After reading the works listed above write an interpretive essay of 8-10 pages on the following topic: The Madisonian model of government is hailed as a major contribution to political theory and to governing a large and diverse polity. As perhaps the first to advocate a pluralist system, James Madison and other Founders, created a constitutional system that attempted to institutionalize competing interests throughout the political system and thus create a system that not even a dictator could run affectively. The system they created reflected A. Hamilton's admonition that "It is better not to pass any laws at all than to pass one bad one." Suggestions for the essay: 1) Identify the components of the American political system that reflect the intentions of the Framers and evaluate how well they reflect the pluralist model of government. 2) Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the American political system. In doing so, consider the following questions: a) should a majority be able to pass quickly any piece of legislation it wants? Or should the process be more deliberate and take into consideration groups not part of the contemporary majority? b) Should policies be national in scope? Or should they reflect the conditions of the states? c) If you want quick policies that reflect the wishes of the majority, what changes would you make in the electoral and governmental systems? 3) Some argue that the American political system and the policymaking process, in fact, are more representative of the elite model of government. For example, Lindblom and Woodhouse in their seminal The Policymaking Process argue that the process reflects " the pernicious effects [of] political inequality" on the policy making process and, "especially the possibility that policy ideas are systematically misshaped by the pro-business cultures of market-oriented democracies." They further argue that, "The ability of every contemporary democracy to probe social problems and policy options is systematically crippled, undermining both the extent of democracy and the degree of intelligence brought to bear in policy making." Do you agree? What argument can you make to challenge their premises? Explain PS: try not to use the ideological "talking points" of any side. Try to think "out of the box." Creativity and originally will be greatly appreciated. .

1. After reading the works listed above write an interpretive essay
of 8-10 pages on the following topic:
The Madisonian model of government is hailed as a major
contribution to political theory and to governing a large and
diverse polity. As perhaps the first to advocate a pluralist
system, James Madison and other Founders, created a
constitutional system that attempted to institutionalize
competing interests throughout the political system and thus
create a system that not even a dictator could run affectively.
The system they created reflected A. Hamilton's admonition that
"It is better not to pass any laws at all than to pass one bad
one."
Suggestions for the essay:
1) Identify the components of the American political system
that reflect the intentions of the Framers and evaluate how well
they reflect the
pluralist model
of government.
2) Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the American
political system. In doing so, consider the following questions:
a) should a majority be able to pass quickly any piece of
legislation it wants? Or should the process be more deliberate
and take into consideration groups not part of the contemporary
majority? b) Should policies be national in scope? Or should
they reflect the conditions of the states? c) If you want quick
policies that reflect the wishes of the majority, what changes
would you make in the electoral and governmental systems?
3) Some argue that the American political system and the
policymaking process, in fact, are more representative of the
elite model
of government. For example, Lindblom and Woodhouse in their
seminal The Policymaking Process argue that the process
reflects "
the pernicious effects

2. [of]
political inequality"
on the policy making process and,
"especially the possibility that policy ideas are systematically
misshaped by the pro-business cultures of market-oriented
democracies."
They further argue that,
"The ability of every contemporary democracy to probe social
problems and policy options is systematically crippled,
undermining both the extent of democracy and the degree of
intelligence brought to bear in policy making."
Do you agree? What argument can you make to challenge their
premises?
Explain
PS: try not to use the ideological "talking points" of any side.
Try to think "out of the box." Creativity and originally will be
greatly appreciated.