LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx

LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO.
1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebitCreditLEDGERACC
OUNTACC.
NO.1200BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebitCreditLEDGERA
CCOUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
1600BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebitCreditACCOUNTAC
C. NO.
1600BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebitCreditACCOUNTAC
C. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
OUNTACC. NO.
5400BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebitCredit
JournalJOURNALPage: 1DateDescriptionPost
Ref.DebitCreditJOURNALPage: 2DateDescriptionPost
Ref.DebitCredit
Trial BalanceAccount NameDebitCredit

1
POL 190 Introduction to Comparative Politics
Department of Political Science
University of Michigan- Flint
Fall 2015
Current Affairs Major Paper: GUIDELINES
This Project is worth 10% of the total course grade. There are
two objectives: a) give students
opportunities to use available electronic resources at the UM-
Flint library, b) provide students an
opportunity to connect on of the concepts introduced in the
course to recent developments in a specific
country.
Completed Projects are due by WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 16
by 5.00pm at the POL Department office,
220 French Hall.
1. Requirements
The core activity for this paper is to identify relevant articles
from news sources, and write a brief report
on a specific issue/conflict.
a) Essays must make use of (and refer to) at least four (5) news
articles. These articles may be from
newspapers, news magazines, or academic journals. These

sources must be published: online webpages
do not qualify. Class texts and articles (e.g. Drogus/Orvis) may
be used as background sources, but do
not qualify as one of the four cited sources and should not be
used as a source for substantial sections of
the paper.
b) Use concepts/processes from class to discuss the specific
case selected. Students may refer to and
draw from Drogus/Orvis text (although this will not be adequate
as a source). Comparison of the
country/case with other countries described in Drogus/Orvis is
recommended.
c) Should point out why/how the issue has recent significant for
the politics of the country being
studied. Papers on broad historical topics or past events, on
non-political issues will not qualify as having
met core requirements for this project.
d) While the paper is about a current/contemporary political
issue, general information from unofficial
websites, ‘blogs’ or special interest groups will not be accepted
as valid sources. ‘Google’ searches are
strongly discouraged. Acceptable news sources include:
newspapers, news wire services.
e) Format:
-inch margins, Double spaced, 12 pt. font
an ‘Introduction’ section and a
‘Conclusion/discussion’ section

format
2
2. Country Assignment
The Current Affairs Major paper must be written on one of the
topics listed below. Choices are arranged
by student UMID numbers: identify your choices by locating
your group using the first digits of your
UMID number (on your UMID card):
Student Group:
UMID Range
Paper Topic Choices
(choose one topic from these options)
Regimes: Stability or
Change Processes
Political Economy Elections and
Institutions
179000-11599999 Democratization in
Myanmar
Impact of low oil prices
on Nigeria

Canada 2015
12400000-25099999 Democratic Consolidation in
Tunisia
Debt crisis in Greece Turkey 2015
25200000-32899999 Democratic Consolidation in
Guatemala
Financial crisis in China Nigeria 2015
32900000-47999999 Democratization in Nepal Education policy
in
Germany
Burkina Faso 2015
49600000-61699999 Non-Democracy in Cuba Energy policy
South
Africa
Israel 2015
64700000-77599999 Democratic Consolidation
or Erosion in Pakistan
Corruption in Brazil Spain 2015
80600000-97099999 Non-Democracy in Belarus Health care
policy in
China
Indonesia 2014

Please feel free to see me to discuss your topic/ideas at any time
for feedback and advice.
3. Access to Sources (UM-Flint Library Resources for Country-
specific News)
This project must be based on news articles that are available
through one or more of the UM-Flint
library’s database search engines.
http://www.umflint.edu/library/. Select “Databases: Indexes
and Full Text Articles” from the main page.
-
Nexis are recommended)
Searching the databases: Type in a few of the
terms/descriptors for the topic. This will require
trial and error as well as good judgment. Typing the words
“India” and “Pakistan” for instance
will generate a list of all the articles that include those terms in
the title or text. This broad
search will result in many (too many) citations: narrow the
search by date, kind of source (only
newspapers, for example), or by adding additional search terms.
for the
paper. Give preference to content-
rich articles (usually longer ones). Use these articles as the
sources for the paper.

http://www.umflint.edu/library/
POL 190 Institutions and Participation Notes 1
POL 190 POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS and PARTICIPATION in
Democracies
Why does politics and policy making differ across democracies?
While all democracies share
core/common features (elections, representative government,
accountability and basic rights), both the
process (who makes policies and how) and the outcome of
policy-making (the content of policies) varies
greatly across these countries.
Institutional differences are the key element that explains this
variation:
-making
s shape the number of actors/players who
participate, and the relationship between
them
A simple model can illustrate this process:
Institutions Characteristics of Policies
Structure of decision-making -Who benefits?

‘Veto points’ -Timing/responsiveness
-Coherence of policy
Needs, -Quality of policies/effectiveness
Demand for -Costs of policy
Policies Participants/Actors -Accountability
Number of actors (e.g. parties) -Transparency
Level of conflict -Deliberation
INSTITUTIONS
‘Institution’ refers to the basic ‘rules of the game’ that structure
politics: these organize the decision-
making process (e.g. legislatures, executives), and the number
of actors (e.g. the number of parties).
Two basic sets of rules shape governing/decision-making in
democracies:
government and regional
authorities: Where is power located? How centralized is
political power ‘geographically’? Are all
policies made in one location, or are some capabilities
‘delegated’ to sub-national authorities?
Two Options: Federal or Unitary arrangements
central government: How are
laws made and power distributed within government? Who
holds representatives accountable?
Options: Presidential or Parliamentary or Semi-Presidential
arrangements

A critical comparative concept in understanding the role of
institutions is the ‘veto point’: these are
decision points in a political system where policy-making faces
an obstacle or where a policy can be
‘vetoed’ by particular actors. Some arrangements of political
institutions have more ‘veto-points’ than
others, leading to substantial differences in how and when
policies are made (or fail to be made). Veto
points also tell us how much power rests in the hands of groups
of elected officials.
I. Unitary vs. Federal systems
The geographical/physical location of decision-making power is
the main criteria: is all decision
making done by leaders in the capital city (centralized), or is
decision making shared with regions (i.e.
decentralized)?
highly centralized
state and regions
Basic

Feature
Degree of Centralization of Political Authority
Unitary
Federal
Power/authority is highly centralized in the
central government
Decentralized power/authority; regions share
decision-making power with the center
Cases,
Examples
UK, France, Japan, (and the majority of
the countries of the world)
US, Germany, Mexico, Canada, Nigeria,
Brazil, India, Russia
Some
Advantages
incentive to participate in central
government decisions
development and reduces

regional disparities
administration
government
political affairs
addressed by the central government
Some
Disadvantages
regional needs
cultural majority to dominate the
state and to marginalize
regionally distinct minorities
and authority, and so endangers
citizen control over leaders
d policy-making with
uniform application may make for
large scale errors
government and duplication of efforts

“separatism” and “secession” by
dissatisfied regions
onment for
culturally distinct groups in some
regions to be victimized
and an uneven application of laws
process: conflicts over ‘who has
authority’
over-
represented’: malapportionment
NOTE: ‘Federalism’ is NOT synonymous with having a
president, the separation of powers in a
constitution, or with having a democracy. The US is also not
the only country that has a federal
arrangement of the state. Some non-democracies have been
federal (Brazil, Nigeria, USSR). Federalism
is not the same everywhere: there are significant differences
between the organization of federalism in
the Brazil, US, Germany, and India.
Degree of Regional Autonomy in Federal countries
Low regional
autonomy

(strong center)
High regional
autonomy
Russia India
US
Canada Brazil
Germany
Switzerland
II. Presidential vs. Parliamentary systems
While all democracies have certain basic guarantees about the
selection of leaders, accountability, and
the rights of individuals, the central government may be
organized in different ways. The two most
common forms are the parliamentary approach (the fused
authority system used in the UK, Canada,
and most democracies around the world) and the presidential

approach (the separation of powers
system at work in the US and Latin America). A few countries
combine elements of both types (France
and Russia for example).
The Presidential System (‘separation of powers’)
EXECUTIVE:
V elect President nominates
(selects Cabinet)
O
T “checks and balances” Judiciary
[separate
E elections]
R Majority Party/
parties
S elect
Minority Party/ approves
parties
LEGISLATURE
Representatives in “Congress”
Basic Features
ritten formal Constitution: essential to regulate this
complex system

legislature (Congress)
-conflict
relationship: checks and balances
egular elections are necessary: many offices/posts to
be filled
predictable, regular change, accountability
many representatives can act for
voters
approve. Extensive review/scrutiny of
proposals
consistent, and conform to the constitution)
y “losing” an election (the minority party) can still
propose laws, have influence
The Parliamentary system (‘fused’ authority)

EXECUTIVE:
V PM, Cabinet
O
T
E select LEGISLATURE
R elect Representatives in
S [single election] Majority/Governing a single
Parliament
Party/parties
Minority Party/parties
“Opposition”
Basic Features
decision-making (not separate powers)
Cabinet officers) from the members of
the majority (a single majority party, or coalition of parties)
at the same time: the maximum
term between elections is fixed by law, BUT
PM/Cabinet cannot act without majority

support, and may call on the electorate to validate their
decisions and control of parliament)
parliament for non-performance: a “Vote of no
confidence” (The PM is given power by, and is always
accountable to the majority in parliament)
more coordinated, and focused on
policy/ideology and presentation of a clear ‘manifesto’ of
policy goals in order to win a majority in the
general election
‘popular will’. Majority rule in parliament
means there is a limited role for the judiciary, and a
written/formal constitution is not essential
nted by the parliamentary
majority: law-making is easy, reflects the
majority
An alternative: The Semi-Presidential System
Most of the world’s democracies use either the presidential or
parliamentary system. For the sake of
completeness, however we should note that some countries use
the ‘semi-presidential’ system.
Legislature and Executive, with
separation of powers and checks and balances), AND with the
addition of a PM that represents
the majority in the Legislature (like in the parliamentary

system).
democracies have adopted this model of
government since the 1980s. It is also the system adopted by
Iraq in 2004.
e main advantage: it allows for the legislature to be more
organized/coordinated in balancing
the powers of the president, and for holding the president
accountable. It is an improvement of
the checks and balances of the presidential system
-presidential system can have two negative results.
It may deepen conflict between the
2 branches of government: it leads to an inevitable conflict over
defining the powers of the
president and the powers of the PM. Second (paradoxically), the
system may actually make the
president stronger when the president, PM and majority are all
from the same party.
Accountability in Presidential and Parliamentary systems of
government
Presidential

Parliamentary
Vertical accountability
(control over elected
officials by voters)
opportunities for voters
predictable, allows voters to
evaluate officials and to
replace/remove officials
raises stakes and visibility of
choices for voters and
candidates
public/majority control over
whole legislature
Horizontal accountability
(control over elected
officials by other players
within government)
powers (executive,
legislative, judicial)

mandatory oversight, joint
decision-making by
executive and legislature
officials
oversight
immediate removal and
replacement of the
PM/cabinet
PM/Cabinet to Majority MPs.
Executive accountable to
majority members
n in parliament acts
as public watch-dog (non-veto
oversight) of majority

oversight (limited)
Combining Political Institutions
So far we have looked at these institutional
arrangements/choices (federal vs. unitary, and presidential
vs. parliamentary) as separate ways of structuring government.
We should, however remember that
these sets of rules are combined in specific countries and that
the combination is the basic building
blocks for organizing democratic politics.
The combination of institutions allows us to make several
observations about important aspects of
politics in democratic countries:
‘veto points’
ng the levels and branches of
government
respond to crises)
constitution)
ect
representatives (how many elections—
‘vertical accountability’)

behalf
(‘horizontal accountability’)
portunities that lobbyists/interest groups
can have to influence the process
Executive-Legislative System
Presidential
(separation of powers)
Parliamentary
(fusion of powers)
Geographical
Centralization
of Authority
Federal
(de-centralized
decision-making)
Maximum veto-points,
largest number of decision

makers
(e.g. US, Nigeria, Brazil,
Venezuela)
Few veto points in the central
government, important veto
points at the regional level
(e.g. India, Canada,
Germany)
Unitary
(centralized decision-
making)
Important veto points in the
central government, no
important veto points at the
regional level
(e.g. Peru, Colombia, Chile,
South Korea)
Minimum veto-points,
fewest number of decision
makers
(e.g. Japan, UK, Spain,
Sweden)

Thus far the discussion has focused on the institutions that
structure government. Within each
set/combination of rules, however, the number of actors is also
a critical ingredient:
These are critical issues, as the number of players can add an
additional layer of complexity in the
system. In some democracies, there may coalitions of parties
that control the legislature. In others there
may be a single party that controls the legislative and executive
functions.
The next section discusses how parties interact with governing
institutions in democracies to create
specific kinds of results.
III. Party Systems and Election Rules in Democracies
Central Question: Why does the number of parties differ across
democracies?
The number of parties in a democracy has implications of the
question for the number of choices/options
that voters have, the level/quality of public debate, and the
ability of voters to ensure oversight/
accountability over government

Types of ‘Party Systems’: over time, a democracy may develop
a relatively stable ‘set’ of parties
every election and governs
continuously. e.g., Mexico’s PRI until 2000; Japan’s LDP until
1990s, the ANC in South Africa
since 1994
Two-
compete. e.g., UK, U.S.
votes but not enough for majority,
which requires coalition with a smaller third party e.g.,
Germany, Canada
Multi-
and must govern in coalition
e.g., India, Israel, most of Western Europe
2 Explanations for the number of parties in a democracy
Sociological Explanation
the divisions or ‘social cleavages’ e.g.
divisions between classes (in the
UK and Germany) or between regions/culture/languages (e.g. in
India, Canada, Nigeria)

Institutional Explanation
shapes the party system. ‘Duverger’s
of two parties; other systems lead
to multiple parties in the legislature
Election Rules in Democracies
2 most common systems for legislative elections: ‘First Past the
Post’ (FPTP) or simple majority vs.
Proportional Representation (PR)
The First Past the Post, ‘Simple Majority’ or ‘Majoritarian’
Election Rule (e.g. the US, UK, India,
Nigeria) (also known formally as the ‘single member district
plurality’ election system)
Basic Rules
majority of the votes wins election/seat
district (hence a ‘single member district’)
There is little incentive for voters who do not support one of
the 2 likely winners in a district
(and controls the legislature)
arties
(the two biggest parties dominate)

both of the 2 likely winners (not
third parties)
(not third parties)
Two Scenarios of a “Winning” Candidate under FPTP election
Rules
1. Simple (absolute) Majority winner
2. ‘Plurality’ Winner (not an absolute
majority)
Can
Advantages of the FPTP election rule
parties make efforts to reach out to
many voters, and representation of groups lies within parties
each district, and a single party
controlling the legislature): voters have a clear focus for
accountability

-to-follow system for voters, media, interest groups: low
information/skill burden for voters
Problems of the FPTP election system
The FPTP system has been observed to create several important
problems: it often results in a legislature
or government that does not reflect the choices of a majority of
voters (a core principle of democratic
government)
necessarily the most votes. It may
thus lead to unrepresentative government and legislation (a
violation of the basic goals of
representative democracy).
(and thus depresses voter turnout over
time).
and very highly contested ones will be
“battleground” districts in elections. Parties will spend most of
their efforts trying to win in those
districts, and may make special appeals to voters there in order
to gain their support (even
though those districts have less than half of the total voters).
rs are “wasted”. supporters of small parties
are effectively excluded. They may
have had good policy ideas, or be the representatives of a
marginalized group. They have no
chance of winning a seat or control of the legislature. Their best

option after the election is to
merge with a larger party and so gain some representation in the
legislature.
election system reduces voter’s
choices to the two front runners and their policies. The
candidates of the two ‘viable’ parties
contesting elections at all levels seek to maximize their share of
the vote in many varied districts,
so the leaders of these parties have an incentive to offer broad
programs that appeal to all.
Proportional Representation (PR) Election system (e.g.
Germany, Sweden, Brazil)
Basic Rules of the PR system
received
ass legislation or to form a
government
PR election systems operate with what are called “multi-
member districts”: each district would have
several representatives from each party. The PR system thus
increases the number of legislators who
represent voters in each district to more than a single majority

‘winner’.
Who ‘wins’ a PR election? Answer: Coalitions of parties.
“What if many parties get only a small percentage (say, 1%) of
the total vote”? Answer: Hurdles or
Thresholds. Many countries operating the PR election system
have a ‘minimum required share of the
national vote’ (a hurdle): parties have to get a minimum of 5%
(a random number, it could be set at 2, 8,
or 10%) of the total vote to get their first seat. The effect:
reduction of the number of very small parties in
the legislature. Parties that can only muster less than 5% have a
strong incentive to merge, and to form a
larger vote-winning group.
Advantages of the PR system
voting choices of the public
public
that voters can choose from
chances for accountability
lways the product

of explicit deals between parties, and
directly ties to voters demands
Problems of the PR Election rule
politics: small parties rewarded
ifficulty in assigning credit or
blame, or to evaluate various policies
even factions within parties
litions can dilute policy
options
attention than national issues
Election Rules Compared: ‘First Past the Post’ vs. ‘Proportional
Representation’
FPTP PR
Main focus of system geography/district centered Program/party
centered
# of competitive parties 2 more than 2
Need for coalitions generally low generally high

Impact on small parties negative, unless small parties
have strong regional support
base
positive, encourages their
formation and organization
Voter turnout
tendency to decline or be low tendency to be high
Combining Political Institutions Part 2: We can now integrate
the governing institutions with the
number of parties: the result is a more fine-grained comparison
of politics across democracies
Executive-Legislative System
Presidential
Parliamentary
Election system PR FPTP PR FPTP
Federal
Brazil (most

fragmented, most
veto points)
US, Nigeria
Germany*
India, Canada
Unitary
Peru
France
South Korea
UK (least
fragmented,
fewest veto
points)
Summary

The ‘payoff’ of investigating how institutional “rules of the
game” shape politics:
ions of
politicians
of laws/policies
executive branch politicians
(presidents vs. prime ministers)
e changed and re-arranged. New
democracies especially have the
opportunity to create constitutions that combine different
institutional rules.
options open to voters
elines for the controls that voters
have over their representatives
by understanding how institutional
rules affect the number of players and their degree of
cooperation or competition
INSTITUTIONS and PARTICIPATION: List of Key Terms and
Concepts

tary system
-Presidential system

-presidential system
Horizontal accountability
-party system
majority/single member district plurality)

election system
election system
-list PR election system
-list PR election system
-member districts
voter
POL 190 Globalization and Development
Development Policies
Combinations of economic policies have been used by state
officials to foster growth and economic
change. Most state leaders see an interest in fostering economic

growth, but this is a challenge that may
not be completely within the control of the leaders of
developing countries. In addition, the policy
measures that they take may not actually lead to the desired
outcome.
Development policy has been a central element in addressing
the gap (in wealth, income, industry,
technology, health/education, life expectancy, etc) between
states.
There are two broad approaches: the market/neoliberal/laissez
faire, and the state-led/interventionist
approaches. Note the way that these ‘schools of thought’
provide different explanations for the problems
facing developing countries and opposed strategies:
Policy Type Market/Neo-liberal
development policy
State-led/Interventionist
development policy
Does Economic policy matter? Yes
Yes
What causes development? Free markets Strong states/high-
quality state
interventions
What causes
underdevelopment?

Too much state involvement Weak or poor/low-quality state
intervention
Main policy recommendation Reduce the state’s economic role
Build the state’s economic
capabilities
Cases that confirm the
recommended policy approach
UK, US South Korea, Singapore, Japan
Test case: Why has China been
successful?
After 1979, opening to the market
has led to economic success
After 1979, strong state remains
active in managing China’s
economy
Test Case: Why has sub-
Saharan African been
unsuccessful?
Too much state intervention,
corruption
Weak states, low capacity for
decision making or provision
good public policy

Economic policy has shifted away from the state-led approach
towards the market approach since the
1970s. Developing countries have made this shift in economic
policy through two processes:
bal corporations and
international organizations
political reasons
Over the last 40 years, economic policy and differences in
economic growth/wealth have also been
profoundly shaped by a larger process: ‘globalization’.
‘Globalization’: Basic Features
barriers to investment and speculation.
Firms became globally mobile/diversified
organize production around global
supply and manufacturing chains
environment, labor, product standards,
financial risk, etc
How? Historical Process of Contemporary Globalization: 1970s-
2000s

The modern global economy is a product of deliberate state
policy actions (and is not a ‘natural’ or
inevitable outcome of market forces)
POL 190 Globalization and Development 2
1970s: states have largely
abandoned efforts to control the value of currencies which are
now left up to global investors
transactions: 1970s-2000s: global financial
flows become greater than global trade flows by early 1980s
have been based on a global
supply of labor and differences in regulations: lower wages and
lower regulations have attracted
higher levels of investment and industry
export/import of goods), and
communication costs (impact on services) have accelerated
global trade. These reductions have
been sped up by state investment in infrastructure across the
globe
alternative economic models, and towards the
adoption of relatively uniform economic policies in developed
and developing countries after 1980s.
Outcome: globalization (should) lead to Convergence

Impact of Globalization
-industrialization: global shift in
industrial process. From high cost/wage
older industrialized regions to low-cost, low regulation regions
of the world
use/demand
Problems created by globalization
al economic breakdown
terrorism, human error.
corporations
between workers
of lower wages.
Basic Questions for the Future of Globalization

o Can the negative consequences by avoided or corrected?
o Is there a role for the state/politics? Does globalization
weaken/erode democracy?
o Is globalization a ‘race to the bottom’ (wages, standards etc
undermined by economic integration
with China, while global firms maximize profits)?
o Will social policies (e.g. those in welfare states) become
obsolete?
o Are international economic organizations the way to ‘govern’
globalization, or will they always be
just promoters of globalization?
o Is globalization sustainable? What will be the environmental
and resource cost of expanded
global production and consumption?
5 EXAMPLE CASES:
The three largest ‘emerging markets’ in the era of globalization
(China, India, Brazil) have been important
engines driving the expansion of production, and have been the
largest targets of global investment. Has
this experience been the result of similar/common policies?
What might slow the further expansion of
these economies? Has globalization led to problems/challenges
in those countries?
China
Economy and Economic Policy setting pre-1978

-1978): Heavy industry, mixed
collective and small scale agriculture;
central planning; experimental phases in development
Globalization era: post 1978
onomic zones’: experimental regions opened to
global trade
Results
25 years), massive foreign
investment, rising role in global
manufacturing, trade, R&D; Capital surplus
net
migration
external markets

growth
workforce
India
Basic Economic Policy: pre 1991
-rural, and regional differences
tradition: ‘permit raj’, ISI
policies
Globalization and India after 1991
1991
role in global manufacturing, and
services
-scale firms: Infosys, Arcelor/Mittal,
Tata
Results
-tech vs. traditional economy
-owned assets

f domestic market
Brazil
Political Economy in Brazil pre 1990
-led industrialization (ISI policies)
Brazil and Globalization since 1990
process complicates process
Impact/Results:

exports
Oil/Mineral Exporters: Globalization has expanded the demand
of raw materials and energy sources.
Has this had a positive or negative impact of this the
producing/exporting countries? What have been the
similarities between raw material/energy exporters?
Nigeria
Economic Policy setting
government. Agricultural exporter in
1960, early oil development.
Nigeria becomes net food importer. Oil
revenue contributes to corruption
-80s: neoliberal policies adopted. Little
positive impact
Impact of Globalization, rising demand for oil
revenue, exchange rate
services

-oil sectors of the economy
Russia
Economic Policy since 1991
1990s: transition to a capitalist economy (elimination of the
communist economic system)
Immediate result: economic decline, collapse
of industry
state autonomy
rising internal debt
Economic crisis of 1997: high debt; reduced
growth/investment
Oil economy since 2001
growth, investment
rate
-centralization of
economic power

POL 190 Political Economy
Political Economy: Interaction between economy/economic
exchanges and politics/state
Basic Economic Policies
States have a basic ‘repertoire’ of policies that can be used to
shape the economic environment
law and order, property rights
economy
and firms
ntrols on production, consumption,
business/economic activities
businesses, state-owned enterprises
for exporters
Positive and Negative Outcomes of Basic Economic Policies

Policy Positive economic impact (benefit) Negative economic
impact (cost)
infrastructure
rty
rules
development
Tax Policy
(Who? How?
What level/rate?)
redistribution
production, investment
stabilize banks

leads to debt, unstable finances
Spending
(What/who? What
level/rate?)
economy; reduce unemployment
Can lead to corruption
stimulate consumption

speculation, erode
confidence
to job loss, high prices
Increases corruption, bribery
Direct
intervention
crises

Risk of government
mismanagement
for firms to rely on bailouts
Trade policy
-standard goods
ads to higher prices
POL 190 Political Economy 2
Implications:
outcomes

(e.g. growth, investment,
employment, efficiency, stability)
positive or negative, only trade-offs
Classifying Economic policy ‘packages’
Economic policy varies with the extent/scale of state
intervention in the economy
-market (‘Laissez-faire’ or liberal) states (e.g. US)
India, China since the 1980s)
the 1980s, North Korea)
Strengths and weaknesses of 4 economic policy arrangements
(increasing levels of state
intervention)
Policy type Strengths/advantages Problems/disadvantages
Liberal free market/
laissez faire
(minimal state
involvement in the
economy)

equality, poverty
consumers
Welfare States
(expansive social
policies to reduce
inequality, expand
market, protect
consumers)
innovation, high productivity
inequality

-monopoly policy
enhances competition
bust
-cost production
for high deficits, debt
Developmental
states (‘strategic’
state support for
specific sectors)
competitive sectors or firms
es
innovation

sectors
resources/subsidies
regions/sectors
, inefficiency
Communism (total
state ownership/no
markets or private
property)
poverty reduction,
industrialization
innovations
n of basic
services
innovation

corruption
-Demand uncoordinated:
overproduction, underproduction
POL 190 Political Economy 3
4 EXAMPLE CASES
Key questions:
US: ‘free market’ model
little in the economy historically (in
19th century: regulation, subsidies, trade protectionism).
-era increases in regulations on businesses,
commodities, in the workplace
expanded; programs such as Social
Security and Medicare have remained. ‘Keynesian policy’ to
manage macro-economy: manage
fiscal policy (use tax, spending policies to stimulate demand,

consumption, production).
Regulation for banks
on of free trade and globalization
(although not always consistent when
U.S. interests threatened)
policies: government intervention
is minimal at the level of state ownership, but extensive at the
macro-economic level (tax policy,
interest rates). Since 1970s, ‘monetarist policy’ to manage
macro-economy: use tax cuts, low
interest rates, allow markets to set currency values (to stimulate
investment, production, supply)
Germany: ‘Welfare state’ model
extensive social spending programs to
eliminate poverty and raise standard of living
◦ Combines highly productive market economy and generous
welfare state
◦ Close relationships between private and public sectors. Unions
and businesses
cooperate to plan long term business strategies
(‘codetermination’)
fast export growth in 2000s. Single
Euro-currency places limits on government spending

continues. Globalization has raised
questions about viability — caused high unemployment and
problems financing social welfare
benefits.
Japan: ‘Developmental state’ model: success case
targeted/strategic export-led policy through
regulation, large conglomerates
e” — Japan
became world’s second largest
economy after 1950-80s
led to less government control,
complicated response, very slow recovery
supporting, promoting particular
industries/sectors. Low overall social spending by government
(no German-style welfare state):
depended on lifetime employment system within corporations
Brazil: ‘Developmental state’ model: unsuccessful case
example of evolution of developmental state policies
-80s) used ‘import substitution
industrialization’ policy to industrialize.
Initial success in stimulating industry and attracting investment
uption, inefficient industries,

high debts to finance program
-liberal’ economic model: Policies:
deregulation, privatization, structural
adjustment, free trade, reduction in spending (on social
policies)
re (IMF, World Bank), Brazil
shifted to more neoliberal policies (SAPs,
free trade, cut spending, etc), abandoned state-led industry
policy
-income country BUT
also high inequality and poverty, high
dependence on foreign investment, foreign export markets
POL 190 Introduction to Comparative Politics
Department of Political Science
University of Michigan-Flint
Fall 2015
FINAL ESSAY EXAM
General Instructions:
PART A, and one from
PART B

-spaced; Use 12 point fonts;
Use 1-inch margins
-5 double spaced pages
are equally important. Answer
each essay question in separate essays: do not combine your
responses into one essay
Drogus/Orvis, articles, notes. DO NOT use
material from any other source: use ONLY the material
assigned/required for this course.
with the assigned readings. Use
the system of citation with which you are most familiar
:
do not use folders, etc.
Science Office, 220 French Hall
PART A: Do ONE Question from this Section
1. Economic Policy Systems: States have developed systems of
basic economic policies like taxes,

spending, and regulations. a) Compare and contrast the
economic policies of welfare states (Germany)
and a liberal market economy (Brazil) and identify their main
differences. b) What are the basic features
of health and social policies in these countries? c) What are the
pros and cons of the ‘welfare state’ vs.
the ‘developmental state’ approaches to economic policy?
2. Globalization and development: Globalization has
transformed economic and political relationships
in states over the last 40 years. a) Describe and explain the main
features of globalization and the main
consequences (both positive and negative) of this process. b)
Compare China and India and identify how
they have had different experiences with globalization. c) What
policies have led to success in achieving
growth and development? What obstacles stand in the way of
each of these countries?
PART B: Do ONE Question from this Section
3. Political Institutions: Institutions have important effects on
politics in democracies. Using a
comparison of the UK and Brazil, discuss the impact of the
parliamentary and presidential system on
politics. a) What are the main differences in the way that these
institutions function in practice? b) What

factors affect the power of the executives (prime ministers and
presidents), and how are elected officials
held accountable and in each country? c) How do differences in
the number of veto points affect how
policy is made?
4. Elections and Parties: You have been asked to assist in
designing a constitution for a new
democracy in a poor developing country. There has been little
experience of democracy, but a number of
political movements and parties have emerged and support the
creation of a viable democracy. There is,
however, a history of violent political competition between
groups across the country. Provide a
justification for why this country should adopt either a ‘single
member district/simple majority’ or a
‘proportional representation’ election system. a) Describe each
system, and explain the impact on
politics, and pros and cons of each option, given the particular
conditions in the country. b) Use examples
from specific countries that use these election systems (e.g. UK
and Brazil) to support your arguments.
PART C: OPTIONAL EXTRA Question: Complete ONE of the
optional questions below (in addition to
the two questions for Part A and B). This optional essay is
worth 15%. Your grade for this essay will be

used to replace a lower grade from the Midterm exam. The
length for this essay should be the same as
for the essays in Part A and B (4-5 pages).
5. Federalism: What are the main similarities and differences in
the operation of federalism in India,
Russia and Brazil? What are the pros and cons of introducing a
federal or decentralized administration
for a newly democratic developing country? What are the most
important lessons that newly democratic
countries could learn from the Indian, Russian and Brazilian
cases about the organization of federalism?
6. Institutions in Africa: Use the article by Prempeh (2008) to
discuss the problems of democratic
institutions and participation in Africa. What are the obstacles
to maintaining the separation of powers
and checks and balances in the presidential system? What is the
role of the legislature, the judiciary and
political parties in these new democracies? What are the most
important lessons that we can learn about
the role of institutions in new democracies from this article?

LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx

LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx

Similar to LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx (19)

More from SHIVA101531

More from SHIVA101531 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

LedgerLEDGERACCOUNTACC. NO. 1100BalanceDateItemRefDebitCreditDebit.docx