Debating reform : conflicting perspectives on how to fix the American political system

Author(s)

Bibliographic Information

Debating reform : conflicting perspectives on how to fix the American political system

Richard J. Ellis and Michael Nelson, editors

Sage/CQ Press, c2014

2nd ed

  • : pbk

Available at  / 2 libraries

Search this Book/Journal

Note

Includes bibliographical references

Description and Table of Contents

Description

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

Table of Contents

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

by "Nielsen BookData"

Details

Page Top