Non-Fiction Books:

You Decide! Current Debates in American Politics

Format

Paperback

Customer rating

Click to share your rating 0 ratings (0.0/5.0 average) Thanks for your vote!

Share this product

You Decide! Current Debates in American Politics by John T Rourke
Unavailable
Sorry, this product is not currently available to order

Description

Updated annually, this best-selling, debate-style reader examines the most timely, important, and provocative issues in American politics. This edition draws students into the key topics that have made headlines and affected our political system during 2007 and are likely to affect our daily lives in 2008. Designed to get students engaged and thinking about our political system, the topics featured in You Decide! have been selected for their currency, importance, and human interest. The pieces, arguing various sides of a given issue, come from recent journals, congressional hearings, think tanks, and periodicals. You Decide! is available at no extra charge when ordered packaged with any Longman American government textbook.

Table of Contents

You Decide 2008 Current Debates in American Politics Editor: John T. Rourke, University of Connecticut *selections new to this edition indicated with an asterisk Table of Contents 1. CONSTITUTON GUNS, SAFETY, AND THE CONSTITUTION'S MEANING: INDIVDUAL RIGHT OR SUBJECT TO REGULATION Guns, Safety, and the Constitution's Meaning: 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's Meaning: Subject to Regulation *Advocate: The Brady Center To Prevent Gun Violence Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Court Of Appeals, District Of Columbia Circuit in Parker v. District of Columbia (2006) 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'Connor, 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 LIBERTIES THE PHRASE "UNDER GOD" IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: VIOLATION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT OR ACCEPTABLE TRADITIONAL EXPRESSION The 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 The 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) 4. CIVIL RIGHTS BARRING STUDENTS FROM ADVOCATING ILLEGAL DRUG USE: ABRIDGING FREE SPEECH OR PERMISSIBLE RESTRICTION? Barring Students From Advocating Illegal Drug Use: Abridging Free Speech *Advocate: Center for Individual Rights Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Morse v. Frederick (2007) Barring Students From Advocating Illegal Drug Use: Permissible Restriction *Advocate: Paul D. Clement, U.S. Solicitor General Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Morse v. Frederick (2007) Also suitable for chapters on Courts, American Political Culture/Ideology, Education Policy 5. AMERICAN PEOPLE/POLITICAL CULTURE THE CULTURAL ASSIMILATION OF IMMIGRANTS: THE MELTING POT IS BROKEN OR BLENDING SATISFACTORILY? The Cultural Assimilation Of Immigrants: The Melting Pot Is Broken *Advocate: John Fonte, Director, Center for American Common Culture, Hudson Institute Source: Testimony during hearings on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Becoming Americans--U.S Immigrant Integration" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, May 16, 2007 The Cultural Assimilation Of Immigrants: Blending Satisfactorily *Advocate: Gary Gerstle, James Stahlman Professor of History, Department of History, Vanderbilt University Source: Testimony during hearings on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Becoming Americans--U.S Immigrant Integration" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, May 16, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Social Policy 6. PARTICIPATION QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT: "BORN IN THE U.S.A." ONLY OR ALL CITIZENS? Qualified To Be President: "Born In The U.S.A." Only *Advocate: Forrest McDonald, Distinguished University Research Professor of History at the University of Alabama Source: Testimony during hearings on "Constitutional Amendment to Allow Foreign-Born Citizens to be President", before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution ,July 24, 2000 Qualified To Be President: All Citizens *Advocate: Prepared Statement by John Yinger, Professor of Economics and Public Administration, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University Source: Testimony during hearings on "Constitutional Amendment to Allow Foreign-Born Citizens to be President", before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution ,July 24, 2000 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Political Culture, Elections, Presidency 7. MEDIA CHILDREN'S ACCESS TO VIOLENCE ON TELEVISION: REGULATE OR LEAVE TO PARENTAL OVERSIGHT? Children's Access to Violence on Television: Regulate *Advocate: Dale Kunkel, Professor, Department of Communication, University of Arizona Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Effects of Television Violence on Children" before the U.S. Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, June 26, 2007. Children's Access to Violence on Television: Leave to Parental Oversight *Advocate: Laurence H. Tribe, Carl M. Loeb University Professor, Harvard University and Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Effects of Television Violence on Children" before the U.S. Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, June 26, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Social Policy 8. INTEREST GROUPS THE OIL INDUSTRY AND ENERGY PRICES: PROFITEERING OR RESPONDING TO MARKET FORCES? The Oil Industry and Energy Prices: Profiteering *Advocates: Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen's Energy Program Source: Testimony during hearings on "Prices at the Pump: Market Failure and the Oil Industry" before the U.S House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Antitrust Task Force, May 16, 2007 The Oil Industry and Energy Prices: Responding to Market Forces *Advocate: John Felmy, Chief Economist, American Petroleum Institute Source: Testimony during hearings on "Prices at the Pump: Market Failure and the Oil Industry" before the U.S House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Antitrust Task Force, May 16, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Energy Policy, Economic 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," 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 COMMUTING THE PRISON SENTENCE OF "SCOOTER" LIBBY: JUSTICE SERVED OR ABUSE OF POWER? Commuting the Prison Sentence of "Scooter" Libby: Justice Served *Advocate: David B. Rivkin, Jr., Partner, Baker Hostetler, LLP and former member, White House Counsel's Office Source: Testimony during hearings on "Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, July 11, 2007 Commuting the Prison Sentence of "Scooter" Libby: Abuse of Power *Advocate: Douglas A. Berman, William B. Saxbe Designated Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University Source: Testimony during hearings on "Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, July 11, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Bureaucracy 13. BUREAUCRACY VIEWS OF U.S. GOVERNMENT SCIENTISTS ON GLOBAL WARMING: STIFLED POLITICALLY OR FAIRLY PRESENTED? Views of U.S. Government Scientists on Global Warming: Stifled Politically *Advocate: James E. Hansen, private citizen and Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies Source: Testimony during hearings on "Political Interference with Government Climate Change Science" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, March 19, 2007 Views of U.S. Government Scientists on Global Warming: Fairly Presented *Advocate: Roy W. Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama in Huntsville and former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies, NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center Source: Testimony during hearings on "Political Interference with Government Climate Change Science" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, March 19, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Presidency, Environmental Policy 14. JUDICIARY THE IDEOLOGY OF THE SUPREME COURT: RADICAL RIGHTWARD SWING OR MODERATE CONSERVATIVE TILT? The Ideology of the Supreme Court: Radical Rightward Swing *Advocate: Jeff Lincoln, "Supreme Court Term Marks Shift to the Right Source: World Socialist Web Site, July 14, 2007 The Ideology Shift Of the Supreme Court: Moderate Conservative Tilt *Advocate:Jonathan H. Adler, Professor of Law and Director, Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law. Source: National Review online, July 05, 2007 Also suitable for chapters on Constitution 15. STATEAND LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICE CRUISERS RAMMING FLEEING VEHICLES: VIOLATION OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT OR JUSTIFIABLE TACTIC? Police Cruisers Ramming Fleeing Vehicles: Violation of the Fourth Amendment *Advocate: Craig T. Jones and Andrew C. Clarke, Attorneys representing Victor Harris, respondent in the U.S. Supreme Court case Scott v. Harris (2007) Source: Brief for the Respondent to the U.S. Supreme Court in Scott v. Harris (2007) Police Cruisers Ramming Fleeing Vehicles: Justifiable Tactic *Advocate: Orin S. Kerr, attorney at law and Philip W. Savrin and Sun S. Choy, Freeman Mathis & Gary, Counsels for Plaintiff Timothy Scott Source: Brief for the Plaintiff to the U.S. Supreme Court in Scott v. Harris (2007) Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Courts, Criminal Justice Policy 16. CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY THE DEATH PENALTY: FATALLY FLAWED OR DEFENSIBLE? The 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 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 17. EDUCATION POLICY ASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BASED ON RACE: JUSTIFIED OR UNACCEPTABLE? Assigning Students to Schools Based on Race: Justified *Advocate: National Education Association, et al. Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007) Assigning Students to Schools Based on Race: Unacceptable *Advocate: Asian American Legal Foundation Source: Amicus Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007) Also suitable for chapters on Constitution, Civil Rights 18. BUDGETARY POLICY A LINE-ITEM VETO FOR THE PRESIDENT: PRUDENT WAY TO RESTRAIN SPENDING OR UNWISE GRANT OF POWER? A Line-Item Veto for the President: Prudent Way to Restrain Spending Advocate: Paul Ryan, U.S. Representative (R-WI) Source: Testimony during hearings on "The Constitution and the the Line-Item Veto," U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, April 27, 2006 A 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 EXTENDED TABLE OF CONTENTS: WEB ISSUES The following topics are available on the Web at: http://www.ablongman.com/YouDecide/ 19. POVERTY IN AMERICA: BAD AND GETTING WORSE OR NOT BAD AND GETTING BETTER? Poverty in America: Getting Worse Advocate: John Podesta, President, Center for American Progress Source: Testimony during hearings on "Economic Opportunity and Poverty in America" before U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways & Means, Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, April 26, 2007 Poverty in America: Getting Better Advocate: Robert Rector, Senior Policy Analyst, The Heritage Foundation Source: Testimony during hearings on "Economic Opportunity and Poverty in America" before U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways & Means, Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, April 26, 2007 Suitable for chapters on Introduction, Policymaking, Economic Policy 20. AMENDING THE CONSTITUION TO BAR GAY MARRIAGE: NECESSARY AND PROPER OR UNNECESSARY AND IMPROPER? 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 21. ACHIEVING GENDER PAY EQUITY: TOUGHER LAWS NEEDED OR CURRENT LAW SATISFACTORY? Achieving Gender Pay Equity: Tougher Laws Needed Advocate: Marcia D. Greenberger, Co-President, National Women's Law Center Source: Testimony during hearings on the "Paycheck Fairness Act" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Education and Labor, Subcommittee on Workforce Protection, July 11, 2007 Achieving Gender Pay Equity: Current Law Satisfactory Advocate: Barbara Berish Brown, Chair, Washington, D.C. office of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker and Vice-Chair, Labor & Employment Law Section, American Bar Association Source: Testimony during hearings on the "Paycheck Fairness Act" before the U.S. Senate, Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, April 12, 2007 Suitable for chapters on Economic Policy, Women and Politics, Civil Liberties 22. REGULATING "SOFT MONEY" IN ELECTIONS: NECESSARY REFORM OR OPPRESIVE RESTRICTION? Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: Needed Reform Advocate: Michael J. Malbin Executive Director of the Campaign Finance Institute and Professor, Department of Political Science, State University of New York at Albany Source: Testimony during hearings on "S.271, a Bill Which Reforms The Regulatory And Reporting Structure Of Organizations Registered Under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code" before the U.S. Senate, Committee on Rules and Administration, March 8, 2005 Regulating the Campaign Finance Activity of Nonprofit Organizations: Oppressive Restriction Advocate: Robert F. Bauer, Chair, Political Law Group, Perkins Coie, LLP, Washington, DC Source: Testimony during hearings on the "Regulation of 527 Organizations," before the House of Representative, Committee on Administration, April 20, 2005 Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Elections, Interest Groups 23. 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 EastReport Online, May 2004 Suitable for chapters on Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice, National Security Policy 24. THE SURGE OF U.S. TROOPS INTO IRAQ: SOUND STRATEGY OR WISHFUL THINKING? The Surge Of U.S. Troops Into Iraq: Sound Strategy Advocate: Max Boot, Senior Fellow in National Security Studies, Council On Foreign Relations Source: Testimony during hearings on "A Third Way: Alternatives for Iraq's Future" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Oversight And Investigations, July 12, 2007 The Surge Of U.S. Troops Into Iraq: Wishful Thinking? Advocate: Wesley K. Clark, General (retired) U.S. Army and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Europe Source: Testimony during hearings on "A Third Way: Alternatives for Iraq's Future" before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Oversight And Investigations, July 12, 2007 Suitable for chapters on Foreign Policy, National Security Policy
Release date Australia
December 10th, 2007
Author
Country of Publication
United States
Edition
5th Revised edition
Imprint
Longman Inc
Pages
304
Dimensions
162x235x16
ISBN-13
9780205605965
Product ID
2445312

Customer reviews

Nobody has reviewed this product yet. You could be the first!

Write a Review

Marketplace listings

There are no Marketplace listings available for this product currently.
Already own it? Create a free listing and pay just 9% commission when it sells!

Sell Yours Here

Help & options

  • If you think we've made a mistake or omitted details, please send us your feedback. Send Feedback
  • If you have a question or problem with this product, visit our Help section. Get Help
Filed under...