PUAF 737 – Strategies of Equality (Spring 2006)

Instructor: Chris Foreman

Office Location: 4133 Van Munching Hall

Office Telephone: (301) 405-0442

Office E-Mail: cforeman@umd.edu and zezfor@aol.com

Office Hours: by appointment

PUAF 737 (previously numbered PUAF 698Y) begins with two premises. First, the political structure, political culture, economy, and history of the United States have unavoidably generated, and continue to sustain, significant group inequality. Second, disadvantaged segments of society have, with irregular success, sought to enhance their collective prospects, and this accumulated experience has something of value to teach persons who want to shape the future of American social policy. This course therefore addresses the political and institutional opportunities and constraints that confront such efforts in elections, legislation, administration, litigation, protest, and the Constitution. Although discussion regularly and necessarily addresses policy outputs and outcomes, the course concentrates mainly on the political strategies and tactics surrounding them. The primary course reading addresses strategic and tactical choices, issue framing, social movements, the rise of affirmative action, approaches to poverty concentration and urban school reform, and homosexual rights. Students may address additional topics in class discussion and in their written work.

Books for Purchase

Randy Shaw, The Activist’s Handbook: A Primer. (University of California Press, 2001).

Francis Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward, Poor People’s Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail. (Vintage Books, 1977).

Owen Fiss, A Way Out: America’s Ghetto’s and the Legacy of Racism. (Princeton University Press, 2003).

Jonathan Rauch, Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America. (Times Books, 2004).

Jane J. Mansbridge, Why We Lost the ERA. (University of Chicago, 1986).

John David Skrentny, The Minority Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2002).

George Lakoff, Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004).

Jeffrey R. Henig, Richard C. Hula, Marion Orr, and Desiree S. Pedescleaux, The Color of School Reform: Race, Politics, and the Challenge of Urban Education. (Pronceton University Press, 1999).

Course Requirements and Grading

Final grades include two components: class discussion and a series of three issue memoranda. Each component is worth 50 percent of the course grade. There is no final examination.

Class Discussion - This course assumes that students make a serious effort to complete each week’s assigned reading before the class to which it pertains. This is essential to assure sustained and fruitful discussion. Rarely will discussion adhere solely to the assigned reading, however. There will be occasional class handouts and e-mail directing students to web sites or bearing timely attachments. Each week one or two students -- the number depends on the course enrollment -- will serve as discussion leaders, responsible for orally summarizing the main points in the reading and for identifying the central challenges, tensions, and questions raised therein.

Issue Memoranda – Along with class participation students will be graded on a series of three issue memoranda, to be submitted at fixed intervals during the semester. Each memo should be a 1,500 to 2,000-word double spaced exposition written as if for a professional colleague or superior who needs the information or analysis. Each memorandum should succinctly address the selected topic and be written with clarity and care. Submit all memos as both hard copy (in your red folder) and as Microsoft Word attachments addressed to the instructor.

As in PUAF 620 all of each student’s memoranda should deal with one segment of society or a single well-defined problem or controversy. But each memorandum should be self-contained, permitting a reader to digest it separately from all other sources. Please submit each in the assigned sequence and on the scheduled dates indicated below.

If possible select an issue that already interests you and about which you already have some knowledge. You must obviously research the issue carefully but your memoranda should not use footnotes or a formal bibliography. Where appropriate, cite sources in parentheses. List them at the end of the memo on a page headed “References.” Use the Internet -- the address of the course web site will be announced in class – but do not lift whole chunks of a memorandum from web sites. The writing and analysis must be your own.

Memorandum Topics -- Students may roam far beyond the readings for memo topics. With the instructor’s approval, political advocacy and policymaking for any arguably disadvantaged segment of American society is fair game for a series of memos. You may therefore tackle such topics as: Latinos; Native Americans; people with AIDS ; the incarcerated population; low-income Americans (or some subset thereof); immigrants; the uninsured; etc. In short, you have lots of freedom to choose but all memos in a series must link together. Memos may focus on issues in the recent past -- how recent is subject to negotiation with the instructor – where there is little or no current activity.

Memo Revisions – By agreement with the instructor, students may revise and re-submit one of their three memos. The maximum grade increase allowable in such cases will be two levels (e.g. from B- to B+).

You must submit four items during the semester. Keep them collected in your folder and turn in the entire folder each time as each item comes due. The four items include the following:

Statement of Issue Selection -- Submit a brief typed statement (one-page maximum) indicating the segment of society and issue that you will examine in your memo series. The instructor must be able to judge from this statement whether the segment and problem chosen conform to course requirements and are researchable during the semester. Due: February 15.

Memorandum #1: Political Analysis -- The first memo should offer a concise but reasonably comprehensive portrait of the advocacy landscape for the particular issue. What interest groups/political organizations, policy research organizations, and policy entrepreneurs are most significant in defining, advancing, and defending the fortunes of your selected segment of society? Describe their goals and their approaches to pursuing them. Discuss their apparent strengths, weaknesses, resources, structures and strategies. If groups or advocates collaborate with one another, try to gauge the nature and extent of the collaboration. To the extent that disharmony exists among advocates, what are its sources and apparent consequences for the overall advocacy effort? To the extent that partisan differences appear relevant you may wish to highlight and comment on them. As you write this memo please avoid tipping your hand regarding your personal opinion or political stance. This ought to be a clear and matter-of-fact memorandum addressed to an interested citizen or policymaker who needs to grasp the relevant political milieu. You should not employ scholarly citations (i.e. footnotes or endnotes) but you must attach a list of sources (i.e. books, articles, web sites, interviews, etc.) at the end of the memo, beginning on a page headed “References.” Due: March 8.

Memorandum #2: Institutional Analysis – The second memorandum should discuss how a major authoritative institution of the American national government, or any state government, has handled the issue. For example, this memo may focus on the United States Congress, the federal judiciary, or a federal administrative agency (or any of their state-level equivalents). Explain how some sphere of activity that raises concerns of equal treatment or equal outcomes has been addressed by the institution. “Spheres of activity” in the sense intended here are impossible to specify comprehensively. Important examples would include the following: political participation or representation; housing; employment; education; recreation; consumption; transportation; criminal justice; and regulation. This memo should address how the institution has addressed the issue and make some effort to explain (or to at least speculate intelligently regarding) why the institution has performed as it has. It may be useful to think of the memo as an answer to the following question: what difference does it make for the issue that this institution is involved? Due: April 5

Memorandum #3: Policy Outcomes and Recommendations – Present and defend a course of action for the issue. What is the preferred outcome or option? Why? What would have to happen to make this choice a reality? Due: May 10

Class Schedule

Week 1 – The Inequality Challenge in the United States (January 25)

Week 2 – Issue Framing (February 1)

Reading: Lakoff, entire.

Week 3 – Strategic Overview (I) (February 8)

Reading: Shaw, chapters 1-4

Week 4 – Strategic Overview (II) (February 15) – Due: statement of issue selection

Reading: Shaw, chapters 5-9; Piven and Cloward, chapter 1.

Week 5 – Winning African American Civil Rights (February 22)

Reading: Piven and Cloward, chapter 4; Plessy v. Ferguson (1896); Brown v. Board of Education (1954); Brown v. Board of Education (1955). (The court cases will be sent to all students.)

Week 6 – Organizing the Poor (March 1)

Reading: Piven and Cloward, chapter 5; Steven Malanga, “How the ‘Living Wage’ Sneaks Socialism into Cities,” City Journal (Winter 2003): 60-68; Sol Stern, “ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities,” City Journal (Spring 2003): 48-59. (The Malanga and Stern articles will be sent to all students.)

Week 7 – Dispersing the Poor (March 8) – Due: memo #1

Reading: Fiss, entire.

Week 8 – Reforming Urban Schools (I) -- (March 15)

Reading: Henig, et. al., chapters 1-4.

MARCH 22 – NO CLASS – SPRING BREAK

Week 9 – Reforming Urban Schools (II) -- (March 29)

Reading: Henig, et. al., chapters 5-8.

Week 10 – Creating Minority Rights (I) -- (April 5) – Due: memo #2

Reading: Skrentny, chapters 1-6.

Week 11 – Creating Minority Rights (II) -- (April 12)

Reading: Skrentny, chapters 5-8.

Week 12 – Why the ERA Lost -- (April 19)

Reading: Mansbridge, entire.

Week 13 – The Gay Marriage Debate -- (April 26)

Reading: Rauch, entire.

Week 14 – Conservative Approaches to Inequality -- (May 3)

Reading: to be assigned.

Week 15 – Concluding Discussion (May 10) – Due: memo #3

No assigned reading: Discussion of Student Memo Topics