1

Roanoke College Office Hours: 2:30-3:30pm M-Th, 1:30-2:30 F

C. William Hill, Jr. 375-2423 (Office)

Office: Courthouse 121 389-0449 (home, before 9 pm)

Spring 2004

SYLLABUS: STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENT (POLI 201)

There are two ways to empty a room in Washington: Hold a fund raiser for

a defeated candidate or a debate on federalism.

- Charles S. Robb

OBJECTIVES

The student who completes this course successfully will

1. Understand the use of federalism as a constitutional device;

2. Be familiar with the development of U.S. intergovernmental relations;

3. Be able to explain and evaluate the various reform proposals that have been offered to

improve U.S. federalism;

4. Have some understanding of the details of selected state governments,

especially New York and Virginia;

5. Have investigated state-local innovations in depth; and

6. Have critical communication skills reinforced.

REQUIREMENTS

The following texts are required for purchase. They should be brought to class.

O’Toole, Lawrence J. (ed.) 2000. American Intergovernmental Relations.

Saffell, David C. and Harry Basehart. 2001. State and Local Government: Politics and

Public Policies. (An excellent source that should become part of your permanent

library.)

Cuba, Lee. (any date.) A Short Guide to Writing About Social Science. (Required in all

departmental courses above 100-level, but will not be used for tests.)

New York Times (weekday hard copy subscription).

Attendance, promptness, preparation, and course participation are expected. Class attendance is essential but voluntary. It is not my responsibility to compensate for missed work. Absences from tests must be excused in advance, be verified by some medical or other authority, and will result in a substitute research paper of 10 pages in length. Class rudeness will not be tolerated and may be grounds for being dropped from the class after a written warning (e.g., tardiness, distracting the class, leaving the class, etc.)

Grades will be based on the average of:

(a) tests 1 and 2 (20% each), (b) paper (20%), (c) comprehensive final exam (30%), and (d) class

contribution and quizzes (10%). Late papers lose 10% each day, beginning at roll call on the due date,

counting weekends. They will not be accepted after 4 days.

Pluses are the first three percentage points in a ten-point sequence; minuses, the last three grades. Thus, A- = 92-90; B+ = 89-87, etc.

Instructors are prohibited by federal law from posting grades or discussing grades with students over the telephone or e-mail.

Anyone with a diagnosed learning disability who wants extended-time tests, must inform me of that one week before each test.

Proper English usage is a grading criterion for all written work. On tests, you may circle any usage or spelling about which you have doubt and still receive full credit. Major errors cost ½% each. Correct usage is expected on papers, and errors will cost 1% each. (see Blackboard.)

The final test will concentrate on material covered after Test II with some announced review material.

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

Until the happy day that the College readopts a student Honor Code (see my paper on the subject on Blackboard), I am an enthusiastic supporter of the academic integrity policy of the faculty. We all share in the responsibility of maintaining Roanoke College as a place where ideas can be freely expressed and properly credited. We all benefit from these practices. I implore you to do your part by doing your own work and encouraging your friends to do the same.

The general rule in my classes is that anything (drafts included) offered for my evaluation by a student is assumed to be exclusively the product of that person. Participation by any other person in its preparation constitutes an integrity violation.

Any idea or fact not original with you or very commonly known must be documented according to Lee Cuba’s manual. Despite what Cuba says in Chapter 7, I require page numbers for all references. Also, I recognize no such thing as a “two source” rule.

In-class assignments/tests must be written on paper I provide using no other paper, books, or notes.

There are only 3 exceptions: (a) specific assigned group projects in which members share the grade, (b) materials provided or authorized by me for in-class assignments/tests, and (c) discussion of class material with anyone. You are encouraged to talk about course material with others, but when it comes to writing anything, it must be original.

See my paper, “Whatever Happened to Honor?” on Blackboard for examples of formats.

If you are ever in doubt about any integrity practice, please contact me before submitting an assignment.

CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION PROJECTS

Each student will submit two research memoranda: one analyzing the State of Virginia’s constitution, and the other analyzing the State of New York’s constitution. You will present recommendations for revision. Each paper must be 1,600 – 1,800 words (body of text) and be fully documented. Include title pages and a “Works Cited” pages. For all questions of grammar and style, see any edition of Diana Hacker’s A Writer’s Reference, and for all questions on documentation, see Cuba. Of course, I am available for consultation, but check these two sources first to build your independent research skills. Use a professional, formal writing style.

Each of the memoranda must be prepared for the attention of a specific relevant state official, such as: house majority leader, governor, senate minority leader, relevant committees, etc. The state official does not have to be the same for both states. The memoranda then, may slant their recommendations in the direction of the interests of their intended sponsors. Remember, however, that any such memorandum (a) must hope for bipartisan and independent support to be successful, and (b) will be open to the public scrutiny and publication, so be very careful in taking sides.

The Virginia paper is due at roll call February 27 and the New York paper is due at roll call on April 16. Late papers sacrifice 10% credit daily and will not be accepted after four calendar days.

In the New York paper, extensive use of The New York Times from this semester is required. These sources must be clipped, glued to pages, annotated, and submitted with the paper. Organize them according to the Works Cited page.

Each paper must have a labeled computer disk submitted with it, which includes the complete paper saved to it as a Word document. No paper will be accepted without this disk.

In evaluating your work, I will consider the following items:

● persuasiveness of your argument,

● fairness in offering evidence,

● quality of your evidence,

● research effort (extent of New York Times use is important here),

● composition and style, and

● documentation accuracy.

Grammatical and spelling errors will cost you 1% per error’s occurrence, so proofread carefully.

A central power, however enlightened and wise one imagines

it to be, can never alone see to all the details of the life of a

great nation…So it is no good looking in the United States for

uniformity and permanence of outlook, minute care of details, or

perfection of administrative procedures; what one does find is a

picture of power, somewhat wild, but robust, and a life liable to

mishaps but full of striving and animation.

- Alexis de Tocqueville

SCHEDULE

This schedule of topics and assignments will be followed as closely as possible. The quiz and test dates are solid commitments.

Key dates to remember:

Test 1: Wednesday 11 Feb.

Virginia paper: Friday 27 Feb. (roll call)

Test 2: Monday 22 Mar.

New York paper: Friday 16 Apr. (roll call)

Test 3: Friday 23 Apr. (8:30am)

Topic / Content / Assignment
1 / Introduction / O’T: Conlan, “Future ofReform,” p. 386.
2 / Political Cultures / S/B: pp. 10-16, 96-97.
3 / Finances / S/B: pp. 246-264, 283-293;
O’T: ACIR, “Significant Features of Fiscal Federalism,” p. 196;
O’T: Sbragia, “Entrepreneurial Cities,” p. 217;
O’T: Quigley/Rubinfeld, “Reductions in the Budget,” p. 255;
Edwards et al, “States Face Fiscal Crunch,” Blackboard, Course Documents;
“Redrawing the Federal Map,” Blackboard, Course Documents.
4 / Constitutions / S/B: pp. 21-35;
Skim Va. and N.Y. constitutions on Blackboard, Course Documents and Websites.
5 / Charters / Reread Va. and N.Y. Constitutions thoroughly – take notes.
6 / Political participation / S/B: pp. 103-130.
7 / Interest Groups / S/B: pp. 89-96;
O’T: Walters, “Lobbying for the Good Old Days,” p. 121;
O’T: Dinan, “State Government Influence,” p. 130.
8 / Political parties / S/B: pp. 68-85, 97-99.
9 / Legislatures / S/B: pp. 114-117, 134-151, 154-159.
10 / Executives / S/B: pp. 110-114, 162-187, 190-200.
11 / Judiciaries / S/B: pp. 117-118, 204-244.
12
/ Definitions and defenses of Federalism / S/B: pp. 1-10, 17-21, 33-35;
O’T: Beer, “Idea of Nation,” p. 337;
O’T: Keller, “State Power Needn’t Be Resurrected,” p. 351;
O’T: Riker, “Federalism,” p. 89;
O’T: Ricker, “Note,” p. 97.
13 / Legal Interpretations
U.S. Constitution / U.S. Constitution, Blackboard website;
S/B: p. 37-44;
Thomas speech, Blackboard, Course Documents;
Hill, “Virginia Indian Governance,” handout;
O’T: Madison, “No. 39,” p. 37;
O’T: Jansson/Smith, “New Nationalism,” p. 373;
O’T: Diamond, “Framers,” p. 44;
O’T: Perlman, “Preemption,” p. 143;
O’T: Wright, “Models of Relationships,” p. 74;
O’T: Wrightson, “Road to South Carolina,” p. 241;
O’T: Palmer/Laverty, “Impact of Lopez,” p. 160.
14 / Development of U.S. Federalism / O’T: Grodzins, “Federal System,” p. 55;
O’T: Scheiber, “Historian’s View,” p. 65;
O’T: Reischauer, “Governmental Diversity,” p. 108;
O’T: Derthick, “Ways of Achieving Federal Objectives,” p. 175;
O’T: Break, “Economics of Grants,” p. 208;
O’T: Monypenny, “Federal Grants…Political Analysis,” p. 211;
O’T: ACIR, “Categorical Grants,” p. 229;
O’T: ACIR, “Techniques of IG Regulation,” p. 278;
O’T: ACIR, “Federal Mandates,” p. 285;
O’T: Posner, “Unfunded Mandates,” p. 296;
O’T: Hosanky, “The OtherWar over Mandates,” p. 309;
O’T: NPR, “Strengthening the Partnership,” p. 314;
O’T: Dilulio/Kettl, “Hooking Leviathan,” p. 320;
O’T: Anton, “New Federalism…Health Policy,” p. 361.
15 / Education / S/B: pp. 267-278, 292-293;
O’T: Cammisa, “Governments as Interest Groups,” p. 116.
16 / Metropolitan issues / S/B: pp. 297-323.

It is one of the happy incidents of the federal government that

a single courageous State, may, if its citizens choose, serve

as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments

without risk to the rest of the country.

- Louis Brandeis