Taking sides : clashing views on controversial political issues
著者
書誌事項
Taking sides : clashing views on controversial political issues
Dushkin/McGraw-Hill, c1999
11th ed
大学図書館所蔵 全1件
内容説明・目次
内容説明
This debate-style reader is designed to introduce students to controversies in politics. The readings represent the arguments of authors such as Robert Kagan, James Fallows and Attorney General, Janet Reno. Some topics discussed include: "Should There Be Term Limits for Members of Congress?" and "Do We Need Tougher Gun Control Laws?" The purpose of this volume is to develop critical thinking skills, by requiring students to analyze opposing viewpoints and reach considered judgement. Taking Sides are supported by the student Web site, Dushkin Online, where study tips and links to related Web sites can be found.
目次
PART 1. Democracy and the American Political Process ISSUE 1. Has the American Political System Succeeded? YES: Irving Kristol, from "On the Character of the American Political Order," in Robert L. Utley, Jr., ed., The Promise of American Politics: Principles and Practice After Two Hundred Years NO: Daniel Lazare, from The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy Writer Irving Kristol argues that America possesses a rich combination of ingredients that give it strength, resilience, and character. Freelance writer Daniel Lazare contends that America has become paralyzed in a constitutional straitjacket and that it needs radical reform. ISSUE 2. Do Political Campaigns Promote Good Government? YES: Samuel L. Popkin, from The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns NO: Anthony King, from "Running Scared," The Atlantic Monthly Professor of political science Samuel L. Popkin argues that presidential election campaigns perform a unique and essential service in informing and unifying the American people. Political scientist Anthony King contends that American officeholders spend too much time and effort running for office, which detracts from their responsibility to provide good government. ISSUE 3. Should Campaign Finance Be Reformed? YES: Archibald Cox, from "Ethics, Campaign Finance, and Democracy," Society NO: Bradley A. Smith, from "The Campaign-Finance Follies," Commentary Archibald Cox, a former special prosecutor and a law professor, argues that the increasing amount of money spent in elections corrupts government but that the public's faith in democratic self-government can be restored by campaign finance reform. Bradley A. Smith, an associate professor at Capital University Law School, asserts that campaign contributions do not corrupt candidates, the biggest spenders do not always win, and the relatively modest amount that candidates spend is essential to educate voters and to increase their interest. ISSUE 4. Are the Mass Media Degrading Political Discourse? YES: James Fallows, from Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy NO: Jon Katz, from "Rock, Rap and Movies Bring You the News," Rolling Stone Journalist James Fallows contends that the information media put the profits of entertainment ahead of their responsibility to inform and educate the public. Media critic Jon Katz asserts that popular culture deals with social issues more effectively than traditional media do. PART 2. The Institutions of Government ISSUE 5. Should There Be Term Limits for Members of Congress? YES: George F. Will, from Restoration: Congress, Term Limits and the Recovery of Deliberative Democracy NO: Victor Kamber, from Giving Up on Democracy: Why Term Limits Are Bad for America Columnist George F. Will argues that term limits will bring fresh perspectives into Congress and restore the spirit of citizen politics. Political consultant Victor Kamber contends that term limits for congressional members violate the spirit of democracy and will force Americans to accept inexperienced legislators. ISSUE 6. Investigating the President: Do We Need an Independent Counsel? YES: Janet Reno, from Hearing Before the Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate NO: Antonin Scalia, from Dissenting Opinion, Morrison, Independent Counsel v. Olson et al., U.S. Supreme Court Attorney General Janet Reno testifies that one part of the executive branch, the Department of Justice, should not be called upon to investigate another and that Watergate and the Iran-Contra investigation demonstrated the value of an independent counsel. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia holds that the independent counsel law violates the Constitution's absolute separation of powers and unconstitutionally restricts judicial control over subordinate officials within the executive branch. ISSUE 7. Should Judges Read Their Moral Views into the Constitution? YES: Ronald Dworkin, from "The Moral Reading of the Constitution," New York Review of Books NO: Mary Ann Glendon, from "Partial Justice," Commentary Law professor Ronald Dworkin contends that judges must read the vaguer phrases of the Constitution with an eye toward what is best for the nation. Law professor Mary Ann Glendon warns of the perils of "romantic judging," which she argues usurps the role of legislatures and weakens the spirit of democracy. PART 3. Social Change and Public Policy ISSUE 8. Will Mandatory Sentencing Reduce Crime? YES: James Wootton, from "Truth in Sentencing: Why States Should Make Violent Criminals Do Their Time," State Backgrounder NO: Lois G. Forer, from A Rage to Punish: The Unintended Consequences of Mandatory Sentencing James Wootton, president of Safe Streets Alliance in Washington, D.C., argues that mandatory sentencing sends a signal to would-be felons that they will pay heavily if they commit a crime. Judge Lois G. Forer contends that mandatory sentencing not only fails to deter crime, but it disrupts families, increases welfare costs, and hurts the poor and minorities. ISSUE 9. Is Capital Punishment Justified? YES: Robert W. Lee, from "Deserving to Die," The New American NO: Matthew L. Stephens, from "Instrument of Justice or Tool of Vengeance?" Christian Social Action Essayist Robert W. Lee argues that capital punishment is the only fair response to certain heinous crimes. Matthew L. Stephens, a prison chaplain, contends that the death penalty is motivated by revenge and is racist in its result. ISSUE 10. Do We Need Tougher Gun Control Laws? YES: Carl T. Bogus, from "The Strong Case for Gun Control," The American Prospect NO: Daniel D. Polsby, from "The False Promise of Gun Control," The Atlantic Monthly Writer Carl Bogus argues that gun control laws will reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Professor of law Daniel D. Polsby contends that gun control laws may actually increase the incidence of robbery and other gun-related crimes. ISSUE 11. Is Affirmative Action Reverse Discrimination? YES: Shelby Steele, from The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America NO: Clarence Page, from Showing My Color Associate professor of English Shelby Steele argues that affirmative action demoralizes both blacks and whites and that racial preferences do not empower blacks. Journalist Clarence Page argues that although affirmative action is not a perfect remedy, it has benefited minorities and, in some cases, increased opportunities for whites as well. ISSUE 12. Should Hate Speech Be Punished? YES: Charles R. Lawrence III, from "Crossburning and the Sound of Silence: Antisubordination Theory and the First Amendment," Villanova Law Review NO: Jonathan Rauch, from "In Defense of Prejudice: Why Incendiary Speech Must Be Protected," Harper's Magazine Law professor Charles R. Lawrence III asserts that speech should be impermissible when, going beyond insult, it inflicts injury on its victims. Author Jonathan Rauch maintains that there can be no genuine freedom of expression unless it includes the freedom to offend those who oppose the expressed opinion. ISSUE 13. Is Welfare Reform Succeeding? YES: Daniel Casse, from "Why Welfare Reform Is Working," Commentary NO: Peter Edelman, from "The Worst Thing Bill Clinton Has Done," The Atlantic Monthly Policy analyst Daniel Casse argues that the 1996 overhaul of welfare has encouraged long-term welfare clients to find meaningful jobs and to better their lives. Peter Edelman, a former adviser for the Clinton administration, maintains that the 1996 welfare overhaul will have a multitude of adverse consequences, including an increase in malnutrition, crime, drug and alcohol abuse, and family violence. ISSUE 14. Is Socioeconomic Inequality Increasing in America? YES: Paul Krugman, from "The Spiral of Inequality," Mother Jones NO: Christopher C. DeMuth, from "The New Wealth of Nations," Commentary Economist Paul Krugman maintains that corporate greed, the decline of organized labor, and changes in production have contributed to a sharp increase in social and economic inequality in America. Christopher C. DeMuth, president of the American Enterprise Institute, asserts that Americans have achieved an impressive level of wealth and equality and that a changing economy ensures even more opportunities. ISSUE 15. Should Abortion Be Restricted? YES: Robert H. Bork, from "Inconvenient Lives," First Things NO: Mary Gordon, from "A Moral Choice," The Atlantic Monthly Legal scholar Robert H. Bork concludes that the semantics of "pro-choice" cannot hide the fact that aborting a fetus is killing an unborn child and that most abortions are performed for the woman's convenience. Writer Mary Gordon maintains that having an abortion is a moral choice that women are capable of making for themselves, that aborting a fetus is not killing a person, and that antiabortionists fail to understand female sexuality. ISSUE 16. Should Gay Marriage Be Legalized? YES: Andrew Sullivan, from Virtually Normal: An Argument About Homosexuality NO: James Q. Wilson, from "Against Homosexual Marriage," Commentary Essayist and editor Andrew Sullivan contends that legalizing gay marriage would be a profoundly humanizing step because such marriages, with their honesty, their flexibility, and their equality, could nourish the broader society as well. Social scientist James Q. Wilson asserts that to legalize homosexual marriage would be to enter an untested area that could profoundly damage the already-fragile institutions of marriage and family. PART 4. America and the World ISSUE 17. Will America Dominate Tomorrow's Global Economy? YES: Mortimer B. Zuckerman, from "A Second American Century," Foreign Affairs NO: Paul Krugman, from "America the Boastful," Foreign Affairs Publisher Mortimer B. Zuckerman maintains that America's entrepreneurial genius will keep the nation economically dominant in the twenty-first century. Economist Paul Krugman asserts that American economic dominance in the world can easily be upset by even a mild national recession combined with moderate recovery in Europe and Asia. ISSUE 18. Does China Threaten Vital American Interests? YES: Richard Bernstein and Ross H. Munro, from "The Coming Conflict With America," Foreign Affairs NO: Robert S. Ross, from "Beijing as a Conservative Power," Foreign Affairs Book critic Richard Bernstein and Ross H. Munro, director of the Asia program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, argue that China, while disguising or minimizing its actual military expenditures, is rapidly modernizing its land, air, and naval forces and still pursues its aim of dominating East Asia. Professor of political science Robert S. Ross argues that China, with an obsolete air force, primitive missiles, and a miniscule navy with no aircraft carriers, has neither the means nor the will to challenge U.S. hegemony in the Pacific. ISSUE 19. Should the United States Put More Restrictions on Immigration? YES: Daniel James, from "Close the Borders to All Newcomers," Insight NO: Stephen Moore, from "Give Us Your Best, Your Brightest," Insight Daniel James, an adviser to Carrying Capacity Network in Washington, D.C., wants a moratorium on immigration, which, he claims, is causing America much social and economic harm. Economist Stephen Moore insists that immigrants have greatly enriched the American economy and culture. ISSUE 20. Is Democracy Desirable for All Nations? YES: Robert Kagan, from "Democracies and Double Standards," Commentary NO: Robert D. Kaplan, from "Was Democracy Just a Moment?" The Atlantic Monthly Author and editor Robert Kagan argues that democracy has taken root in many nations that never had it before, in large measure due to American intervention, with desirable consequences for American security and prosperity. Foreign correspondent Robert D. Kaplan contends that recent experience demonstrates that not all nations have the conditions in which democracy can thrive, that some nations prosper without it, and that democracy may be less important in the future.
「Nielsen BookData」 より