9780072968880

Preface

Introduction: Labels and Alignments in American Politics

xvii

PART 1 DEMOCRACY AND THE AMERICAN POLITICAL PROCESS

(104)

Issue 1. Is There Too Much Democracy in the World?

(28)

YES: Fareed Zakaria, from The Future of Freedom (W.W. Norton & Company, 2003)

(11)

NO: Robert Kagan, from "The Ungreat Washed," The New Republic (July 7 & 14, 2001)

(15)

Newsweek writer Fareed Zakaria argues that unrestrained democracy threatens vital liberties and concludes that "what we need in politics today is not more democracy but less." Robert Kagan, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, contends that in today's world, democracy is the only practical means of protecting vital liberties.

Issue 2. Do Political Campaigns Promote Good Government?

(24)

YES: Samuel L. Popkin, from The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns (University of Chicago Press, 1991)

(9)

NO: Anthony King, from "Running Scared," The Atlantic Monthly (January 1997)

(13)

Professor of political science Samuel L. Popkin argues that presidential election campaigns perform a unique and essential service in informing and unifying the American people. Political scientist Anthony King contends that American office-holders spend too much time and effort running for office, which detracts from their responsibility to provide good government.

Issue 3. Is There an Emerging Democratic Majority?

(24)

YES: John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, from The Emerging Democratic Majority (Scribner, 2002)

(11)

NO: Daniel Casse, from "An Emerging Republican Majority?" Commentary (January 2003)

(11)

Social analysts John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira argue that on key issues the Democratic Party is more in line with the values of modern, postindustrial America than the Republican Party is. Public communications director Daniel Casse contends that the Republicans occupy the middle ground on domestic issues, driving the Democrats to adopt less popular, extreme positions.

Issue 4. Do the Media Have a Liberal Bias?

(27)

YES: Bernard Goldberg, from Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite (Warner Books, 2003)

(9)

NO: Eric Alterman, from What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News (Basic Books, 2003)

(16)

Former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg argues that liberal bias is pervasive in news reporting, the result not from a conspiracy but of a mind-set among media elites acquired from the homogeneous social circles in which they live and work. Journalist Eric Alterman criticizes Goldberg's methodology and argues that there is a conservative bias in the media, citing as evidence the media's extensive corporate ties and what he regards as their favorable coverage of President Bush's presidency.

PART 2 THE INSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT

105

(34)

Issue 5. Is Congress Barred from Regulating Commerce Within a State?

106

(16)

YES: William H. Rehnquist, from Majority Opinion, United States v. Lopez, U.S. Supreme Court (April 26, 1995)

108

(7)

NO: Stephen G. Breyer, from Dissenting Opinion, United States v. Lopez, U.S. Supreme Court (April 26, 1995)

115

(7)

Supreme Court chief justice William H. Rehnquist argues that Congress cannot regulate activities within a state that are not economic and do not substantially affect commerce among the states. Supreme Court justice Stephen G. Breyer upholds the right of Congress to regulate activities within a state if Congress has a rational basis for believing that it affects the exercise of congressional power.

Issue 6. Is the Filibuster of Judicial Nominees Justifiable?

122

(17)

YES: Marcia Greenberger, from Testimony, Senate Judiciary Committee (May 6, 2003)

124

(6)

NO: John C. Eastman, from Testimony, Senate Judicial Committee (May 6, 2003)

130

(9)

Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, contends the filibuster of judicial nominees serves the nation well by forcing the president to submit moderate, consensus nominees to the bench. Law professor John C. Eastman argues that the "dilatory" use of the filibuster flouts the will of the Senate, intrudes upon the president's power to nominate judges, and ultimately threatens the independence of the judiciary.

PART 3 SOCIAL CHANGE AND PUBLIC POLICY

139

(224)

Issue 7. Is Capital Punishment Justified?

140

(18)

YES: Robert W. Lee, from "Deserving to Die," The New American (August 13, 1990)

142

(8)

NO: Eric M. Freedman, from "The Case Against the Death Penalty," USA Today Magazine (March 1997)

150

(8)

Essayist Robert W. Lee argues that capital punishment is the only fair way for society to respond to certain heinous crimes. Law professor Eric M. Freedman contends that the death penalty does not reduce crime but does reduce public safety and carries the risk of innocent people being executed.

Issue 8. Do We Need Tougher Gun Control Laws?

158

(22)

YES: Carl T. Bogus, from "The Strong Case for Gun Control," The American Prospect (Summer 1992)

160

(10)

NO: John R. Lott, Jr., from More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (University of Chicago Press, 1998)

170

(10)

Writer Carl T. Bogus argues that even local gun control laws will reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Social analyst John R. Lott, Jr., argues that giving law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed handguns deters street crime.

Issue 9. Does Affirmative Action Advance Racial Equality?

180

(18)

YES: Mary Frances Berry, from "Affirmative Action: Why We Need It, Why It Is Under Attack," in George E. Curry, ed., The Affirmative Action Debate (Perseus, 1996)

182

(7)

NO: Linda Chavez, from "Promoting Racial Harmony," in George E. Curry, ed., The Affirmative Action Debate (Perseus, 1996)

189

(9)

Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, contends that affirmative action is needed because minorities have suffered so much negative action throughout American history. Columnist Linda Chavez argues that racial preferences create a surface appearance of progress while destroying the substance of minority achievement.

Issue 10. Should the President Be Allowed to Detain Citizens Indefinitely in Wartime?

198

(16)

YES: Andrew C. McCarthy, from "Comforting the Enemy," National Review Online (December 19, 2003)

200

(5)

NO: Lewis Z. Koch, from "Dirty Bomber? Dirty Justice," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ( January/February 2004)

205

(9)

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy believes citizens who are terrorists should not enjoy the constitutional rights of common criminal defendants, and they may be detained for the duration of hostilities. Investigative reporter Lewis Z. Koch states that no American citizen has ever been or ever should be indefinitely detained and deprived of the right to counsel and trial on the assertion of the Attorney General.

Issue 11. Is "Middle Eastern" Profiling Ever Justified?

214

(16)

YES: Daniel Pipes, from "Fighting Militant Islam, Without Bias," City Journal (November 2001)

216

(7)

NO: David A. Harris, from "`Flying While Arab,' Immigration Issues, and Lessons from the Racial Profiling Controversy," Testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (October 12, 2001)

223

(7)

Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, argues that "heightened scrutiny" of Muslims and Middle Eastern-looking people is justified because, while not all Muslims are Islamic extremists, all Islamic extremists are Muslims. Law professor David A. Harris opposes profiling people of Middle Eastern appearance because, like racial profiling, it compromises civil liberties and actually damages our intelligence efforts.

Issue 12. Should Hate Speech Be Punished?

230

(16)

YES: Charles R. Lawrence III, from "Crossburning and the Sound of Silence: Antisubordination Theory and the First Amendment," Villanova Law Review (vol. 37, no. 4, 1992)

232

(7)

NO: Jonathan Rauch, from "In Defense of Prejudice: Why Incendiary Speech Must Be Protected," Harper's Magazine (May 1995)

239

(7)

Law professor Charles R. Lawrence III asserts that speech should be impermissible when, going beyond insult, it inflicts injury on its victims. Author Jonathan Rauch maintains that there can be no genuine freedom of expression unless it includes the freedom to offend those who oppose the expressed opinion.

Issue 13. Should There Be a Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage?

246

(16)

YES: Katherine Shaw Spaht, from Testimony Before Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, March 23, 2004

248

(6)

NO: Cass Sunstein, from Testimony Before Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, March 23, 2004

254

(8)

Louisiana State University law professor Katherine Shaw Spaht argues that if a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage is not passed, the courts will take the issue away from the American people and abolish traditional marriage. University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein, recalling that amendments have almost always been reserved to ones expanding individual rights and correcting structural problems of the government, and observing the marriage amendment fit neither category, concludes that such an amendment is neither desirable nor necessary.

Issue 14. Should Abortion Be Restricted?

262

(16)

YES: Robert P. George, from The Clash of Orthodoxies: Law, Religion, and Morality in Crisis (ISI Books, 2001)

264

(6)

NO: Mary Gordon, from "A Moral Choice," The Atlantic Monthly (March 1990)

270

(8)

Legal philosopher Robert P. George asserts that, since each of us was a human being from conception, abortion is a form of homicide and should be banned. Writer Mary Gordon maintains that having an abortion is a moral choice that women are capable of making for themselves, that aborting a fetus is not killing a person, and that antiabortionists fail to understand female sexuality.

Issue 15. Are Tax Cuts Good for America?

278

(24)

YES: Amity Shlaes, from The Greedy Hand: How Taxes Drive Americans Crazy and What to Do About It (Random House, 1999)

280

(7)

NO: Paul Krugman, from "The Tax-Cut Con," The New York Times Magazine (September 14, 2003)

287

(15)

Wall Street Journal editorial writer Amity Shlaes maintains that the federal income tax is too high, too complex, and biased against high-income earners who invest in economic growth. Economist Paul Krugman believes that the Bush tax cuts increase economic inequality, contribute to a huge budget deficit, and endanger the future of Medicare and Social Security.

Issue 16. Is America Becoming More Unequal?

302

(20)

YES: Jeff Madrick, from "Inequality and Democracy," in George Packer, The Fight Is for Democracy (Perennial, 2003)

304

(9)

NO: Christopher C. DeMuth, from "The New Wealth of Nations," Commentary, October 1997

313

(9)

Editor and author Jeff Madrick maintains that the striking recent increase in income and wealth inequality reflects increasing inequality of opportunity and threatens the civil and political rights of less wealthy Americans. American Enterprise Institute president Christopher C. DeMuth asserts that Americans have achieved an impressive level of wealth and equality and that a changing economy ensures even more opportunities.

Issue 17. Does the Patriot Act Abridge Essential Freedom?

322

(26)

YES: Nat Hentoff, from The War on the Bill of Rights and the Gathering Resistance (Seven Stories Press, 2003)

324

(10)

NO: Heather Mac Donald, from "Straight Talk on Homeland Security," City Journal (Summer 2003)

334

(14)

Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff opposes the Patriot Act as an unjustified invasion of private belief and behavior, in the conviction that the sacrifice of liberty for security will result in the loss of both. Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald believes that, since the new terrorism poses an unprecedented threat to America's survival, the Patriot Act is an appropriate response and contains adequate protection of fundamental liberties.

Issue 18. Should America Restrict Immigration?

348

(15)

YES: Patrick J. Buchanan, from The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperial Our Country and Civilization (Thomas Dunne Books, 2002)

350

(6)

NO: Daniel T. Griswold, from "Immigrants Have Enriched American Culture and Enhanced Our Influence in the World," Insight on the News (March 11, 2002)

356

(7)

Political commentator Patrick J. Buchanan argues that large-scale, uncontrolled immigration has increased America's social and economic problems and deprived it of the shared values and common language that define a united people. Daniel T. Griswold, associate director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, while acknowledging the need to protect the United States against terrorists, contends that immigration gives America an economic edge, does not drain government finances, and is not remarkably high compared with past eras.

PART 4 AMERICA AND THE WORLD

363

(73)

Issue 19. Is Free Trade Fair Trade?

364

(20)

YES: Douglas A. Irwin, from Free Trade Under Fire (Princeton University Press, 2002)

366

(8)

NO: David Morris, from "Free Trade: The Great Destroyer," in Jerry Mander and Edward Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the Global Economy: And for a Return to the Local (Sierra Club Books, 1996)

374

(10)

Professor of economics Douglas A. Irwin asserts that all countries benefit from free trade because it promotes efficiency, spurs production, and forces the least productive companies to reduce their output or shut down, resulting in better goods at lower prices. David Morris, vice president of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, argues that free trade is unnecessary because gains in efficiency do not require large-scale multinational enterprises and undesirable because it widens the standard-of-living gap between rich and poor nations.

Issue 20. Was the Invasion of Iraq Justified?

384

(26)

YES: Robert Kagan and William Kristol, from "The Right War for the Right Reasons," The Weekly Standard (February 23, 2004)

386

(12)

NO: Michael Ignatieff, from "Why Are We in Iraq?" The New York Times Magazine (September 7, 2003)

398

(12)

The Weekly Standard editors Robert Kagan and William Kristol argue that the Iraq war is justified because it has put an end to three decades of tyranny, is leading to a democratic government that will be a blessing to the Iraqi people and their neighbors, and will encourage liberalization throughout the region. Michael Ignatieff, director of the Carr Center at the Kennedy School of Government, views the Iraq war as a unilateral act of territorial conquest, with costs far higher than anyone bargained for, which has seriously damaged America's respect in the world and the American people's trust in their president.

Issue 21. Must America Exercise World Leadership?

410

(26)

YES: Charles Krauthammer, from "The Unipolar Moment Revisited," The National Interest (Winter 2002/2003)

412

(13)

NO: Niall Ferguson, from "An Empire in Denial," Harvard International Review (Fall 2003)

425

(11)

Political writer Charles Krauthammer believes that America's mission as the sole superpower to keep the peace and extend democracy takes priority over the considerations of its allies or the international community. Author Niall Ferguson maintains that despite America's military and economic dominance, it lacks both the long-term will and the capital and human investment that would be necessary to sustain its dominance.

Contributors

436

(6)

Index

442