Political Science 533: Democracy in America (Spring 2015)
Instructor: Brian Adams
e-mail: badams@mail.sdsu.edu
Phone: (619) 594-4289
Office: Nasatir Hall 122
Office Hours: Tuesdays 10:30-noon, Thursdays 9:00-10:00 am and 3:30-5:00 pm, and by
appointment.
Overview
In this course we will examine the practice and potential of American democracy. We will
address two central research questions: (1) How is democracy practiced in America; and (2) Is
the current state of American democracy satisfactory? There are many options for organizing a
democratic society and various ways that citizens can participate in democratic governance. Thus,
we have choices as to the extent and nature of democracy within our political system. In this
course, we will examine these choices, analyze how we currently choose between options, and
explore whether we need to alter our political system to create a different type of democratic
polity.
Learning Outcomes
1.) Identify different models of democracy
2.) Develop analytical skills by writing short response papers to assigned readings
3.) Develop research skills through a research paper on an aspect of democratic governance
4.) Learn how to assess and critique current democratic practices in the United States
5.) Identify key problems facing the American democratic system
6.) Develop an understanding of the relationship between citizens and government
7.) Develop civic skills that students can use when participating in politics
Assignments
25%: 8 Weekly discussion papers
15%: Class participation
20%: Research paper, Part I: literature review
15%: Research paper, Part II: analysis
25%: Final Exam
Readings: Most of the readings are articles and book chapters available through the course
blackboard website or as an e-book available through SDSU’s library. There is also one book for
1
the course: Tweeting to Power by Jason Gainous and Kevin M. Wagner (Oxford University Press,
2014). Note that in addition to being available through the bookstore, there are ebook versions
available through various sellers (for example, there is a Kindle version on Amazon.com for
$9.95).
Weekly discussion papers: For 8 out of the 15 class weeks, students are required to write a 2page discussion paper responding to readings for that week. These are analytical papers that
address an issue raised in the readings. They are not summaries. Students should reflect on issues
raised in the readings by critiquing, adding to, or developing ideas in the readings. These should
be substantive critiques, not about style or readability. They will be graded on a “checkplus/check/check-minus” scale. Papers are due at the BEGINNING of class each Tuesday.
Class Participation: Students are expected to come to class on a regular basis and participate in
class discussions. In order to participate, students need to come to class prepared, meaning that
you not only did the readings, but reflected on them and are prepared to discuss them. If class
discussions are not satisfactory, the instructor reserves the right to assign additional work to
compensate (additional work will be graded and included as part of your class participation
grade).
Research paper: Students will write a research paper in two parts. The first part will be a review
of the scholarly literature on a specific topic. The second part will be an analysis where students
develop an original argument. Further guidelines for the research paper are below.
Final exam: The final exam will be take-home and consist of essays based on the lecture and
reading material. The final will be due on Tuesday, May 12th (during finals week).
Extra Work for Graduate Students: Graduate students enrolled in this class must do all the
assigned readings and writing assignments plus read three additional books and write discussion
papers on each (thus graduate students must write 11 discussion papers total). Books will be
assigned based on the graduate students’ interests.
Two notes on grading:
1.) There is no curve in this class; students will be given the grade that they earn.
2.) The research paper and final exam will be submitted electronically to Turnitin, which is
run through blackboard. The papers will be graded and returned electronically as well. .
Course Outline
Notes on readings:
1.) The instructor reserves the right to change assignment dates and content. All changes
will be announced in class.
2.) All readings other than the Gainous and Wagner book can be found on the Blackboard
course website or as an e-book through the SDSU library.
3.) Note that I do not always assign all the pages in an article or chapter—please pay
attention to the page numbers listed.
Week 1 (Jan. 22nd): Introduction
2
Week 2 (Jan. 27th and 29th): The minimalist view
“Even though counting heads is not an ideal way to govern, at least it is better than breaking
them” Learned Hand
Readings:
1. Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York:
Harper and Row. pp. 250-273 and 284-296.
2. Mueller, John. 1999. Capitalism, Democracy & Ralph’s Pretty Good Grocery.
Princeton University Press. pp. 137-189.
Week 3 (Feb. 3rd and 5th): Participatory democracy
“The danger of modern liberty is that, absorbed in the enjoyment of our private independence,
and in pursuit of our particular interests, we should surrender our right to share in political
power too easily.” Benjamin Constant
Reading: Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age.
Berkeley: California. pp. xix-xxiv, 3-25, and 117-162.
Week 4 (Feb. 10th and 12th): Civic republicanism and Communitarianism
“I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if
we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the
remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.” Thomas
Jefferson
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it
good and hard.” H.L. Mencken
Readings:
1. Sandel, Michael. 1996. Democracy’s Discontent. Harvard University Press. pp. 3-54.
2. Fleming, James E. and Linda C. McClain. 2013. Ordered Liberty: Rights,
Responsibilities, and Virtues. Harvard University Press. pp. 18-49. E-book available for
free through the SDSU library.
3. “The Responsive Communitarian Platform” available at
http://www.gwu.edu/~ccps/platformtext.html
3
Week 5 (Feb. 17th and 19th): Direct Democracy
“Direct Democracy is an attractive political ideal, as close to our own experience as a New
England town hall meeting. It has never worked, however, in large, diverse political
communities.” Peter Schrag
Readings:
1. Smith, Daniel A. and Caroline Tolbert. 2007. “The Instrumental and Educative Effects
of Ballot Measures: Research on direct Democracy in the American States.” State
Politics and Policy Quarterly 7, 4: 416-445
2. Lupia, Arthur and John Matsusaka. 2004. “Direct Democracy: New Approaches to Old
Questions.” Annual Review of Political Science 7: 463-82.
3. Ellis, Richard J. 2002. Democratic Delusions. University Press of Kansas. Pages 1-25.
4. Lewis, Daniel C. 2012 Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: Routledge. Pages 1-16.
Week 6 (Feb. 24th and 26th): Deliberative democracy, part I
“Democracy means government by discussion but it is only effective if you can stop people
talking” Clement Attlee
Readings:
1. Jacobs, Lawrence R., Fay Lomax Cook, and Michael X. Delli Carpini. 2009 Talking
Together: Public Deliberation and Political Participation in America. Chicago
University Press. Pages 1-20.
2. Ryfe, David. 2005. “Does Deliberative Democracy Work?” Annual Review of Political
Science 8: 49-71.
3. Young, Iris Marion. 2001. “Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy.” Political
Theory 29, 5: 670-690.
Week 7 (March 3rd and 5th): Deliberative Democracy, Part II
“With the issues confronting modern government highly complex, with ordinary people having
as little interest in complex policy issues as they have aptitude for them, and with the officials
whom the people elect buffeted by interest groups and the pressures of competitive elections, it
would be unrealistic to expect good ideas and sensible policies to emerge from the intellectual
disorder that is democratic politics by a process aptly termed deliberative.” Richard Posner
Readings:
1. Polletta, Francesca, and John Lee. 2006. "Is Telling Stories Good for Democracy?
Rhetoric in Public Deliberation after 9/11." American Sociological Review 71: 699-723.
2. Sunstein, Cass R. 2000. “Deliberative Trouble? Why Groups Go to Extremes.” Yale
Law Journal 110 (1): 71-119.
4
Week 8 (March 10th and 12th): Participation bias
“Those who stay away from elections think that one vote will do no good. ‘Tis but one step more
to think one vote will do no harm.” Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reading: Schlozman, Kay Lehman, Sidney Verba and Henry E. Brady. 2012. The Unheavenly
Chorus: Unequal Participation and the Broken Promise of American Democracy. Princeton
University Press. pp. 1-24, 117-146, and 199-231.
Research Paper, Part I (Literature Review) due March 13th
Week 9 (March 17th and 19th): Policy responsiveness: Do elites listen to the public?
“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re
winning.” Warren Buffett
Readings:
1. Manza, Jeff and Fay Lomax Cook. 2002. “A Democratic Polity? Three Views of
Policy Responsiveness to Public Opinion in the United States.” American Politics
Research 30, 6: 630-667.
2. Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New
Gilded Age. Princeton University Press. 6-28.
3. Gilens, Martin and Benjamin I. Page. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics:
Elites, Interest Groups and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics 12 (3): 564-581.
Week 10 (March 24th and 26th): Democracy and Technology
“The Internet makes it far easier for us to restrict ourselves, much of the same, to groups of likeminded people -- to live in echo chambers of our own devising. In this way, the Internet is
creating an increase, in many places, of social fragmentation, and hence an increase in both
intolerance and incivility, as people end up seeing their fellow citizens as stupid, or malicious, or
despicable. This problem is increased by the fact that much of the Internet is intolerant and far
from civil.” Cass Sunstein
Reading: Tweeting to Power pages 1-92, 106-135, and 150-160.
Week 11 (April 7th and 9th): Campaign Finance, part I
“We have the best Congress money can buy.” Will Rogers
Readings:
1. Lessig, Lawrence. 2011. Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress—and a Plan
to Stop it. Hachette. Pp. 125-171.
2. Smith, Bradley A. 2001. Unfree Speech. Princeton University Press. pp. 39-64
3. Tweeting to Power pages 136-149.
5
Week 12 (April 14th and 16th): Campaign Finance, Part II
“The political world has been arguing about campaign finance policy for decades.
Unfortunately, what was once a rich conversation has devolved into a two-sided battleground,
with the debate's underlying structure looking much as it did in the 1970s. One side argues that
restraining the role of money through contribution or spending limits is essential to restraining
corruption, or the appearance of corruption, or the 'undue influence' of wealthy donors. The
other side resists any such limits in the name of free speech. Despite dramatic changes in the
political world, and despite some court cases that have been coming down on the speech side of
these debates, the arguments on each side remain largely unchanged.” Anthony Corrado
Reading: Panagopoulos, Costas, ed. Public Financing in American Elections. Temple University
Press, 2011. Pages 1-5, 11-16, 36-60, 147-170. E-book available for free through the SDSU
library.
Research Paper, Part II (analysis) due April 17th
Week 13 (April 21st and 23rd): Social Capital
"The new currency won't be intellectual capital. It will be social capital-the collective value of
whom we know and what we'll do for each other. When social connections are strong and
numerous, there is more trust, reciprocity, information flow, collective action, happiness, and, by
the way, greater wealth." James Kouzes
Readings:
1. Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American
Community. Simon and Shuster. Read pages 15-28, 183-188, 216-246, and 277-284.
Skim pages 32-64.
2. Elizabeth Theiss-Morse and John Hibbing. “Citizenship and Civic Engagement.”
Annual Review of Political Science 8 (2005): 227-49.
3. Tweeting to Power pages 93-105.
Week 14 (April 28th and 30th): Economic democracy
“If democracy is justified in governing the state, then it must also be justified in governing
economic enterprises” Robert Dahl
Readings:
1. Dahl, Robert A. 1985. A Preface to Economic Democracy. University of California
Press. Pp. 1-6 and 111-135.
2. Williamson, Thad and Martin O’Neill, eds. Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and
Beyond. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Pages 266-282 (chapter by Gar Alperovitz). E-book
available for free through the SDSU library.
3. Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice. Basic Books. pp. 295-303.
6
Week 15 (May 5th and 7th): Is political apathy a problem?
“We have the greatest opportunity the world has ever seen, as long as we remain honest -- which
will be as long as we can keep the attention of our people alive. If they once become inattentive
to public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors would all
become wolves.” Thomas Jefferson
Readings:
1. Eliasoph, Nina. 1997. “’Close to Home’: The Work of Avoiding Politics.” Theory and
Society 26, 5: 605-630.
2. Kettering Foundation, “Citizens and Politics: A View from Main Street America.”
Pages vii-33 and 41-63.
Final exam due Tuesday, May 12th
7
Research Paper Guidelines
For the research paper, students are to explore one aspect of democracy in America. Students can
choose any topic as long as it is focused on the United States and it deals with some aspect of
democratic practice or theory. In general, your topic should be specific and narrow—the broader
the topic, the more difficult it will be to analyze the topic fully.
The paper will be written in two parts:
Part I: Literature Review. For the first part of the paper, you should review the academic
literature on the topic, examining the scholarly debates. Your sources should be journal articles
or scholarly books; you should not use “popular press “ sources such as newspapers or
magazines. Websites are also discouraged as a source. There are a number of library databases
that index scholarly journals. One of the best is “Web of Science Core Collection.” Proquest and
Academic Search Premier also contain some scholarly sources (to focus on just scholarly sources,
you can click on the “peer-reviewed” box on the search screen). There is no minimum number of
sources you need to use, but my expectation is that you will have enough sources to adequately
cover all the different perspectives on the topic you have chosen. Typical “A” papers have 7-10
sources.
Literature reviews are not simply summaries of books and articles. You should not write this
paper in the format “author A said x, and author B said y,” which is essentially a series of book
reports rather than a literature review. What you should do is integrate your sources to map out
the terrain of the scholarly discourse on the subject. You should pull out core ideas and concepts
from the readings, and weave them together into a coherent discussion of your topic. Part of this
process involves “comparing and contrasting” different authors, but a literature review goes
beyond that: it not only compares authors, but also fits them together into a coherent picture. The
best literature reviews (i.e. “A” papers) say something about the literature as a whole: in addition
to describing the scholarly debate, they also comment on it. This is not in the form of who’s right
or wrong (that belongs in part II of your paper), but rather a commentary on the fundamental
issues at stake or the particular shape or characteristics of the debate. In other words, a good
literature review is not just a description of the literature, but also an interpretation.
Part II: Analysis. The second part of your paper is an analysis of your topic. Here, you are to
develop your own argument, drawing on the ideas and research in your literature review. Even
though your argument should be your own, it should also be grounded in the scholarly literature.
Students often make the mistake of thinking that an original argument is completely unconnected
to previous research. Far from it: arguments are built from previous research. You should think
of the analysis part of the paper as a contribution to the discussion on your topic, engaging the
work of previous scholars. The analysis should be an extension of the literature review, and
should not repeat information contained in part I.
[CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE]
8
Paper Requirements
1. Part I should be 8-9 pages long, double spaced, with one inch margins and in a 12-point font.
Part II should by 6-7 pages long
2. Students should submit their papers through Turnitin on blackboard anytime on the due date (the
actual due time is set for 11:59 pm—at midnight your paper turns into a pumpkin!). If you have
technical troubles submitting your paper to Turnitin, please contact the Student Help Desk at 5943189. Sometimes problems with uploading are caused by popup and JavaScript settings. Also, if you
are using Internet Explorer, you might want to try using another web browser (such as Firefox).
3. Students found intentionally plagiarizing will automatically fail the course, and will be referred to
the Center for Student Rights and Responsibilities for further disciplinary action.
4. You may not hand in a paper written for another class. Students who do this will fail the paper.
In other words, the research paper must be an original piece of work written specifically for this
class.
5. Late paper will be marked down 1/3 of a letter grade for each day late without a legitimate
excuse (for example, a “B” paper handed in one day late will become a “B-“).
6. You should not repeat information in part II covered in part I, even though the analysis in part
II will rely heavily on the literature covered in part I. When you are writing part II, you should
assume that the reader has already read part I.
Grading Criteria:
Papers will be graded based on the following criteria (not in any particular order):
 The quality of the student’s research
 Student’s knowledge of the issue
 Student’s ability to write a well-organized, coherent paper
 Student’s analytical ability
Can’t think of a topic? Here are some examples of topics students have addressed in the past:
 The causes of political apathy among young people
 Electronic voting
 Does “individualism” undermines democracy?
 Does the media influences the attitudes and beliefs of citizens?
 What influence does the media have on the public agenda?
 What impact does the Daily Show and other “soft news” programs have on political
participation?
 Does negative campaign advertising demobilize voters?
9