WEEK 1 DISCUSSION 1

For much of 2011 and 2012, public dissatisfaction with Congress rose to all time
highs, with 70-80% expressing disapproval with how Congress does its job. Many
commentators note that Americans are fed up with Washington "grid-lock" that mak
es government apparently unable to address important problems. Other observers b
elieve that the national government is acting according to its design, based on
separation of powers and checks and balances.
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, analyze how the U.S. Constitutio
n implements separation of powers and checks and balances. Briefly explain why t
he constitutional framers based the new government on these ideas. Evaluate how
separation of powers and checks and balances are working out in practice, today,
justifying your assessment with persuasive reasoning and examples.
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you
r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates' initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer's post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer's
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 1 DISCUSSION 2
The formal process of amending the Constitution is cumbersome and slow. While t
his fact explains why relatively few amendments have been adopted, it does not d
iscourage advocates of constitutional change from proposing them. Four amendment
proposals that have gained considerable attention are the Balanced Budget Amend
ment, the Birthright Citizenship Amendment, the Equal Rights Amendment, and the
Overturn Citizens United Amendment. Select one of these proposals as the topic o
f your initial post and use the assigned resources to inform yourself about its
purpose and the arguments of its supporters and critics.
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, briefly summarize what the propo
sed amendment would do and the problem its proponents say it will solve. Explain
the main pros and cons in the debate about the amendment. Evaluate the proposed
amendment from two perspectives:
Your own political philosophy, values or ideology. (Justify your assessment
by clearly explaining your political values and why they lead you to support or
oppose the amendment.)
The likelihood that the proposed amendment will eventually be ratified to be
come part of the Constitution. (Justify your assessment by explaining how the pr
oposal will or will not, in your judgment, survive the ratification process.)
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you
r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.

By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates' initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer's post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer's
while explaining or justifying your position).

WEEK 2 DISCUSSION 1
The U.S. government's expansive role in public policy is caught in a swirl of co
nflicting cross-currents. On the one hand, popular expectations about government
's responsibility to solve problems often exceed the capacity of state and local
authorities to respond effectively. On the other hand, policies developed at th
e national level may not sufficiently reflect the great diversity of interests a
cross the U.S. to be effective at the local level. Moreover, the search for effe
ctive policy is further complicated by theoretical debates about the constitutio
nal framework of federalism, e.g., what limits on national power can be derived
from the Tenth Amendment?
A policy area in the middle of these cross-currents is elementary and secondary
education a subject traditionally under local control, with some oversight by th
e states. However, during the last four decades especially since 2001 the nation
al government's role in education has grown significantly as a result of initiat
ives by Republican and Democratic administrations. Use the assigned resources to
inform yourself about this role and the arguments of its supporters and critics
.
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, briefly summarize the national g
overnment's education policies. Explain the main pros and cons in the debate abo
ut these policies. Evaluate them from two perspectives:
The policies effectiveness in improving the quality of U.S. elementary and se
condary education. (Justify your assessment by clearly explaining your definitio
n of "effectiveness" and how it should be measured or determined.)
Their consistency with the constitutional framework of federalism. (Justify
your assessment by clearly explaining your interpretation of American federalism
s constitutional framework and why federal education policies are or are not co
nsistent with it.)
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you
r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer s post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer s
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 2 DISCUSSION 2
The Constitution states, "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Memb
ers chosen every second Year by the People of the several States..." (Art. I, Se
c. 2). Contrast this with the original constitutional language for the other hou

se of Congress, "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senato
rs from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years..." (Art. I,
Sec. 3). The phrase "chosen by the Legislature" was changed to "elected by the
people" by the 17th Amendment, but not until 1912. In other words, from the begi
nning the House of Representatives was intended to be exactly what its name sugg
ests representative of the people. (Note that in 2010 the Tea Party, and some Rep
ublican politicians, called for repeal of the 17th Amendment, eliminating the po
pular vote for Senators. While most Republican politicians have backed away from
that view, many Tea Party chapters continue to demand its repeal.)
Textbook models suggest how members of the House of Representatives may fulfill
their constitutional duty to "represent" the delegate model, the trustee model,
the oversight model, and the service model. A weakness of these models is that t
hey ignore the pervasive influence of interest groups, partisanship, and politic
al money (campaign contributions) on the behavior of congressional reps. To what
extent do these factors interfere with effective representation?
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
After researching your representative by using the assigned resources, identify
one important issue directly related to your rep s committee or subcommittee wor
k in Congress. Summarize your representative s position on this focus issue as d
escribed on his or her website or illustrated by legislation sponsored by your r
ep. Be concrete and specific. Avoid vague generalities like "my representative
is for jobs" or "my Congressman is for national security."
With respect to this focus issue, evaluate your representative s performance as
a representative of the people in your legislative district. Justify your assess
ment from two perspectives:
How well does your reps position on that issue reflect your district s likely
preferences or broad interests on the issue? Support your inferences about the
district with fact-based evidence not just your opinion about the district or yo
ur reps position on the focus issue. Demonstrate how your rep does or does not re
flect his or her constituency on this issue. Consider your reps committee members
hips and seniority.
Discuss fact-based evidence about how interest groups, political party loyal
ty, or campaign money may influence your representative. Can these influences we
aken his or her effectiveness as a true "representative" of the district? Consid
er whether the district is considered a safe seat or a competitive district. Put o
n your critical thinking cap to respond to this aspect of the question.
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Your initia
l must be at least 200-250 words. Support your position with APA citations to tw
o or more of the assigned resources required for this discussion. Please be sure
that you demonstrate understanding of these resources, integrate them into your
argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer s post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer s
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 3 DISCUSSION 1
Americans expect their presidents to get things done, to solve problems, to gove
rn effectively, and to be strong leaders. The framers of the Constitution did no

t envision such presidential leadership. A scholar of the presidency points out

that Article II of the Constitution gives the president scant formal power to in
fluence congressional policy-making (Simon, n.d.). He also notes that the frame
rs intentionally designed a process for selecting presidents that would minimize
their political power the Electoral College. They hoped this institution would
insulate the chief executive from the public because they feared the power of pr
esidents who might be elected by the people. Therefore, the Constitution provide
s that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may
direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Represen
tatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress..." Having state legi
slatures "appoint" the Electors who select the chief executive would minimize th
e president s capacity to lead on the basis of his popular support. In a very re
al sense, the president would not be accountable to the people but rather to the
state legislatures who appoint Electors. This procedure was also seen as a way
to encourage the selection of statesmen with "characters preeminent for ability
and virtue rather than mere politicians with talents for low intrigue, and the lit
tle arts of popularity (Hamilton, 1788).
The practice of state legislatures appointing Electors continued for many years.
Most American history texts do not report national presidential vote totals bef
ore 1824 because 25% of the states were still not holding presidential elections
by that year. Even as late as 1876 the state of Colorado s legislature appointe
d Electors. As states moved away from legislative appointment to the current sys
tem of allowing a state s Electors to be chosen by a winner-take-all popular vot
e, the primary rationale for the Electoral College was forgotten in history. At
the same time, public expectations of strong presidential leadership were rising
.
This creates a problem well illustrated by the disputed election of 2000. George
W. Bush was elected president with 271 electoral votes to Al Gore s 266 elector
al votes. However, Gore amassed 543,895 popular votes more than Bush. Also, beca
use some disputed votes in Florida made unclear which candidate should receive t
he state s electoral votes, the Florida Supreme Court ordered a full recount of
the Florida vote. But the U.S. Supreme Court intervened and stopped the recount,
thereby in effect awarding Florida s electoral votes to Bush. While arguments c
ontinue to this day about the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court s interventio
n, the 2000 election illustrates a glaring weakness of the Electoral College sys
tem selecting a president whose authority may be diminished by the dubious circu
mstances of his or her election. The election of 2000 also has fueled a long ong
oing debate about whether the Electoral College should be abandoned in favor of
method which insures that the candidate elected has the most popular votes. Woul
d this outcome be more consistent with contemporary public expectations about th
e president s role as a national leader who can get things done?
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, briefly summarize how the Electo
ral College works. Explain some of the main pros and cons in the debate about w
hether to keep or abolish the current Electoral College process. Also explain on
e proposal to change how the system works without formally abolishing it. Evalua
te the various arguments and the proposal. Include at least two perspectives in
your assessment:
Your judgment about the relevance of the Electoral College s underlying rati
onale to contemporary America.
Your judgment about its impact on presidential leadership capacity.
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you

r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer s post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer s
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 3 DISCUSSION 2
Levin-Waldman (2012, pp. 186-89) analyzes how "iron triangles" link Congress, th
e bureaucracy, and interest groups in self-serving relationships that influence
policy in ways that are contrary to the public interest. In 1961, at the end of
President Eisenhower s second term, he gave a farewell address to the nation in
which he warned of the dangers of a "military-industrial complex." Many commenta
tors today see the military-industrial complex as an example of an iron triangle
that bloats the defense budget and distorts national priorities. Not everyone w
ould accept this analysis, however, especially defense "hawks" in Congress, the
military bureaucracies, and defense industries.
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, briefly explain the iron triangl
e model of policy-making involving Congress, the bureaucracy, and interest group
s. Analyze information about relationships among Congress, the military bureaucr
acies, and defense industries. Draw your own conclusion, and support it with fac
ts and with persuasive reasoning, about the impact of these relationships on def
ense spending. Evaluate the accuracy of the iron triangle model as a basis for u
nderstanding the process of making defense spending policy.
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you
r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer s post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer s
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 4 DISCUSSION 1
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, respond to one of these question
s:
What judicial philosophy should guide the Supreme Court s exercise of judici
al review?
Should the Supreme Court s power of judicial review be strictly limited by a
constitutional amendment?
In answering either question, clearly state your position (thesis) at the beginn
ing of your post. Define important terms and explain your position fully. Consid
er pro and con arguments on both sides of your position and respond to the con a
rguments. Justify your position with facts and persuasive reasoning.
WEEK 4 DISCUSSION 2

Soon after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration dev
eloped a plan for holding and interrogating prisoners captured during the confli
ct. They were sent to a prison inside a U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay on lan
d leased from the government of Cuba. Since 2002, over 700 men have been detaine
d at "GITMO." Most have been released without charges or turned over to other go
vernments. In 2011, Congress specifically prohibited the expenditure of funds to
transfer GITMO prisoners to detention facilities in the continental United Stat
es, making it virtually impossible to try them in civilian courts. As of April 2
012, 169 remained in detention at GITMO (Sutton, 2012).
An assumption made by the Bush administration in selecting this location was tha
t it was beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. The administration wanted to av
oid any judicial oversight of how it handled detainees, characterized as "enemy
combatants." A possible legal challenge to indefinite detention with no formal c
harges or judicial proceedings might arise from the habeas corpus provision of t
he Constitution.
Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of H
abeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasi
on the public Safety may require it." Under this provision, persons detained by
the government are entitled to a judicial hearing to determine if there is any l
egal basis for their detention. Some legal commentators refer to the right of ha
beas corpus as the "great writ of liberty" because it is a prisoner s ultimate r
ecourse to an impartial judge to review the possibility that he is being held il
legally by the executive (e.g., the police or the military). In nations that do
not honor habeas corpus, people simply disappear into prisons without ever havin
g their day in court.
Several controversial Supreme Court cases have come out of GITMO. One fundamenta
l question that has been debated, but not clearly resolved, is to what extent th
e war on terror justifies the President s indefinite detention of "enemy combata
nts" without the possibility of the minimal judicial review protected by habeas
corpus? Another issue in the debate is to what extent Congress must clearly auth
orize the President to conduct extra-judicial detentions in order for them to be
legal? In 2008, the Supreme Courts decision in Boumediene v. Bush offered some a
nswers to these questions. However, the deeply divided 5-4 Court and the likelih
ood of the protracted nature of the war on terror suggest that debate around the
se important questions will continue.
Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
The purpose of this forum is for you to share and discuss with classmates your u
nderstanding of some of the academic literature about this subject in order to h
elp you write the Final Paper in the course. Your initial post will have two par
ts. Fully respond to both parts of the question, and write in your own words.
In 150 to 200 words, summarize, in your own words, one of the academic artic
les required for this discussion (from Section 5 of the assigned resources). Sel
ect an article from the list that you think may be a source for your final essay
. Read it carefully and try to understand the author s main points that may be r
elevant to your final essay. First, give the full APA citation for the article.
Then, summarize the relevant main points and explain the author s reasoning as y
ou understand it. At the end of your summary, ask one question about a specific
point in the article that you do not understand and would like some help with (r
efer to a page number).
In 50 to 75 words, state what you believe the thesis of your Final Paper wil
l be. State the thesis as clearly and fully as you can. Draw upon what you have
learned from all the required resources you reviewed for this discussion. While

you can change your mind about your thesis when you actually write the Final Pap
er, use this discussion forum as a serious opportunity to try out a thesis and r
eceive feedback from your peers.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
. Offer ideas about the question your peer asks in his or her initial post. Give
your peers feedback about their proposed thesis.
WEEK 5 DISCUSSION 1
Political parties mobilize voters to
arties use their stated policy goals
e voter support. Generally, in order
ties must have policy goals across a
road range of voters.

win elections and implement policy goals. P

(i.e., their platforms) as a way to mobiliz
to be successful in a two-party system, par
broad range of issue areas to appeal to a b

Before writing your initial post, review the assigned resources. To easily acces
s the resources from the Ashford University Library, please see the table locate
d in the Course Materials section.
For this discussion, you will identify one issue area that you want investigate.
Use the assigned resources required for this discussion to gather information a
bout the goals and proposals, in that issue area, of three political parties the
Democratic and Republican parties and a third party.
In your initial post of at least 200-250 words, summarize each of the three part
ies policy goals in your issue area. Compare and contrast the parties goals in
that area. Evaluate each party s goals from two perspectives:
Your own political philosophy, values or ideology.
How effective each party s goals are likely to be in mobilizing voters to su
pport the party s candidates on the national level. In making your assessment fr
om this perspective, consider what influence the factors which underlie the twoparty system have on each party s ability to use its policy proposals to generat
e voter support.
Justify your conclusions with facts and persuasive reasoning.
Fully respond to all parts of the question. Write in your own words. Support you
r position with APA citations to two or more of the assigned resources required
for this discussion. Please be sure that you demonstrate understanding of these
resources, integrate them into your argument, and cite them properly.
By Day 7, respond to at least two of your classmates initial posts. Your peer r
esponses each must be at least 75 words. They must demonstrate critical thinking
(e.g., ask a relevant question about your peer s post while explaining why your
question is significant, or state a perspective that contrasts with your peer s
while explaining or justifying your position).
WEEK 5 DISCUSSION 2
In 150 to 200 words, summarize, in your own words, one of the academic artic
les required for this discussion (from Section 5 of the assigned resources). Sel
ect an article from the list that you think may be a source for your final essay
. Read it carefully and try to understand the author s main points that may be r
elevant to your final essay. First, give the full APA citation for the article.
Then, summarize the relevant main points and explain the author s reasoning as y
ou understand it. At the end of your summary, ask one question about a specific

point in the article that you do not understand and would like some help with (r
efer to a page number).
In 50 to 75 words, state what you believe the thesis of your Final Paper wil
l be. State the thesis as clearly and fully as you can. Draw upon what you have
learned from all the required resources you reviewed for this discussion. While
you can change your mind about your thesis when you actually write the Final Pap
er, use this discussion forum as a serious opportunity to try out a thesis and r
eceive feedback from your peers.
WEEK 5 Assignment