You Decide! Current Debates in American Politics, 2006 Edition

This exciting new debate-style reader edited by John Rourke examines provocative issues in American politics today. The topics featured in "You Decide!" have been selected for their currency, importance, and student interest, and the pieces arguing various sides of a given issue come from recent journals, congressional hearings, think tanks, and periodicals. Sure to get students engaged and thinking critically about our political system, "You Decide!"

Table of Contents:
TABLE OF CONTENTS   1. CONSTITUTON GUNS, SAFETY, AND THE CONSTITUTION’S MEANING: INDIVDUAL RIGHT OR SUBJECT TO REGULATION Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Individual Right Advocate:     Joyce Malcolm, Professor, Department of History, Bentley College and Senior  Fellow, MIT Security Studies Program Source: “Infringement,” Common Place, July 2002 Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Subject to Regulation Advocate:     Daniel A. Farber, Henry J. Fletcher Profess of Law and Associate Dean of Faculty and Research, University of Minnesota. Source:        “Disarmed by Time:  The Second Amendment and the Failure of Originalism,” Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2000 Also suitable for chapters on Courts, Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice Policy       NEW2.  FEDERALISM FEDERAL REGULATION OF MEDICAL MARIUANA: APPROPRIATE CONSITUTIONAL POWER OR USURPATION OF STATE AUTHORITY? Federal Regulation of  Medical Marijuana:  Appropriate Constitutional Power Advocate:               John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court         Source: Opinion in Gonzales v. Raich, June 6, 2005 Federal Regulation of  Medical Marijuana: Usurpation of State Authority Advocate:               Sandra Day O’Conner, Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court   Source:      Opinion in Gonzales v. Raich, June 6, 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, Courts. Constitution   NEW 3.  CIVIL RIGHTS EVALUATING THE “RIGHT TO AN ABORTION DECISION IN ROE V. WADE: POSITIIVE IMPACT OR NEGATIVE IMPACT? Evaluating the “Right to an Abortion” Decision in Roe V. Wade:  Positive Impact Advocate: R. Alta Charo, Professor of Law and Bioethics; Associate Dean for Rresearch and Faculty Development, University of Wisconsin Law School Source:    Testimony  during hearings on “The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton,” U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary June 23, 2005 Evaluating the “Right to an Abortion” Decision in Roe V. Wade:  Negative Impact Advocate:               Teresa Collett, Professor of Law, University of St. Thomas School of Law, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Source:        Testimony  during hearings on “The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton,” U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary June 23, 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Courts, American Political Culture/Ideology, Interest Groups                NEW  4.  CIVIL LIBERTIES CURRENT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE DOCTRINE: REASONABLE BALANCE OR SUPPRESSING PUBLIC DISPLAYS OF FAITH   Current Separation of Church and State Doctrine: Reasonable Balance Advocate: Melissa Rogers, Professor, Wake Forest University Divinity School Source:      Testimony during hearings on “Beyond the Pledge of Allegiance: Hostility to Religious Expression in the Public Square,” U.S. Senate Committee on the JudiciaryJune 8, 2004 Current Separation of Church and State Doctrine: Suppressing Public Displays of Faith Advocate: Vincent Phillip Munoz, Professor of Political Science, North Carolina State University and Civitas Fellow of Religion and Public Life, American Enterprise Institute Source:   Testimony during hearings on “Beyond the Pledge of Allegiance: Hostility to Religious Expression in the Public Square,” U.S. Senate Committee on the JudiciaryJune 8, 2004 Also suitable for chapters on Courts, Political Culture (role of religion in politics)     5.  AMERICAN PEOPLE/POLITICAL CULTURE IMMIGRATON AS A THREAT TO “WHO WE ARE”: VALID CONCERN OR UNFOUNDED FEAR? Immigraton as a Threat to “Who We Are”:  Valid Concern Advocate:        John O’Sulllivan, Editor-in-chief of the National Interest Source:           “Who We Are,” The American Conservative, July 19, 2004 Immigraton as a Threat to “Who We Are”:  Unfounded Fear? Advocate:               Jim Sleeper, Lecturer in Political Science at Yale University Source:       Review of Samuel Huntington's Who Are We?: The Challenges to America's                     National Identity, History News Network, May 3, 2004. Also suitable for chapters on Social Policy                 NEW6.  PUBLIC OPINION/PARTICIPATION VOLUNTEER BORDER PATROL GROUPS: LAUDABLE PATRIOTS OR DANGEROUS VIGILANTES? Volunteer Border Patrol Groups: Laudable Patriots Advocate: Chris Simcox, President of Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, Source:     Testimony during hearings on “Securing Our Borders: What We Have Learned From Government Initiatives and Citizen Patrols,” U.S. House of Representatives House Committee on Government Reform, May 12, 2005 Volunteer Border Patrol Groups: Dangerous Vigilantes? Advocate:               Asheesh Siddique, Editor, The Princeton Progressive Review, Princeton University Source:  “The New Nativism” Campus Progress News, Spring 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Foreign Policy   New7.  MEDIA SHIELDING OF JOURNALISTS’ SOURCES FROM SUBPEONA: NECESSARY FOR DEMOCRACY OR UNNECESSARY PROTECTION Shielding Journalists’ Sources from Subpeona: Necessary for Democracy Advocate: Norman Pearlstine, Editor-in-Chief, Time Inc. Source:    Testimony during hearings on “Reporters' Shield Legislation: Issues and Implications,” U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 20, 2005 Shielding Journalists’ Sources from Subpeona:  Unnecessary Protection Advocate: James B. Comey, Deputy Attorney General, United States Department Of Justice Source:    Testimony during hearings on “Reporters' Shield Legislation: Issues and Implications,” U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 20, 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Public Opinion and Participation, Policy Process   8.  INTEREST GROUPS ETHNIC FOREIGN POLICY LOBBYING: MISPLACED ALLEGIENCE OR ALL-AMERICAN TRADITION? Ethnic Foreign Policy Lobbying:  Misplaced Allegiance Advocate:               Geoffrey Wheatcroft, a British journalist Source:  “Hyphenated Americans,” Guardian Unlimited online, April 25, 2000 Ethnic Foreign Policy Lobbying: All-American Traditions Advocate:     Yossi Shain, Aaron and Cecile Goldman Visiting Professor, Georgetown University; Professor of Political Science, Tel Aviv University Source:        “For Ethnic Americans, The Old Country Calls,” Foreign Service Journal, October 2000 Debate also suitable for chapters on Political Culture, Foreign Policy   NEW9.  POLITICAL PARTIES HILARY CLINTON AND THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: THE DEMOCRATS’ BEST BET OR A PROBLEMATIC CANDIDATE Hilary Clinton and The 2008 Presidential Election: The Democrats’ Best Bet Advocate: Carl Cannon, White House correspondent for the National Journal Source:  “She Can Win the White House,” WashingtonMonthly. July/August 2005 Hilary Clinton and The 2008 Presidential Election: A Problematic Candidate Advocate:               Amy Sullivan, editor, Washington Monthly Source: “Not So Fast,” WashingtonMonthly, July/August 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Elections   10.  VOTING/CAMPAIGNS/ELECTIONS THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE: ABOLISH OR PRESERVE? The Electoral College: Abolish Advocate:               Becky Cain, President, League of Women Voters Source:       Testimony during hearings on “Proposals for Electoral College Reform: H.J. Res. 28 and H.J. Res. 43 " before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, September 4, 1997 The Electoral College: Preserve Advocate:   Judith A. Best, Professor of Political Science, State University of New York at Cortland Source:       Testimony during hearings on “Proposals for Electoral College Reform: H.J. Res. 28 and H.J. Res. 43 "  before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, September 4, 1997 Also suitable for chapters on Presidency, Federalism      11.  CONGRESS CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS: PROMOTING CHOICE OR RESTRICTING CHOICE? Congressional Term Limits: Promoting Choice Advocate:               Paul Jacob, Executive Director, U.S. Term Limits Source:      Testimony during hearings on "Limiting Terms of Office for Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House  of Representatives," U.S. House of Representatives,  Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, January 22, 1997 Congressional Term Limits: Restricting Choice Advocate:               John R. Hibbing, Professor of Political Science, University of Nebraska Source:        Testimony during hearings on "Limiting Terms of Office for Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, January 22, 1997 Also suitable for chapters on Elections 12.  PRESIDENCY QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT:  NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS ONLY OR ALL CITIZENS? New Qualified to be President: Natural-Born Citizens Only Advocate:  Matthew Spalding Director, Center of American Studies , The Heritage Foundation Source:        Testimony during hearings on “Maximizing Voter Choice: Opening the Presidency to Naturalized Americans,” before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, October 5, 2004 NewQualified to be President: All Citizens Advocate:     John Yinger, Professor of Economics and Public Administration, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University Source:        Testimony during hearings on “Maximizing Voter Choice: Opening the Presidency to Naturalized Americans,” before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee,  October 5, 2004 Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Political Culture, Elections   13.  BUREAUCRACY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TITLE IX: CHAMPION OF EQUALITY OR OVERZEALOUS CRUSADER? The Department of Education and Title IX: Champion of Equality Advocate:     Judith Sweet, Vice-President for Championships and Senior Women Administrator, National Collegiate Athletic Association. Source:        U.S. Department of Education, Secretary's Commission on Opportunity in Athletics, Hearings, August 27, 2002 The Department of Education and Title IX: Overzealous Crusader Advocate:               Amanda Ross-Edwards, Visiting Professor of Political Science, Fairfield University Source:        "The Department of Education and Title IX:  Flawed Interpretation and Implementation," an essay written especially for this volume, October 2003. Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, Education Policy      New  14.  JUDICIARY FILIBUSTERING  FEDERAL COURT NOMINEES: FRUSTRATING THE MAJORITY OR PROTECTING THE MINORITY? Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Frustrating The Majority Advocate: Orrin Hatch, U.S. Senator (R-UT) Source:    Congressional Record, May 10, 2005 Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Protecting The Minority?                         Advocate:  Harry Byrd, U.S. Senator (D-WV)                         Source:     Congressional Record, March 1, 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Congress   NEW  15.  State and Local Government   USING EMINENT DOMAIN TO TAKE PROPERTY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:                 SERVING THE PUBLIC GOOD OR FAVORING THE WEALTHY?        Using Eminent Domain To Take Property For Economic Development: Serving the Public Good        Advocate: Connecticut Conference of Municipalities and 31 other state municipal leagues                    Source:  Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Kelo v. New London (2005)          Using Eminent Domain To Take Property For Economic Development: Favoring the Wealthy        Advocate:  NAACP, AARP, and 4 other civil rights groups        Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Kelo v. New London (2005)        Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Courts, Economic Policy                            16.  ECONOMIC POLICY CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRE A BALANCED BUDGET: FISCAL SANITY OR IRRESPONSIBILITY? Constitutionally Require A Balanced Budget:  Fiscal Sanity Advocate:               William Beach, Director, Center for Data Analysis, Heritage Foundation Source:        Testimony during hearings on the “Balanced Budget Amendment”before the U.S.  House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, March 6, 2003 Constitutionally Require A Balanced Budget:  Fiscal Irresponsibility Advocate:               Richard Kogan, Senior Fellow, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Source:        Testimony during hearings on the “Balanced Budget Amendment”before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, March 6, 2003 Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Congress, Economic Policy   17. CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY THE DEATH PENALTY: RACIALLY BIASED OR JUSTICE SERVED? Racially Biased Advocate:   Julian Bond, Professor of History, University of Virginia and Distinguished Professor-in-Residence,                     American University. Source:        Testimony during hearings on “Race and the Federal Death Penalty,” before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee On Constitution, Federalism, and Property Rights, June 13, 2001 Justice Served Advocate:   Andrew  G. McBride, former U.S. Associate Deputy Attorney General Source:        Testimony during hearings on “Race and the Federal Death Penalty,” before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee On Constitution, Federalism, and Property Rights, June 13, 2001 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights   18.  EDUCATION POLICY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADMISSIONS: PROMOTING EQUALITY OR UNFAIR ADVANTAGE? Promoting Equality Advocate:               41 College Students and 3 Student Coalitions Source:                  Amicus Curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bolligner (2003) Unfair Advantage Advocate:  21 Law Professors Source:                  Amicus Curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bolligner (2003) Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Civil Rights New 19.  FOREIGN POLICY U.S.MILITARY FORCES IN IRAQ: STAY THE COURSE OR WITHDRAW QUICKLY?   U.S.Military Forces in Iraq:  Stay the Course Advocate:  George W. Bush, President of the United States Source:  Address to the nation, Jule 28, 2005   U.S.Military Forces in Iraq:  Stay the Course of Withdraw Quickly? Advocate:  James P. Sterba, Professor of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame Source: “Why the U.S. Must Immediately Withdraw from Iraq,” International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Spring, 2005.    New 20. URBAN POLICY REBUILDING ORLEANS: NATIONAL IMPERATIVE OR EMOTIONAL MISTAKE?   Rebuilding New Orleans: National Imperative Advocate: James R. Stoner, Jr., professor of political science at Louisiana State University Source: "Saving a Great City: Why America Should Rebuild New Orleans," The Weekly Standard (September 26, 2005)   Rebuilding New Orleans: Emotional Mistake Advocate: Edward Glaeser, Professor of Economics and Director of the Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston and the Taubman Center for State and Local Government, Harvard University Source: "Should the Government Rebuild New Orleans, Or Just Give Residents Checks?" The Economists' Voice, September, 2005   Also suitable for chapters on State and Local Government, Economic Policy       EXTENDED TABLE OF CONTENTS: WEB ISSUES The following topics are available on the Web at:  http://www.ablongman.com/YouDecide/     21.  DECIDING POLICY: ADOPT DIRECT DEMOCRACY OR REMAIN A REPUBLIC? Adopt Direct Democracy Advocate:                 Harlan Hahn, Professor of Political Science, University of Southern California. Source:          Testimony during hearings, “Voter Initiative Constitutional Amendment,” before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, December 13, 1977 Remain a Republic Advocate:                 Peter G. Fish, Professor of Political Science, Duke University Source:          Testimony during hearings, “Voter Initiative Constitutional Amendment,” before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, December 13, 1977 Suitable for chapters on Introduction, Constitution, Political Participation, Policymaking        22.  AMENDING THE CONSTITUION TO BAR GAY MARRIAGE: NECESSARY AND PROPER OR  UNNECESSARY AND IMPROPER? New Amending the Constitution to Bar Gay Marriage: Necessary and Proper Advocate:               Marilyn Musgrave, U.S. Representative (R-CO)            Source:        Testimony during hearings on the “Federal Marriage Amendment, before the U.S. House of  Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, May 13, 2004 New Amending the Constitution to Bar Gay Marriage: Unnecessary and Improper Advocate:               Shiela Jackson-Lee, U.S. Represetative (D-TX) Source:      Congressional Record, September 30, 2004 Suitable for chapters on Constitution, Federalism, Public Opinion, Political Culture 23.   PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION: ADVANCE OF DEMOCRACY OR DESTABILIZING IDEA? Advance of Democracy  Advocate:     Theodore S. Arrington, Professor, Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte Source:        Testimony during hearings on  the “States' Choice of Voting Systems Act" before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, September 23, 1999 Destabilizing Idea    Advocate:               Abigail Thernstrom., Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute Source:        Testimony during hearings on “H.R. 1173\States' Choice of Voting Systems Act,” U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, September 23, 1999 Suitable for chapters on Elections, Congress   24.  ANTI-TERRORIST LEGISLATION: THREAT TO CIVIL LIBERTIES OR CONSTITUTIONAL SHIELD? New Threat to Civil Liberties: Advocate:               Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S.  Attorney General Source:        Testimony during hearings on, “Oversight of the USA Patriot Act,” U.S. House Of Representatives Committee On The Judiciary April 6, 2005 New Constitutional Shield:  Advocate: Chip Pitts  Chair of the Board, Amnesty International USA       Source:      Testimony during hearings on, “Oversight of the USA Patriot Act,” U.S. House of Representatives   Committee On The Judiciary April 6, 2005 Also suitable for chapters on Courts, Political Culture (freedom v. safety), Criminal Justice, National Security     25.  REGULATING THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACTIVITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: NECESSARY REFORM OR OPPRESIVE RESTRICTION? Needed Reform Advocate:               Donald B. Tobin, Professor, Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University Source:        “Comments on Proposed Rulemaking Notice 2004-5 and Request to Testify,” e-mail letter to the Federal Elections Commission, April 5, 2004. Oppressive Restriction Advocate:     415 civil rights, environmental, civil liberties, women's rights, public health, social welfare, religious, consumer, senior and social service organizations Source:        “Comments and Request to Testify Concerning Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Political Committee Status, e-mail letter to the Federal Elections Commission, April 5, 2004. Suitable for chapters on Bureaucracy, Civil Liberties, Elections, Interest Groups   26. TORTURING TERRORISTS: SOMETIMES JUSTIFIED OR ALWAYS ABHORRENT? Torturing Terrorists:  Sometimes Justified Advocate:               Robert G Kennedy, Professor of Management, University of St Thomas Source:        “Can Interrogatory Torture Be Morally Legitimate?,” paper presented at the Joint Services Conference On Professional Ethics, U.S. Air Force Academy, January 2003 Torturing Terrorists:  Always Abhorrent Advocate:               Lisa Hajjar, Professor of Sociology, Law and Society Program, University of California-Santa Barbara Source: “Torture and the Future,” Middle East Report Online, May 2004 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice, National Security Policy