Take-home portion of the second exam: PS123, Summer 2003

(due in class on August 5, 2003)

"Nothing is more dangerous in wartime than to live in the temperamental atmosphere of a Gallup Poll, always feeling one's pulse and taking one's temperature. I see that a speaker at the week-end said that this was a time when leaders should keep their ears to the ground. All I can say is that the British nation will find it very hard to look up to its leaders who are detected in that somewhat ungainly position." (Winston Churchill, 1941)

Write a typed, double-spaced response to the questions below; put your name on a cover page only. Develop and support your assertions with concrete evidence from the required readings; indicate with parenthetical references the source for all ideas and evidence. This portion of the exam will be worth 100 points; the in-class portion will be worth 100 points.

The Topic: Political observers have long argued over exactly how our elected representatives should "represent" us. How, for example, should a representative behave when her opinion is different from that held by a majority of her constituents? different from that held by a majority of the nation's citizens? Should a representative "follow" or "lead"? On one side of the question is Edmund Burke (who died before the invention of scientific opinion polls), who said, "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion" (Shafritz and Weinberg 288). On the other side is George Gallup, the father of the modern survey, who argued that Americans have a great deal of "common sense" and that in order for a legislator "to legislate in the best interests of the whole nation," he or she "must know [through surveys] what the nation thinks" (Shafritz and Weinberg 142).

In recent years this question of representation has been set aside somewhat as the initiative and referendum have given majority opinion a direct say in legislative decisions. Today Burke and Gallup might be arguing over whether a democracy should encourage citizens to use the initiative and referendum to exercise legislative power. A further twist has been added, however, by research about how Americans want to participate in politics. Specifically, Elizabeth Theiss-Morse and John Hibbing argue that Americans would prefer to ignore democracy; in the opposite vein, several of the short readings from our ≥public opinion≤ unit indicate that Americans want politicians to consult public opinion before making legislative decisions.

The Questions (each is worth 25%):

1. Read Elizabeth Theiss-Morseπs extended version of the ≥Leave-Us-Alone Democracy≤ (available at www.umaine.edu/mcsc/MPR/Vol11No2/Theiss.htm or on reserve in our library). Summarize Theiss-Morseπs argument about why Americans dislike politics and what they prefer in place of citizen participation.

2. Return to our Congress unit and analyze how either Starkπs (≥Too Representative Congress≤) or Parker and Davidsonπs (≥Popular Congressmen and Unpopular Congress≤) argument compares/contrasts to Theiss-Morseπs argument.

3. Drawing on your knowledge of how to interpret survey results, develop two criticisms of Theiss-Morseπs use of survey data.

4. Some of the survey evidence from our shorter ≥Public Opinion≤ readings (from 7/22) suggested that Americans want politicians to consult public opinion, and Theiss-Morse acknowledges that huge majorities of Americans want to be able to participate in politics through initiatives and referenda. Review this evidence and explain how it could be reconciled with Theiss-Morseπs finding that Americans prefer a ≥stealth democracy.≤

Thesis

Ä Clearly stated and precise; reveals sophisticated critical thinking.

Ä Clearly stated; reasonable and supportable.

Ä Present but lacks precision or is not particularly challenging.

Ä Missing or difficult to understand, but paper makes effort to tackle an assigned question.

Ä Inappropriate or unsupportable; paper does not address assignment.

Understanding and presentation of ideas from the readings (Gallup

Ä Detailed and accurate understanding; goes beyond the "obvious."

Ä Accurate understanding; ideas are generally well explained.

Ä Accurate but basic; minimal explanation.

Ä Mostly accurate understanding, but some minor confusion or missed points.

Ä Superficial understanding; serious misinterpretations.

Ä Theory texts absent, irrelevant, or seriously misrepresented.

Development and support of argument

Ä Arguments supported and presented gracefully; ample, clear, accurate, and creative use of quotations.

Ä Insightful arguments supported with appropriate evidence /quotations.

Ä Reasonable arguments, although:

- relevance of some evidence/quotations not well explained.

- some quotations too long, awkwardly integrated, or irrelevant.

- some useful evidence has been overlooked.

Ä Uneven effort to support claims:

- quotations/evidence used in places, but absent in others.

- some claims are confusing or based on misunderstandings.

Ä Presentation of evidence is confusing; summaries or quotations used to fill space.

Organization

Ä Coherent, logical organization, including an excellent introduction and conclusion.

Ä Central point is made in an organized and competent way: clear topic sentences, focused paragraphs, and so on

Ä Organization is evident, but

- paper strays from the main point in places.

- a paragraph or two lack coherence, focus, or development.

- transitions and topic sentences missing in places or unclear.

- introduction or conclusion are rough.

Ä Organization is seriously flawed (missing introduction or topic sentences; unfocused or incoherent paragraphs).

Ä Little discernible organization.

Grammar

Ä Few or no mechanical mistakes; clear, unambiguous sentences, perhaps with a touch of elegance.

Ä Clear and accurate use of language with only a few errors that do not significantly affect meaning.

Ä Prose is generally clear, but grammar errors and/or weak proofreading negatively affect the reading experience.

Ä Prose is uneven; some errors serious enough to cloud meaning.

Ä Numerous and serious grammatical errors make the writer's ideas difficult to understand.

No paper will earn better than a C if it:

Ä lacks a thesis statement in the introduction.

Ä is shorter than three pages (two pages and three lines is not three pages).

Ä contains an average of one or more grammar or proofreading error per sentence in the introduction.