You Decide! Current Debates in American Politics, 2007 Edition
4th Edition
Published on 19. February 2007
Book
Paperback/Softback
320 pages
978-0-321-43016-8 (ISBN)
Description
This best-selling, debate-style reader is edited and updated annually by John Rourke to examine the most important and provocative issues in American politics. The 2007 edition draws students into the key topics that have made headlines and affected our political system during 2006 and are likely to affect our daily lives in 2007.
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! is available at no extra charge when ordered packaged with any Longman American government textbook.
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! is available at no extra charge when ordered packaged with any Longman American government textbook.
More details
Edition
4th edition
Language
English
Place of publication
United States
Publishing group
Pearson Education (US)
Target group
Professional and scholarly
Dimensions
Height: 235 mm
Width: 162 mm
Weight
431 gr
ISBN-13
978-0-321-43016-8 (9780321430168)
Copyright in bibliographic data and cover images is held by Nielsen Book Services Limited or by the publishers or by their respective licensors: all rights reserved.
Schweitzer Classification
Other editions
Previous edition
Book
08/2006
3rd Edition
Pearson
€24.79
Article exhausted; check for reprint
Content
1. CONSTITUTON
GUNS, SAFETY, AND THE CONSTITUTION'S MEANING: INDIVDUAL RIGHT OR SUBJECT TO REGULATION New Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Individual Right Advocate: Robert A. Levy, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Oversight Hearing on the District of Columbia's Gun Control Laws," before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, June 28, 2005
Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Subject to Regulation
Advocate: Daniel A. Farber, Henry J. Fletcher Professor 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
2. FEDERALISM
FEDERAL REGULATION OF MEDICAL MARIUANA:
APPROPRIATE NATIONAL POWER OR USURPATION OF STATE AUTHORITY?
Federal Regulation of Medical Marijuana: Appropriate National Power
Advocate: John Paul Stevens III, 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
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 Research and Faculty Development, School of Law, University of Wisconsin
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights, June 23, 2005
Evaluating the "Right to an Abortion" Decision in Roe V. Wade: Negative Impact
Advocate: Teresa Collett, Professor, School of Law, University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights June 23, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Courts, American Political Culture/Ideology, Interest Groups
4. CIVIL LIBERTIES
NewTHE PHRASE "UNDER GOD" IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE:
VIOLATION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT OR ACCEPTABLE TRADITIONAL EXPRESSION
NewThe Phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance: Violation of the First Amendment
Advocate: Douglas Laycock, Professor, School of Law, University of Texas; and Counsel of Record for 32 Christian and Jewish clergy filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Elk Gove School District v. Newdow
Source: A discussion of the topic "Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality," sponsored by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and held before the National Press Club, Washington, D.C., March 19 2004
NewThe Phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance: Acceptable Traditional Expression
Advocate: Jay Alan Sekulow, Chief Counsel, American Center for Law and Justice; and Counsel of Record for 76 members of Congress and the Committee to Protect the Pledge filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Elk Gove School District v. Newdow
Source: A discussion of the topic "Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality," sponsored by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and held before the National Press Club, Washington, D.C., March 19 2004
Also suitable for chapters on Courts, Political Culture (role of religion in politics)
5. AMERICAN PEOPLE/POLITICAL CULTURE
NewEVENTUAL CITIZENSHIP FOR UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANTS:
REWARDING ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR OR REWARDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO AMERICA
NewEventual Citizenship For Unauthorized Immigrants: Rewarding Illegal Behavior
Advocate: James R. Edwards, Jr., Adjunct Fellow, Hudson Institute
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Should We Embrace the Senate's Grant of Amnesty to Millions of Illegal Aliens and Repeat the Mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986?" U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims, July 18, 2006.
New: Eventual Citizenship For Unauthorized Immigrants Rewarding Contributions To America
Advocate: Tom Harkin, U.S. Senator (D-IA),
Source: Congressional Record, March 29, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Social Policy
6. 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 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
7. MEDIA
SHIELDING JOURNALISTS' SOURCES FROM SUBPOENA:
PROTECTING DEMOCRACY OR IMPEDING JUSTICE
Shielding Journalists' Sources from Subpoena: Protecting 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 Subpoena: Impeding Justice
Advocate: James B. Comey, Deputy Attorney General, U.S. 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 Civil Liberties 8. INTEREST GROUPS
NewTHE PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY IN THE UNITED STATES:
GOLIATH OR DAVID?
NewThe Pro-Israel Lobby In The United States: Goliath
Advocates: John Mearsheimer, R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science and co-director of the Program on International Security Policy, University of Chicago; and Stephen Walt, Robert and Rene Belfer Professor of International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
Source: London Review of Books, March 23, 2006
NewThe Pro-Israel Lobby In The United States: David
Advocate: Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics, University of San Francisco and Middle East Editor for the Foreign Policy In Focus project
Source: "The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?"International Relations Center Silver City, NM and Institute for Policy Studies: Washington, D.C.: Foreign Policy In Focus, May 16, 2006.
Debate also suitable for chapters on Political Culture, Foreign Policy
9. 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," Washington Monthly. July/August 2005
Hilary Clinton and The 2008 Presidential Election: A Problematic Candidate
Advocate: Amy Sullivan, editor, Washington Monthly
Source: "Not So Fast," Washington Monthly, July/August 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Elections
10. VOTING/CAMPAIGNS/ELECTIONS
New PROVIDING PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP WHEN REGISTERING TO VOTE: REASONABLE REQUIREMENT OR UNNECESSARY BARRIER TO PARTICIPATION? New Providing Proof Of Citizenship When Registering To Vote: Reasonable Requirement Advocate: Patrick J. Rogers, attorney and member of the Board of Directors of the American Center for Voting Rights Legislative Fund
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Non-citizen Voting," before the House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, June 22, 2006
New Providing Proof Of Citizenship When Registering To Vote: Unnecessary Barrier To Participation? Advocate: Christine Chen, Executive Director of Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Non-citizen Voting," before the House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, June 22, 2006 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, 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
New CENSURE PRESIDENT BUSH FOR ABUSE OF POWER:
JUSTIFIED OR POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?
New Censure President Bush For Abuse Of Power: Justified
Advocate: John W. Dean, former Counsel to the President of the United States
Source: Testimony during hearings on"Senate Resolution 398 Relating to the Censure of George W. Bush," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, March 31, 2006
New Censure President Bush For Abuse Of Power: Politically Motivated?
Advocate: Professor Robert Turner, Associate Director, Center for National Security Law, University of Virginia
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Call to Censure the President," United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, March 31, 2006.
Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Foreign Policy
13. BUREAUCRACY
Revivsed THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND WOMEN IN SPORTS:
UNDERMINING PROGRESS OR REGULATING REASONABLY
NewThe Department of Education and Women in Sports: Undermining Progress
Advocate: Nancy Hogshead-Makar, Professor, Florida Coastal School of Law and U.S. Olympic triple goal medalist in swimming (1984).
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The First Tee and Schools: Working to Build Character Education," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Education and the Workforce, June 28, 2006
NewThe Department of Education and and Women in Sports: Regulating Reasonably
Advocate: Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education
Source: "Intercollegiate Athletics: Additional Factors Considered by Post-Secondary Institutons," A Response to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, March 17, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, Education Policy
14. JUDICIARY
FILIBUSTERING FEDERAL COURT NOMINEES:
FRUSTRATING THE MAJORITY OR PROTECTING THE MINORITY?
Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Frustrating The Majority
Advocate: Orrin G. Hatch, U.S. Senator (R-UT) Source: Congressional Record, May 10, 2005
Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Protecting The Minority
Advocate: Harry F. Byrd, U.S. Senator (D-WV)
Source: Congressional Record, March 1, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Congress
15. State and Local Government
TAKING PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:
SERVING THE PUBLIC GOOD OR ABUSING OF GOVERNMENT POWER?
NewTaking Property By Eminent Domain For Economic Development: Serving the Public Good
Advocate: Jeffrey Finkle, President And Chief Executive Office, International Economic Development Council
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Protecting Property Rights After Kelo,"before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy And Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, October 19, 2005
NewTaking Property By Eminent Domain For Economic Development: Abusing Government Power
Advocate: Michael D. Ramsey, Professor, School of Law, University of San Diego
Source: Testimony during hears on "Protecting Property Rights After Kelo,"before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy And Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, October 19, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Courts, Economic Policy
16. ECONMIC POLICY
NewA LINE-ITEM VETO FOR THE PRESIDENT:
PRUDENT WAY TO RESTRAIN SPENDING OR UNWISE GRANT OF POWER?
NewA Line-Item Veto for the President: Prudent Way to Restrain Spending
Advocate: Edward Lorenzen, Policy Director, The Concord Coalition
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Line-Item Veto: Perspectives on Applications and Effects," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget, May 25, 2006
NewA Line-Item Veto for the President:Unwise Grant of Power?
Advocate: Cristina Martin Firvida, Senior Counsel, National Women's Law Center
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Constitution and the Line Item Veto," U.S. House of Representatives, Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, April 27, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, President, Congress
Revised17. CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY
THE DEATH PENALTY: FATALLY FLAWED OR DEFENSIBLE? NewThe Death Penalty: Fatally Flawed
Advocate: Stephen B. Bright. Director, Southern Center for Human Rights, Atlanta, Georgia; Visiting Lecturer in Law, Harvard and Yale Law Schools
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Death Penalty in the United States" before the U.S. Senate, Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On The Constitution, February 1, 2006
New The Death Penalty: Defensible Advocate: John McAdams, Professor of Political Science, Marquette University
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Death Penalty in the United States" before the U.S. Senate, Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On The Constitution, February 1, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights
18. EDUCATION POLICY
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADMISSIONS:
PROMOTING EQUALITY OR UNFAIR ADVANTAGE?
Affirmative Action Admissions: 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)
Affirmative Action Admissions: 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
New19. FOREIGN POLICY
U.S. MILITARY FORCES IN IRAQ:
STAY THE COURSE OR WITHDRAW QUICKLY?
NewU.S. Military Forces in Iraq: Stay the Course
Advocate: George W. Bush, President of the United States
Source: This Is Going To Be Freedom's Century, address delivered at the Freedom House, Washington, D.C., March 29, 2006
Revised U.S. Military Forces in Iraq: Withdraw Quickly
Advocates: Wesley B. Renfro and Brian Urlacher, doctoral students, Department of Political Science, University of Connecticut
Source: "With Civil War Looming the United States Must Withdrawal from Iraq," an essay written especially for this volume, August 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Policymaking, National Security Policy
EXTENDED TABLE OF CONTENTS: WEB ISSUES
The following topics are available on the Web at: http://www.ablongman.com/YouDecide/
20. DECIDING POLICY: ADOPT DIRECT DEMOCRACY OR REMAIN A REPUBLIC?
Deciding Policy: Adopt Direct Democracy
Advocate: Harlan Hahn, Professor, Department 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
Deciding Policy: Remain a Republic
Advocate: Peter G. Fish, Professor, Department 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
21. 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: Christopher Wolfe, Professor, Department of Political Science, Marquette University
Source: Testimony during hearings on the "Federal Marriage Amendment," before the U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution,October 20, 2005
Amending the Constitution to Bar Gay Marriage: Unnecessary and Improper
Advocate: Sheila Jackson-Lee, U.S. Representative (D-TX)
Source: Congressional Record, September 30, 2004
Suitable for chapters on Constitution, Federalism, Public Opinion, Political Culture
22. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION:
ADVANCE OF DEMOCRACY OR DESTABILIZING IDEA?
Proportional Representation: 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
Proportional Representation: 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
23. REGULATING THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACTIVITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: NECESSARY REFORM OR OPPRESIVE RESTRICTION?
Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: 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.
Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: 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
24. 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
Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice, National Security Policy
GUNS, SAFETY, AND THE CONSTITUTION'S MEANING: INDIVDUAL RIGHT OR SUBJECT TO REGULATION New Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Individual Right Advocate: Robert A. Levy, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Oversight Hearing on the District of Columbia's Gun Control Laws," before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, June 28, 2005
Guns, Safety, and the Constitution: Subject to Regulation
Advocate: Daniel A. Farber, Henry J. Fletcher Professor 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
2. FEDERALISM
FEDERAL REGULATION OF MEDICAL MARIUANA:
APPROPRIATE NATIONAL POWER OR USURPATION OF STATE AUTHORITY?
Federal Regulation of Medical Marijuana: Appropriate National Power
Advocate: John Paul Stevens III, 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
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 Research and Faculty Development, School of Law, University of Wisconsin
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights, June 23, 2005
Evaluating the "Right to an Abortion" Decision in Roe V. Wade: Negative Impact
Advocate: Teresa Collett, Professor, School of Law, University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights June 23, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Courts, American Political Culture/Ideology, Interest Groups
4. CIVIL LIBERTIES
NewTHE PHRASE "UNDER GOD" IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE:
VIOLATION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT OR ACCEPTABLE TRADITIONAL EXPRESSION
NewThe Phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance: Violation of the First Amendment
Advocate: Douglas Laycock, Professor, School of Law, University of Texas; and Counsel of Record for 32 Christian and Jewish clergy filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Elk Gove School District v. Newdow
Source: A discussion of the topic "Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality," sponsored by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and held before the National Press Club, Washington, D.C., March 19 2004
NewThe Phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance: Acceptable Traditional Expression
Advocate: Jay Alan Sekulow, Chief Counsel, American Center for Law and Justice; and Counsel of Record for 76 members of Congress and the Committee to Protect the Pledge filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Elk Gove School District v. Newdow
Source: A discussion of the topic "Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality," sponsored by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and held before the National Press Club, Washington, D.C., March 19 2004
Also suitable for chapters on Courts, Political Culture (role of religion in politics)
5. AMERICAN PEOPLE/POLITICAL CULTURE
NewEVENTUAL CITIZENSHIP FOR UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANTS:
REWARDING ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR OR REWARDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO AMERICA
NewEventual Citizenship For Unauthorized Immigrants: Rewarding Illegal Behavior
Advocate: James R. Edwards, Jr., Adjunct Fellow, Hudson Institute
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Should We Embrace the Senate's Grant of Amnesty to Millions of Illegal Aliens and Repeat the Mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986?" U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims, July 18, 2006.
New: Eventual Citizenship For Unauthorized Immigrants Rewarding Contributions To America
Advocate: Tom Harkin, U.S. Senator (D-IA),
Source: Congressional Record, March 29, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Social Policy
6. 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 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
7. MEDIA
SHIELDING JOURNALISTS' SOURCES FROM SUBPOENA:
PROTECTING DEMOCRACY OR IMPEDING JUSTICE
Shielding Journalists' Sources from Subpoena: Protecting 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 Subpoena: Impeding Justice
Advocate: James B. Comey, Deputy Attorney General, U.S. 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 Civil Liberties 8. INTEREST GROUPS
NewTHE PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY IN THE UNITED STATES:
GOLIATH OR DAVID?
NewThe Pro-Israel Lobby In The United States: Goliath
Advocates: John Mearsheimer, R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science and co-director of the Program on International Security Policy, University of Chicago; and Stephen Walt, Robert and Rene Belfer Professor of International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
Source: London Review of Books, March 23, 2006
NewThe Pro-Israel Lobby In The United States: David
Advocate: Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics, University of San Francisco and Middle East Editor for the Foreign Policy In Focus project
Source: "The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?"International Relations Center Silver City, NM and Institute for Policy Studies: Washington, D.C.: Foreign Policy In Focus, May 16, 2006.
Debate also suitable for chapters on Political Culture, Foreign Policy
9. 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," Washington Monthly. July/August 2005
Hilary Clinton and The 2008 Presidential Election: A Problematic Candidate
Advocate: Amy Sullivan, editor, Washington Monthly
Source: "Not So Fast," Washington Monthly, July/August 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Elections
10. VOTING/CAMPAIGNS/ELECTIONS
New PROVIDING PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP WHEN REGISTERING TO VOTE: REASONABLE REQUIREMENT OR UNNECESSARY BARRIER TO PARTICIPATION? New Providing Proof Of Citizenship When Registering To Vote: Reasonable Requirement Advocate: Patrick J. Rogers, attorney and member of the Board of Directors of the American Center for Voting Rights Legislative Fund
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Non-citizen Voting," before the House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, June 22, 2006
New Providing Proof Of Citizenship When Registering To Vote: Unnecessary Barrier To Participation? Advocate: Christine Chen, Executive Director of Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Non-citizen Voting," before the House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, June 22, 2006 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, 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
New CENSURE PRESIDENT BUSH FOR ABUSE OF POWER:
JUSTIFIED OR POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?
New Censure President Bush For Abuse Of Power: Justified
Advocate: John W. Dean, former Counsel to the President of the United States
Source: Testimony during hearings on"Senate Resolution 398 Relating to the Censure of George W. Bush," U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, March 31, 2006
New Censure President Bush For Abuse Of Power: Politically Motivated?
Advocate: Professor Robert Turner, Associate Director, Center for National Security Law, University of Virginia
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Call to Censure the President," United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, March 31, 2006.
Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Foreign Policy
13. BUREAUCRACY
Revivsed THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND WOMEN IN SPORTS:
UNDERMINING PROGRESS OR REGULATING REASONABLY
NewThe Department of Education and Women in Sports: Undermining Progress
Advocate: Nancy Hogshead-Makar, Professor, Florida Coastal School of Law and U.S. Olympic triple goal medalist in swimming (1984).
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The First Tee and Schools: Working to Build Character Education," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Education and the Workforce, June 28, 2006
NewThe Department of Education and and Women in Sports: Regulating Reasonably
Advocate: Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education
Source: "Intercollegiate Athletics: Additional Factors Considered by Post-Secondary Institutons," A Response to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, March 17, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights, Education Policy
14. JUDICIARY
FILIBUSTERING FEDERAL COURT NOMINEES:
FRUSTRATING THE MAJORITY OR PROTECTING THE MINORITY?
Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Frustrating The Majority
Advocate: Orrin G. Hatch, U.S. Senator (R-UT) Source: Congressional Record, May 10, 2005
Filibustering Federal Court Nominees: Protecting The Minority
Advocate: Harry F. Byrd, U.S. Senator (D-WV)
Source: Congressional Record, March 1, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Congress
15. State and Local Government
TAKING PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:
SERVING THE PUBLIC GOOD OR ABUSING OF GOVERNMENT POWER?
NewTaking Property By Eminent Domain For Economic Development: Serving the Public Good
Advocate: Jeffrey Finkle, President And Chief Executive Office, International Economic Development Council
Source: Testimony during hearings on "Protecting Property Rights After Kelo,"before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy And Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, October 19, 2005
NewTaking Property By Eminent Domain For Economic Development: Abusing Government Power
Advocate: Michael D. Ramsey, Professor, School of Law, University of San Diego
Source: Testimony during hears on "Protecting Property Rights After Kelo,"before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy And Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, October 19, 2005
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Courts, Economic Policy
16. ECONMIC POLICY
NewA LINE-ITEM VETO FOR THE PRESIDENT:
PRUDENT WAY TO RESTRAIN SPENDING OR UNWISE GRANT OF POWER?
NewA Line-Item Veto for the President: Prudent Way to Restrain Spending
Advocate: Edward Lorenzen, Policy Director, The Concord Coalition
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Line-Item Veto: Perspectives on Applications and Effects," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget, May 25, 2006
NewA Line-Item Veto for the President:Unwise Grant of Power?
Advocate: Cristina Martin Firvida, Senior Counsel, National Women's Law Center
Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Constitution and the Line Item Veto," U.S. House of Representatives, Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, April 27, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, President, Congress
Revised17. CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY
THE DEATH PENALTY: FATALLY FLAWED OR DEFENSIBLE? NewThe Death Penalty: Fatally Flawed
Advocate: Stephen B. Bright. Director, Southern Center for Human Rights, Atlanta, Georgia; Visiting Lecturer in Law, Harvard and Yale Law Schools
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Death Penalty in the United States" before the U.S. Senate, Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On The Constitution, February 1, 2006
New The Death Penalty: Defensible Advocate: John McAdams, Professor of Political Science, Marquette University
Source: Testimony during hearings on "An Examination of the Death Penalty in the United States" before the U.S. Senate, Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On The Constitution, February 1, 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Civil Rights
18. EDUCATION POLICY
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADMISSIONS:
PROMOTING EQUALITY OR UNFAIR ADVANTAGE?
Affirmative Action Admissions: 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)
Affirmative Action Admissions: 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
New19. FOREIGN POLICY
U.S. MILITARY FORCES IN IRAQ:
STAY THE COURSE OR WITHDRAW QUICKLY?
NewU.S. Military Forces in Iraq: Stay the Course
Advocate: George W. Bush, President of the United States
Source: This Is Going To Be Freedom's Century, address delivered at the Freedom House, Washington, D.C., March 29, 2006
Revised U.S. Military Forces in Iraq: Withdraw Quickly
Advocates: Wesley B. Renfro and Brian Urlacher, doctoral students, Department of Political Science, University of Connecticut
Source: "With Civil War Looming the United States Must Withdrawal from Iraq," an essay written especially for this volume, August 2006
Also suitable for chapters on Policymaking, National Security Policy
EXTENDED TABLE OF CONTENTS: WEB ISSUES
The following topics are available on the Web at: http://www.ablongman.com/YouDecide/
20. DECIDING POLICY: ADOPT DIRECT DEMOCRACY OR REMAIN A REPUBLIC?
Deciding Policy: Adopt Direct Democracy
Advocate: Harlan Hahn, Professor, Department 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
Deciding Policy: Remain a Republic
Advocate: Peter G. Fish, Professor, Department 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
21. 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: Christopher Wolfe, Professor, Department of Political Science, Marquette University
Source: Testimony during hearings on the "Federal Marriage Amendment," before the U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution,October 20, 2005
Amending the Constitution to Bar Gay Marriage: Unnecessary and Improper
Advocate: Sheila Jackson-Lee, U.S. Representative (D-TX)
Source: Congressional Record, September 30, 2004
Suitable for chapters on Constitution, Federalism, Public Opinion, Political Culture
22. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION:
ADVANCE OF DEMOCRACY OR DESTABILIZING IDEA?
Proportional Representation: 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
Proportional Representation: 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
23. REGULATING THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACTIVITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: NECESSARY REFORM OR OPPRESIVE RESTRICTION?
Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: 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.
Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: 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
24. 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
Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice, National Security Policy