictions on the economic practices of private firms. supply-side economics A form of fiscal policy that emphasizes “supply” (production). An example of supply-side economics would be a tax cut for business. Lecture Outline This lecture outline closely follows the text in its organization. The instructor can use this outline as a lecture aid. This chapter deals with the economic and environmental regulatory roles of the government, focusing on its promotion and regulation of economic interests and its fiscal and monetary policies, which affect economic growth, and its attempts to balance economic growth with environmental protection. Unlike at the time of the Great Depression, government programs intended to stabilize and stimulate the economy existed in 2008, when the housing market collapsed and Lehman Brothers, one of the nation’s oldest and largest commercial banks, filed for bankruptcy. The crisis was severe, but government programs were in place to protect depositors’ savings, and within a year the U.S. economy had stabilized and was growing again. In the modern era, government is a participant and vital player in the national economy, regulating business activity and actively using fiscal and monetary policy to maintain a prosperous general economy. I. Government as Regulator of the Economy The United States has a mixed economy. While it is based on private enterprise, the economy is subject to government intervention and regulation motivated by two primary factors: efficiency and equity. Efficiency requires firms to fulfill as many of society’s needs as possible while using the least amount of its resources. Equity requires that the outcome of an economic transaction be fair to all parties. • Laissez-faire economics holds that private firms should be free to make their own production and distribution decisions. This model prevailed most completely in the U.S. during the nineteenth century. • Markets are not always competitive. Government intervention occurs in part to prevent monopolistic practices affecting price levels, a major area of regulation. • Government can also promote efficiency by making business pay for indirect costs (such as environmental pollution) associated with production. • Over-regulation may result in inefficiencies (wasted resources), making deregulation desirable in some instances, though deregulation can also be taken too far, allowing firms to engage in reckless practices. • Government can promote equity through regulations that protect workers (e.g., safety regulations) and consumers (e.g., declaring certain products unsafe for consumers). • The Progressive Era, the New Deal, and the reforms of the 1960s and 1970s represent different periods of regulatory reform in terms of efficiency as well as equity. • Newer agencies such as the EPA have a broad mandate and are more responsive to presidential control. II. Government as Protector of the Environment Externalities refers to unpaid costs such as pollution that result from business activity and the production of consumer goods. Before the 1960s, the federal government did not require firms to pay to reduce externalities. The publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring helped launch the environmental movement. With the 1963 Clean Air Act and the 1965 Water Quality Act, the federal government, for the first time in history, took steps to protect the nation’s air, water, and ground from pollution. • The Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 and today administers environmental regulations. • Government environmental regulation has greatly reduced pollution levels. Current issues involve how far the government should go to reduce pollution, especially when regulations clash with economic interests. Today, environmental groups are among the most powerful lobbies in the nation. • Climate change now receives the most attention among environmental issues. Because measures to reduce it could restrict economic activity and would also affect different nations differently, U.S. policymakers have largely not sought to reduce U.S. carbon emissions in a significant way. III. Government as Promoter of Economic Interests The U.S. government makes important contributions to business, labor, and agriculture. • The most significant contribution that government makes to business is through its traditional functions, such as education, transportation, defense, and currency. Business is also supported directly through loans, subsidies, tax incentives, and other government benefits. • Government assistance to labor is less substantial than its assistance to business, but labor is protected by minimum wage, safety, right to organize, and other government measures. • Government’s agricultural policy is designed to promote stable farm incomes and control agricultural production; this approach is both complex and costly. IV. Fiscal Policy as an Economic Tool Government fiscal policy consists of taxing and spending decisions that are designed to stimulate a depressed economy or dampen an overheated economy. • Demand-side (consumer) and supply-side (producer) economics are major types of fiscal policy. • Demand-side policy emphasizes the consumer “demand” component of the supply-demand equation. When the economy is sluggish, the government, by increasing its spending, places additional money in consumers’ hands. • A fiscal policy alternative to demand-side stimulation is supply-side economics, which emphasizes the business (supply) component of the supply-demand equation. Tax cuts for companies and upper-income taxpayers are used as a means of stimulating business activity, on the understanding that these firms and wealthy individuals will invest in production (supply) and thereby boost employment and spending. • Partisan politics plays an important role in determining fiscal policy. Approaches to fiscal policy vary significantly in how costs and benefits are distributed among interests, and is the source of disagreement between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats prefer demand-side remedies, since government spending typically redistributes benefits to lower-income categories. Republicans prefer supply-side remedies that provide benefits to higher-income groups. • High levels of spending and deep cuts in taxes both result in a budget deficit and increase the national debt. The U.S. government has not had a balanced budget since the late 1990s. • Both political parties have contributed to the nation’s fiscal problems. V. Monetary Policy as an Economic Tool Monetary policy is based on the manipulation of the amount of money in circulation. • Control of the money supply rests with the Federal Reserve (the Fed). • The Fed is expected to address both the health of the economy and the rate of inflation. • The Fed controls the money supply in three major ways: adjusting interest rates, raising or lowering the cash reserve that member banks are required to deposit with regional Federal Reserve banks, and buying and selling government securities. • Two key questions are whether the Fed is representative and whether it is accountable. Whose interest does the Fed serve? Should the Fed place its judgment ahead of that of elected officials? Complementary Lecture Topics Below are suggestions for lectures or lecture topics that will complement the text. In general, these topics assume that students have read the chapter beforehand. • In recent years, U.S. firms have emphasized short-term profits and corporate takeovers, while European and Japanese firms have been more intent on long-range product and market developments. Should the U.S. government take the lead in orientating U.S. firms toward a similar long-term outlook? What policies might achieve this result? • The annual federal budgetary process involves the president, Congress, bureaucratic agencies, and special interests. What role does each actor play in the process? How is the budget as a tool of fiscal policy affected by the interplay of these actors? • Monetary policy is established primarily through the Fed, which acts in the interests of governmental branches as well as the interests of the larger society. Should the Fed continue to set monetary policy or should elected officials take direct control? Why? • Discuss the latest evidence regarding climate change and also the long-term detrimental impacts of climate change. Examine why many governments have yet to treat the problem seriously. Class Discussion Topics 1. Present to the class the relationship between the health of the economy and its affect on voter preference in presidential elections. Examine this connection, exploring both its logic and realism based on the global nature of the U.S. economy. Answer: Relationship Between Economic Health and Voter Preference: • Logic: • Economic Performance: Generally, a strong economy with low unemployment and rising incomes is associated with higher approval ratings for the incumbent president and their party. Conversely, economic downturns or high inflation can lead to dissatisfaction and drive voters to support the opposition. • Economic Impact on Voting Behavior: Voters often evaluate the current administration based on economic conditions, believing that economic performance reflects the effectiveness of the sitting president and their policies. • Realism Based on Global Nature of the Economy: • Global Influences: In today’s globalized economy, domestic economic conditions are influenced by international factors such as global trade dynamics, foreign investment, and international economic crises. Therefore, while the state of the U.S. economy impacts voter preferences, it may not always be solely attributable to domestic policies or actions of the current administration. • Economic Interdependence: U.S. economic performance can be affected by global events like trade wars, economic sanctions, and international market fluctuations, which may complicate the direct link between economic conditions and voter preferences. Conclusion: • The connection between economic health and voter preference is strong but must be understood within the context of global economic interdependencies. Voters often use economic performance as a measure of presidential effectiveness, but this evaluation is influenced by both domestic and international factors. 2. Remind the class that the president and Congress share responsibility for fiscal policy but that monetary policy is controlled by the Federal Reserve Board. Discuss some possible scenarios that affect the economy when the president and Congress are of different political parties and the effect this has on the Federal Reserve Board’s power. Answer: Shared Responsibility for Fiscal Policy: • President and Congress: Both the president and Congress are responsible for fiscal policy, which involves decisions on government spending, taxation, and budgetary priorities. When they are from different political parties, policy disagreements can arise, potentially leading to gridlock or compromised fiscal measures. Monetary Policy Control by the Federal Reserve Board: • Federal Reserve: The Federal Reserve Board (Fed) controls monetary policy, including interest rates and money supply. Its decisions are intended to stabilize the economy, independent of political pressures. Possible Scenarios: • Scenario 1: Economic Stimulus Needs vs. Austerity Measures • Scenario: The president and Congress may have conflicting views on fiscal policy. For example, if the president advocates for increased government spending to stimulate the economy while Congress seeks to reduce deficits through austerity measures, it can lead to policy conflicts and inefficiencies. • Impact on Fed: In such cases, the Fed’s role becomes crucial in managing monetary policy to balance economic growth and inflation, regardless of fiscal policy debates. • Scenario 2: Interest Rates and Economic Conditions • Scenario: If Congress and the president disagree on fiscal policy, the Fed may face pressure to adjust interest rates to counteract adverse economic conditions. For instance, if fiscal policies are restrictive, the Fed might lower interest rates to encourage borrowing and investment. • Impact on Fed: The Fed’s decisions might become a focal point for resolving economic issues caused by fiscal policy disagreements, emphasizing its role in economic stabilization. Conclusion: • When the president and Congress are from different political parties, their conflicting fiscal policies can impact economic management. The Federal Reserve Board’s role in monetary policy becomes even more critical in stabilizing the economy and mitigating the effects of fiscal policy disputes. 3. Talk about the relationship between U.S. environmental policies and global trade and development. Discuss what role is appropriate for the U.S. to take in protecting the global environment. Answer: Relationship Between U.S. Environmental Policies and Global Trade: • Global Trade Impacts: U.S. environmental policies can influence global trade dynamics. For example, stringent environmental regulations can affect the competitiveness of U.S. industries in the global market, potentially leading to trade imbalances or shifts in manufacturing to countries with less stringent regulations. • Development and Trade Agreements: U.S. environmental policies often shape trade agreements and development practices. Policies promoting sustainable practices can set standards for international trade, but they can also face opposition from industries concerned about increased costs. Appropriate Role for the U.S. in Protecting the Global Environment: • Leadership and Collaboration: The U.S. should play a leadership role in global environmental protection by setting ambitious targets for reducing emissions, investing in clean energy, and participating in international agreements like the Paris Agreement. • Sustainable Trade Practices: Integrating environmental considerations into trade policies can help promote global sustainability. The U.S. can advocate for and implement trade agreements that include environmental standards and encourage sustainable development practices. • Support for Developing Nations: Providing assistance and technology transfers to developing countries can help them adopt sustainable practices and address environmental challenges while promoting equitable global development. Conclusion: • The U.S. has a significant role in shaping global environmental policies and trade practices. Balancing domestic economic interests with global environmental responsibilities is crucial. The U.S. can lead by example, collaborate internationally, and support sustainable development to address global environmental challenges effectively. Instructor Manual for We The People: An Introduction to American Government Thomas L. Patterson 9781259912405