American Political Development Syllabus

    Seminar in
   American Political Development
   Political Science 6431, Fall 2007

"The past is never dead; it's not even past."
-- William Faulkner, Requiem for a Nun

Professor Dave Robertson
Office: 801 Tower; Phone 314-516-5855, Fax 314- 516-5855; e-mail: daverobertson@umsl.edu

Office Hours: 9:00-12:00 am Tuesday; 7-8 pm Monday; and other times can be easily arranged

1. The Course Agenda

What makes American politics so unique? American government is harder to use than governments in other places. American political parties are weaker and interest groups more fragmented than in comparable nations. Many political scientists have tried to understand these patterns by tracing the path of American politics over time. The field of American Political Development focuses on the ways that political culture, ideology, governing structures (executives, legislatures, judiciaries, and subnational governments) and structures of political linkage (political parties and organized interests) shape the development of political conflict and public policy. Such studies emphasize that the decisions of the past establish recognizable paths and affect contemporary political strategy, institutional design, and policy outcomes.

This course introduces the subfield of American political development. It combines several features of the "new institutionalism" in the study of politics: longitudinal (that is, across time) comparison, the use of developmental evidence to validate hypotheses, the examination of counterfactuals, the effect of rules and structure on political conflict, and the "state" as an independent political force. We will ask how political strategy, political structure, and public policy affect one another. We will examine enduring questions about structure, leadership, culture, gender, race, class and religion.

2. Required Books

Six books are required for the course. These are or will be available at the University of Missouri - St. Louis bookstore.

q Richard Franklin Bensel, The Political Economy of American Industrialization, 1877-1900 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000); ISBN 0-521-77604-x

q James Morone, Hellfire Nation: The Politics of Sin in American History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003); ISBN: 0300105177

q Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, The Search for American Political Development (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004) ISBN: 0521547644

q David Brian Robertson, The Constitution and America's Destiny (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005); ISBN: 0521607787

q Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill Clinton (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1997); ISBN: 0674689372

q Richard M. Valelly, The Two Reconstructions: The Struggle for Black Enfranchisement (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004); ISBN: 0226845303

In addition to these books, several articles and documents are also required. These will be available through My Gateway.

All royalties from the Robertson book will be dedicated to the political science graduate student fund.

You are encouraged to use the American Political Development Bibliography for additional readings in your area of interest and additional research resources. The American Political Development Website at the Miller Center is a great resource for further information.

You are expected to participate in all seminar sessions and to contribute thoughtful and informed questions and comments to the discussion. If you do so you will receive an "A" for this part of the grade. Remember, this seminar will succeed only to the extent that you participate. Its success depends on you.

Each student should select an area of interest or specialization.. This area of interest could be a government institution (the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Presidency, a federal agency, or the Supreme Court); a linkage institution (the Republican or Democratic party, business or labor groups, newspapers or television), a policy area (tariffs, education, environmental policy), or some cultural force that affects politics (religion or social movements). You need to indicate this interest to me in an email message by September 6. Your papers and research design will deal with the area of interest you select. Your work in your area of interest will connect your substantive interests to the more general material we will cover in seminar discussions. Ph.D. students can take advantage of this opportunity to develop a dissertation topic, or to refine a topic they've already chosen.

There will be three short (6-10 page, typed) analytical papers for the course. Two of the papers will critically examine books that are relevant to each student's area of interest or specialization; these are intended to help you beef up your reading list. These books may be selected from the American Political Development Bibliography or some other source. The instructor must approve the student's choice of in advance. You should devote no less than three pages to summarizing the book's argument and evidence; this material should include a summary of the book's key questions, the author's argument for their significance, the evidence (qualitative or quantitative) she uses to answer the question, and the conclusions she reaches. You should devote no less than three pages describing its place in the literature and providing a critical analysis of its strengths and weaknesses; the critical analysis should examine the quality of the questions, the evidence, and the logic of the argument. These two papers are due September 26 and November 7.

The final short paper is a "think piece" about your of interest. This think piece involves two important tasks. First, your paper should identify and define the key concepts in your area of interest. Specify how you know these concepts when you see them. Second, it should describe important, researchable questions in your area of interest. Some of these questions should derive from the larger questions for American political development identified in seminar, in Orren and Skowronek, and in other writings. You are developing an inventory of questions worth asking in your area of interest, and you need to explain explicitly (1) why these questions are merit research and (2) how in general they can be researched (is the research doable?). Your paper should demonstrate an ability to think politically about public policy and government. The purpose of the assignment is to develop the ability to ask good, answerable questions and to decompose large questions into smaller, manageable questions. It will provide the basis for your research design. This paper is due November 14. I will be happy to read earlier drafts.

You may be asked to speak briefly about your papers during our class discussions.

There will be a research design assignment of 12-15 pages. See below for more detail on this assignment. You will not have to turn in a completed research project - only a rigorous plan for such a project. This design is due on December 14.

The research design assignment requires a 12-15 page research proposal based on answers to the following questions. You will not have to turn in a completed research project -- only a rigorous plan for such a project.

Here are the key elements of the research design. Remember, the methods you use should be directly related to the question you are trying to answer. Qualitative methods may be more appropriate than quantitative methods, or the quantitative methods may be more appropriate. You might use rigorous analysis of archival sources, or you might model data. You might use some of both methods. The object is to frame an important, enduring, and open question about politics and write a plan for exploring information, including historical information (that is, information at least ten years old) to answer the question.

1. Topic. What is the central issue that will motivate your research? Explain precisely what topic you will examine. Explain why it matters (it may matter because it is central to scientific theory, because it is a central policy or political issue today, because it was a decisive turning point in political development, or because conventional wisdom about the topic may be wrong). There are many ways to get ideas for topics. Several are included in our readings. You can find others in key journals, such as The American Political Science Review or other general political science journals, or more specialized journals such as Studies in American Political Development. Your topic should be interesting to you.

2. Literature Review. What do we know about this topic? Who has written about it? What are their central arguments and assertions? What are the key concepts? What are the important open questions in the field? (Sources include bibliographies, literature reviews, computer-assisted references, and discussions with faculty).

3. Theoretical Question. Once you have chosen a topic, you have to specify the problem you want to study. You will have to try to isolate one precise question about the topic to answer in a discrete research project. Precisely what question will your research try to answer? This may take the form of a relationship between a dependent variable and several independent variables (that is, what caused something to happen? Factor A? Factor B? Some combination?). It also may take the form of the relationship between two non-recurring events (did slavery cause the Civil War?)

4. Information. What information will you collect to answer the central theoretical question? Define 3 (a) and 3 (b) precisely. How do I know them when I see them (are they Congressional votes? If so, precisely which ones? Where can I find them?). Specify why historical information is required to answer the question.

5. Techniques. How will you analyze the question? That is, what is your proposed research strategy answering the question? How will you decide that a relationship between (a) and (b) is confirmed or refuted by the evidence? Will you statistically assess the relationship between variables? If so, how? If not, what qualitative methods will you use to rigorously assess their relationship? Will you use a mixture of methods? How will you assess the role of other factors (3 d).

6. Validity and Objectivity. How do you know that your conclusions will be valid? Are there flaws in your method that could cast doubt on your findings about the relationship of (a) and (b)? How do we know that the numbers and documents offer reasonably reliable measures of what you claim they measure? What explicit steps will you take to assure a reader that you are being fair-minded and objective in each step of the process?

8. What timetable will you have for the project? Give a realistic estimate of the time it will take to complete each step above.

Brief Schedule (*) indicates material available for download from My Gateway

What kinds of questions are important to ask about the case of Chelonia mydas?

    How is the U.S. similar and different from other nations?

    What is a rule? Why do we have rules?

    What is a political institution? Why do we have political institutions?

READ: Paul Pierson, Politics in Time, Introduction and Chapters 1-2 (*)
             Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek,
                                     The Search for American Political Development, 78-119
             Philip E. Tetlock and Aaron Belkin,
                     "Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics" (*)
             David Brian Robertson, The Constitution and America's Destiny, chapter 1

What's the difference between American political development and American history? What sets APD apart?

What do Orren and Skowronek mean when they say that politics may be "shaped by time" (page 12)?

What's the difference between progress and development (see Orren and Skowronek on Burgess, ch 2)

What is the "lost alternatives" and "multiple traditions" approaches to American political development? (see also Morone, 7-8)

Explain path dependence or positive feedback, using examples (1) from Morone and (2) contemporary politics. Be specific.

Explain why timing and sequence matters, using examples (1) from Morone and (2) contemporary politics. Be specific.

How has religion affected political change in America? State-building? What is the "Great Awakening" and who cares?

2. What are the criteria a “bad” government (how do you know a “bad” government when you see one)? Did American government in the Confederation era meet the criteria for a bad government?

3. Counterfactual: What would have happened had the U.S. not altered the Articles of Confederation in 1787?

4. What lessons does James Madison teach us in general about achieving political success? About designing political institutions?

5. Counterfactual: What would have happened had the Constitutional Convention adopted the entire Virginia Plan?

6. What lessons does Roger Sherman teach us in general about achieving political success? About designing political institutions?

7. Describe the controversy over the role of the states and the way the framers came to agreement on it. Is American federalism fundamentally different today? Give both sides.

8. Give examples of the use of the Constitution as a political weapon. How have scholars used the Constitution as a weapon (see Orren and Skowronek’s discussion of Burgess, Ford and Beard for starters).

9. Does the U.S. Constitution meet the criteria for a technology that generates increasing returns (Pierson, page 24-26)? Explain fully.

1. If James Madison were called to testify before a Congressional subcommittee on “the Performance of the Constitution,” what would his testimony look like? Would he call for reforms?

2. If Roger Sherman were called to testify before a Congressional subcommittee on “the Performance of the Constitution,” what would his testimony look like? Would he call for reforms?

3. Explain the theory of federalism and policy development described in The Constitution and America’s Destiny. Explain how has & does American federalism affects public policy development in your chosen area of expertise.

4. (At least 2 people should sign up for this). What does Skowronek mean by "the institutional logic of political disruption" (p 15)? Explain the “recurrent structures of political authority” (table 1). Is this idea evident in the presidency of Bill Clinton and George Bush?

4. What are the explanations for the enduring dominance of the 2 major political parties in the United States? How much of this dominance does Constitutional design explain?

5. Are all “good” presidents creation of their political time? If so, how do individual humans make a difference in politics (see Orren and Skowronek, page 199).

6. How would Madison react to Skowronek’s description of presidential authority? Is the president the agent of the national interest? What kind of national interest will it represent?

7. Explain the significance of a “durable shift in governing authority.” Is the U.S. Constitution biased against “durable shifts in governing authority” or biased in favor of them? Give the best case for both sides.

8. Explain, illustrate, and specify the significance of this statement: “to the extent that one country’s politics differs from politics observed elsewhere, it is likely because of endogenous political relationships operating over time and through mechanisms similar to what we have described as historical construction.” (Orren & Skowronek, p. 189).

9. Under what scenarios have / would / will the American two party system experience a “durable shift in governing authority” (Orren and Skowronek)?

ALL: Is American politics and policy developing in a particular direction? What are the possible directions mentioned by Orren & Skowronek? What one or two other directions can you think of?

1. What surprised Morone the most about the nation’s moral crusades? What difference do these religious crusades make for American political development?

2. How does Morone evaluate the distinctive American combination of broad early suffrage, political instability, and relatively stingy social welfare programs? Explain and evaluate.

3. Did slavery cause the civil war? Was the slavery issue fundamentally moral, economic or political? Give the case for each.

4. Give the case for and against this proposition: Andrew Jackson is he overrated as a president

6. Is Lincoln just a lucky politician? Is Lincoln more than just a politician? If so, who cares?

7. How did Lincoln’s presidency change the path of American political development and create a durable change in governing authority (use Pierson and Orren and Skowronek)

1. What is the “state of courts and parties” and who cares? Was it a break with the Constitution or an articulation of it?

2. How does Valelly hope to combine rational choice and historical institutionalism?

3. Using Valelly, explain how party building and jurisprudence building differ. Why is the distinction important? How does this distinction relate to “multiple orders” (Orren and Skowronek) or the constitutional design of the U.S. policy process (The Constitution and America’s Destiny chapter 6)?

4. What caused Reconstruction to be reversible? Does Reconstruction count as “a durable shift in governing authority” (Orren and Skowronek)?

5. Explain this fully: “Economic development within democratic institutions has been rare, because transitions from agrarian to industrial societies almost always generate intense conflict over the distribution of wealth” (Bensel, page 2). Who cares and why?

6. What variables does Bensel choose to measure industrialization? Why does he choose all of these? Are they relevant today? If not, what variables would you use instead?

7. What makes uneven political development a political problem? Under what circumstances would it not be a political problem?

8. What question is Bensel trying to answer in his analysis of state party platforms? Why does this question matter? Compare and contrast the role of federalism and state party diversity in Bensel’s account with that of the founding of the Democratic Party in The Constitution and America’s Destiny (chapter 8).

READ: Stephen Skowronek, Building a New American State, pp. 24-35 (*)
Richard Franklin Bensel, The Political Economy of American Industrialization, pp.101-354

1. Summarize and explain the conflict over the national market in the U.S. What made it so difficult politically to create a national market in the U.S.? Did the Constitution make this political difficultly worse or better? Give both sides.

2. Summarize and explain the conflict over trade. Should disputes over trade be determined by partisan conflict, or by special commissions that are insulated from politics? Give the case for both sides. How should the commissions be chosen?

3. Summarize and explain the conflict over the gold standard. Should disputes like the gold standard be settled by partisan conflict? Should money supply be determined by legislatures, or by special commissions that are insulated from politics? Give the case for both sides. How should the commissions be chosen?

1. How accurate is this sentence: “In the late 1800s, the Republicans and the Democrats merely represented competing capitalist elites.” Is this description too simple? How? What would Karl Marx say? What would free market economist Milton Friedman say?

2. Does Bensel discount race and cultural factors like religion in his account of U.S. policy development? If so, is he right or wrong to do so? Give specifics.

3. Does Bensel’s analysis strengthen or weaken Skowronek’s claim that the U.S. in the nineteenth century was a state of “courts and parties?” Is the place of presidents in “political time” irrelevant to Bensel’s account?

4. How did the Constitution provide “increasing returns” for the economic policies that Bensel describes?

1. Does the case of the gold standard – particularly the Bland-Allison Act -- prove that democracy inevitably results in inefficient public policy?

2. Why was the Congress more involved in tariff policy than in creating a national market or governing the gold standard? Why? Is the U.S. Congress entrusted only with policies that are not essential for capital accumulation? What is the significance for American democracy?

3. Explain the “policy foundation” of the Republican coalition of the late 19^th century. Was the Constitutional separation of powers a necessary condition for this policy foundation? Is it a necessary condition fo the Republican policy foundation today?

4. Does the case of the gold standard in the late nineteenth century prove that the individuals who serve as president are prisoners to the opportunities and constraints imposed by the office? Give the case for both sides.

5. Did industrialization in the U.S. inevitably transfer policy authority to the president? To policy experts? Give both sides.

6. Did the growth of interest groups in the period of the late 1800s and early 1900s make it easier or more difficult to “make politics”? Give both sides, and make sure to specify, “make politics for whom.”

7. Is “reputation” a critically important variable in American political development? Is it less important now, in a nation with deep partisan splits, than in was a generation or two ago? How has “reputation” changed?

8. How do Carpenter and Skowronek (in the Politics Presidents Make) agree or disagree about the importance of leadership and opportunity in American state building? What kinds of research projects could help resolve the disagreements, if there are any?

1. Does the case of the gold standard – particularly the Bland-Allison Act -- prove that democracy inevitably results in inefficient public policy?

5. Did industrialization in the U.S. inevitably transfer policy authority to the president? To policy experts? Give both sides.

2. Were the “purity movements” of Gilded Age and Progressive Era necessary for the expansion of American government? Were the necessary for the expansion of the national government?

3. What does the Prohibition story tell us (if anything) about the capabilities of American state governments? About the capabilities of those governments today?

4. How did Prohibition change social movements in the United States? Take both sides, paying attention to different meanings of the term “modernizing.”

5. Theodore Roosevelt "stands as a reliable signpost of the changing shape of political possibilities" (Skowronek, page 259). Explain. Do you agree? Why or why not?

6. Does Theodore Roosevelt belong on Mt. Rushmore - that is, is TR one of the best half-dozen presidents? Give both sides, carefully defining “best.”

7. Does the experience of racial policy in the post-Reconstruction South prove that Reconstruction was a mistake?

8. Was Jim Crow in the South inevitable? If not, what could have been done differently during the Progressive Era to change the outcome?

1. What is the “reification of technique”? What are the strengths and weaknesses of Herbert Hoover's political leadership? Was Hoover a victim?

2. Describe how the Depression created the politics of disjunction in public attitudes, Congress and the presidency. Be specific about the causal connections.

3. Does the “politics of reconstruction” affect Congress independent of the president? Is that significant, and if so, why?

4. Do the speeches of Lincoln, WJ Bryan, and Franklin Roosevelt prove that it is necessary for social reformers to draw on religion to bring about major social change in the United States?

1. Explain and critique: “Roosevelt’s political achievement was to extort from modernity a measure of legitimacy for radical change in basic governing commitments; the ‘modern presidency’ emerged as the achievement of those who resisted him” (p. 295)

2. What is the NRA and why does it matter for understanding the Franklin Roosevelt presidency?

3. Explain and critique: “What we observe is a systematic decoupling of the reconstructive process from the personal will of the reconstructive leader” (p. 315). How does this explain how FDR could suffer defeats and “without completely losing control of the situation”?

4. Give the case for and against this proposition: the “new moral frame” that Morone describes at the end of chapter on the New Deal still endures today, and it affects American public policy.

November 7 (Wednesday): Cold War and the Garrison State
READ: The Truman Doctrine
             John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address
             Excerpt from George W. Bush's Speech at the Air Force One Pavillion, October 21, 2005
             Aaron Friedburg, "American Antistatism and the Founding of the Cold War State" (*)
             Bartholomew Sparrow, "Limited Wars and the Attenuation of the State" (*)
             Eric Schickler, Disjointed Pluralism, pp. 3-26, 136-188 (*)
             Mettler, Soldiers to Citizens, 1-58 (*)
CRITICAL ANALYSIS 2 DUE

1. “How is it that congressional institutions have proven remarkably adaptable to changing environmental conditions and yet a never-ending source of dissatisfaction for members and outside observers?” Explain how “disjointed pluralism” answers this question. Is Bensel’s argument consistent with this theory?`

2. Do institutional developments in Congress from 1937 to 1952 create more constraints on the president than opportunities to exercise power, or more opportunities than constraints? Give both sides, using specific examples from Schickler.

Does the enactment of the GI Bill validate the pluralist theory of interest group influence on government after all – or was the GI Bill a special case?

How did the GI Bill affect American citizenship? Should public policies shape citizenship? How could a policy extending access to health insurance shape citizenship?

1. Is Kennedy’s inaugural address an extension of the Truman Doctrine? How does the war on terrorism compare to the Truman Doctrine?

2. What is “embedded antistatism”? Is it more a creation of culture or of institutions? Does the Cold War really constitute a new “founding”?

3. Compare and contrast the Sparrow and Friedburg chapters on the following question: Has American military policy since the 1940s strengthened or weakened the national state? Give both sides.

4. Can the U.S. engage in limited wars indefinitely without needing to rewrite its Constitution?

READ: Byron E. Shafer, "The Two Majorities and the Puzzles of American Politics"(*)
            Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make, 325-406
            James Morone, Hellfire Nation, pp. 378-406
            Richard M. Valelly, The Two Reconstructions, 149-172

1. How did the underlying issue structure of American politics change in the 1950s and 1960s, according to Shafer? Was it inevitable?

2 What does Shafer mean by the “two majorities” and who cares? What difference does it make today?

3. Did the sexual revolution (Morone) alone fundamentally and permanently alter American politics? What hypotheses would suggest that it had?

4 . Would African-Americans have had more long-run political success by investing more effort in building a biracial coalition in the Republican Party as well as the Democratic Party?

5. Does the “Red Scare” prove that American democracy will in the long run be incompatible with America’s extensive global role?

6. Did the Great Society mark a revolution in American politics? Give both sides.

7 Is the Vietnam War the worst policy blunder in American history? Give both sides.

READ: Port Huron Statement
           Hugh Heclo, "The Sixties' False Dawn" (*)
            James Morone, Hellfire Nation, pp. 407-449
           Suzanne Mettler and Andrew Milstein, "American Political Development from Citizen's Perspective"(*)
            Richard M. Valelly, The Two Reconstructions, pp. 173-250

1. Is the Port Huron statement an example of a break from American tradition, or continuity with American tradition? Give both sides.

2. What does Heclo mean by "post-modern" policy making? Is it really a break from the path of American political development? Is it a “fundamental shift” in governing institutions?

3. Is post-1960s policy making worse than pre-1960s policy making? Give both sides.

4. Are feminism and the student movement sufficient to account for the decline of the New Deal coalition? Give both sides.

5. What was the single most important factor in explaining the enactment of the Civil Rights Act? Could the Civil Rights Act have been delayed? How? What would have been the costs and benefits?

6. Does the case of the first and second Reconstruction prove that everything important in American politics depends on the unelected courts because they have the last say in American politics?

8. Does American political development teach contemporary policy-makers that they should explicitly construct policies to build citizenship? What policies would do so?