Mastery Project/Learning Objectives

LO 1.A.1: Compare how various models of representative

democracy are reflected through major institutions, policies,
events, or debates in the U.S.
Representative Democracy is a system of government where citizens elect
public officials to govern on their behalf or an indirect democracy where
"the people don't rule directly but through elected representative officials" .

Various models of representative democracy include: participatory

democracy, pluralist democracy, and elite democracy. In participatory
democracy, the citizens are their own representatives and govern on their
own behalf, rather than electing representatives to govern on their behalf.
This was borrowed from the Greeks in which every citizen would vote on
every topic of discussion and eventually became a tedious thing to vote on
everything that happened in the country. As a result, indirect democracy
was in favor over direct democracy (participatory democracy), and was
practiced by the Romans. An example of current participatory democracy
can be seen in Chicagos school system, in which each school is governed
by a parents council and not by the citywide school board (textbook). All
members of a group, rather than representatives they elect to govern on
their behalf, govern for themselves. Pluralist Democracy advocates
government by people operating through competing interest groups such as
the NAACP or the League of Women Voters. Today, pluralist democracy is
seen in the AFL, the National Education Association, Labor Unions, and the
ACLU. Also seen in Direct Lobbying (where representatives of an interest
group "meet privately with government officials to suggest legislation and to

present arguments supporting their positions; basically want to influence

public policy without getting elected or appointed a political position). These

interest groups, work to change public policy without getting elected. For
instance, when Congress couldnt outlaw segregated schools in the South
during the 1950s, the NAACP turned to the federal court system and did it
themselves. In Elite Democracy, a small group of elite, wealthy, powerful
people play a big role in government decisions.
Elite democracy (a small minority of wealthy, "elite", powerful people having a
great influence and role in government decision makings) can be seen in
fundraising sponsorships and campaign elections. In 1974 the FECA (Federal
Election Campaign Act) allowed corporations/ unions/ trade associations to
form political action committees (PACS) to raise campaign funds and were
allowed unlimited/ unregulated fundraising if there were no specific
candidates funded under the 2010 Citizens United Decision.
This shows how elites play a big role in government and can represent
themselves in voting elections and sponsorships of presidential campaigns
that will eventually influence public policy decisions. "Political donations were
considered free speech".

Representative Democracy can also be seen in the election of governors, in

which "voters elect representatives to act as legislators (people who make
laws)". However, governors or other public office holders can be recalled,
because the people elect who they feel is best fit to represent them.
Additionally seen in the electoral college where "a body of electors chosen by
voters to cast ballots for president and vice president".

LO 1.B.1: Analyze and compare democratic ideals reflected in

U.S. foundational documents.

The US Government is based on ideas of limited government including natural

rights, popular sovereignty, republicanism, and social contract.
Naturals Rights are the "god-granted rights" to "life, liberty, and property".
This idea originates from John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government
1690, and is applied in today's benefits of government to which every citizen is
entitled (rights). Popular Sovereignty is "a form of government in which power
resides in the people and is exercised by their elected representatives".
Originated from Thomas Hobbes's Leviathon, this idea is applied to the idea of
order and democracy in our government. Social contract (theory that people
agree to set up rulers for certain purposes and thus have the right to
resist/remove rulers who act against those purposes) was developed by the
philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau, and is now applied with the recall and
impeachment processes. The idea of republicanism(a form of government in
which power resides in the people and is exercised by their elected
representatives) dates back to Aristotle, and is applied to representative
democracy.
These democratic ideals can be found in US Historical foundation documents
such as the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. For
instance, the D.O.I shows us what ideals we wanted but did not receive from
Britain. John Locke is quoted directly in the 1st paragraphs which shows his
great influence: "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them....with
certain unalienable rights, that are among these are life, liberty".
The US Constitution also applied Aristotle's Republicanism idea instead of a
direct democracy, monarchy, and aristocracy.

LO 1.B.2: Compare and interpret Federalist and Anti-Federalist

views on central government and democracy.

Federalists and Anti-Federalists held different views on central government

and democracy. For instance, in Federalist 10, Madison states the purpose of
the Constitution: to "break and control the violence of faction". Madison
defined factions that today are interest groups and political parties, and stated
that through representation we would avoid the "tyranny of the majority".
Anti-Federalists condoned a central government, for it resembled the
formation of a Republic seen in Greece and Rome. This argument is seen in
Brutus's statement to the citizens of NY in 1787, on how "an extensive"
Republic equates to "a tyrannical autocracy". Brutus also states how Congress
has the most important aspect of power: to tax, therefore there is
no"separation of powers" nor "checks and balances" like the Constitution
claims there is. Lastly, Brutus states how there is no "leftover powers" for the
states because the government is "absorbing" all the power. Other AntiFederalists such as Jefferson, wanted additional checks and balances/
separation so powers AND to list basic civil liberties. But the Federalists said
this would weaken and make national action impossible.

LO 1.C.1: Explain the relationship between key provisions of the Articles of

Confederation and the debate over granting greater power to the federal
government formerly reserved to the states.

Specific incidents and legal challenges highlighted key weaknesses of the

Articles of Confederation and displayed the eventual need for more power
granted to the federal government formerly reserved to the states. Example:
Shay's Rebellion in 1787 displayed the government's inability to enforce the
laws of the Articles or lack of power in maintaining domestic order due to
Congress not being granted the ability to tax or draft soldiers for military
service. Showed how weak the government was. The Articles also did not
establish an executive branch (because the people were still fearing the
reestablishment of a monarch), and therefore had no leader to direct the

government or enforce Congress's laws/acts. Another challenge was the

inability of the government to regulate interstate and foreign commerce.
States had the ability to coin money so there was no unified national currency
and states could tax other states however they'd wanted; this led the economy
to chaos.

LO 1.C.2: Analyze causes and effects of constitutional

compromises in addressing political, economic, and regional
divisions.

Constitutional Compromises deemed necessary for the adoption and

ratification of the Constitution included: the Great Compromise, the 3/5ths
Compromise, the Compromise on the Presidency, and the Commerce and
Slave Trade Compromise.
After great debate on the Virginia Plan vs. New Jersey Plan, the makeup of the
legislative branch was decided on in the Great Compromise and led to
Congress being a bicameral legislature with representation in the House of
Reps. based on the population of each state and equal representation of the
states in the Senate. Led to a more organized and balanced legislative body.
The 3/5ths Compromise was an achievement at the time but was a temporary
"solution". It resolved the concern of counting slaves for determining
population for representation in Congress and for taxation. North wanted
slaves accounted for taxation But not for representation. His Consequence of
this compromise was that it gave the South greater representation in
Congress. The Compromise of the Presidency was necessary due to the people
fearing the reappearance of a monarch and the disagreement on HOW the
executive would be elected. Main argument was popular vote vs. election by
the legislatures. The solution was the electoral college and had a positive
outcome because it eliminated the fear of a popular vote for President and
satisfied the small states. Each state would choose a number of electors
equivalent to the number of already established reps. In Congress of that state.

LO 1.C.3: Explain how the issues raised in the ratification debate

are reflected in ongoing philosophical disagreements about
democracy and governmental power.

The tension between the role of the central government, the powers of state
governments,and the rights of individuals reflects ongoing philosophical
disagreements about democracy and government power as represented by
issues such as the expanded power of the legislative powers and the Bill of
Rights. Federalists stressed the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation
that led to the creation of a weak government, to display why expanded
legislative powers was necessary. Anti-Federalists feared that the enumerated
powers and implied powers listed in the Constitution such as the Commerce
Clause and the Militia Clause, absorbed all the possible power of government
and left nothing for the states (this argument is seen in Brutus's statement to
NY in 1787). Instead the they wanted another set of separation of powers and
checks and balances, AND we're upset that the Constitution did not even state
the simple, basic, fundamental civil liberties of the people. Hamilton argued
providing even more rights, or "such protections", would "make the unlisted
areas vulnerable to government abuse" (Federalist 54, Hamilton).

LO 1.D.1: Evaluate the relationship between separation of

powers and checks and balances.

The powers allocated to Congress, the President, and the courts demonstrate
the separation of powers and checks and balances features of the US

Constitution. In the legislative branch, the separation of powers include: the

ability to override Presidential vetoes by 2/3rds vote of both house
(extraordinary majority), Congress may impeach and remove Presidents from
office, Senate may refuse to confirm Presidential appointments and ratify
Presidential treaties, can appropriate funds, and create executive agencies and
programs. Congress's checks and balances (over Judiciary) include: the ability
to create lower federal courts, to set salaries of federal judges, may refuse to
confirm judicial appointments, may propose constitutional amendments
which overrule court decisions, and may impeach and remove federal judges.
The President's separation of power is the ability to enforce laws. The checks
and balances include: (over legislature) the ability to veto acts of Congress,
may call special sessions of Congress, may recommend legislation, (over
Judiciary) may appoint federal judges, may grant pardons to federal offenders,
and may refuse to enforce court decisions. Lastly, for the Judiciary, it's
separation of powers is the ability to interpret laws. The checks and balances
include: the ability to rule legislative/executive acts unconstitutional and to
impeach Presidents.

LO 1.E.1: Assess how the distribution of powers among three

federal branches affects policy making
The three Federal branches of government play different roles in the creation,
implementation, and/or continuation of public policy as represented by tax
policy. Congress's role in the creation of tax policy is to establish national
supremacy in order to define states' limitations and to justify the national
government's ability in actions/ rights. For instance: in McCulloch v.
Maryland (1819), the Court ruled that the national government had the ability
to create a national bank due to the implied powers of the necessary and
proper clause/ elastic clause, and so cannot be taxed by the states. A
Contemporary example is seen in the inability of the states to tax the Federal
Reserve (federal banking authority created in 1913, made up of 12 Federal

banks controlled from Washington D.C). The Federal Reserve Board consists
of governors appointed by the US President with Senate approval, this shows
the executive's role in implementation that is approved by Congress. Congress
makes the policies and keeps the people in line of when and what taxes to pay
through executive cooperation. The Judiciary also plays a role in the
continuation of the policy as seen in 1958 under the court ruling of US v.
Massei, the government presented the court with proof of tax evasion. The IRS
is also an example of an executive implementation of the tax policy in which it
was made by President Lincoln in 1862, and now "operates under the US
Department of Treasury".

LO 1.F.1: Explain how and why the appropriate balance of power

between national and state governments has been interpreted
differently over time.

Exclusive powers of the national and state governments help explain the
conflict over the balance of power between the two levels such as the national
government's ability to provide a navy and army vs. the states' power of taking
measures for public health and safety. This conflict was seen in 2005's
Hurricane Katrina in which President Bush was hesitant on whether the
government should've gotten involved and how. Bush's advisors claimed that
the states were at fault for not explicitly stating what was needed of the
government. The balance of power was also fragile in the court cases
McCulloch v. Maryland and US v. Lopez. In McCulloch v. Maryland, due to
implied powers in the necessary and proper clause, the national government
had the authority to create a national bank even if the Constitution didn't
explicitly state this right, it was implied. In US vs. Lopez, " Congress exceeded
its authority under the commerce clause when it enacted a law in 1990 that
banned the possession of a gun in/near a school". The court ruled that having
a gun near/in a school had nothing to do with commerce.

LO 1.F.2: Analyze questions over the allocation and scope of

central power within a federal structure.

Conflict over the scope of central power within a federal structure is reflected
in public policy disputes about social policy such as the Kim Davis issue
recently. The public policy (freedom of religion and speech, Amendment 1 of
Bill of Rights) conflicted with the social policy of a new law passed previously
(gay couples were given the right to marry). Kim Davis, a county clerk whose
duty was to give marriage licenses in Kentucky (75% conservative), refused (a
numerous amount of times) a gay couple a license because it was "against her
beliefs" and her religion. She was jailed for days and was shortly released. One
of the arguments derived from this issue was: Davis knew what she was
signing up for and therefore never should have ran to be a government agent
doing something that might eventually conflict with her beliefs (that shouldn't
hurt the lives of others) vs. freedom of expression/ the couples should have
went somewhere else to get a license if they wanted to be married so badly.
The two sides of the arguments are still continuing and are present no matter
what the image.