1,105 research outputs found
Maddison W. Merrill Oral History Interview
No full textInterview of Madison W. Merrill by Theron Luke about the history of Mount Timpanogo
Recommended from our members
Zero-Sum Madison
No full textHas the fabric of American constitutional law been permanently distorted by the Framers\u27 preoccupation with protecting private property against redistribution? Jennifer Nedelsky thinks so. In this provocative study of how the idea of property shaped the political thought of the Framers and the institutions they designed, she argues that James Madison\u27s constitutional philosophy was driven by fear that a future propertyless majority would seek to expropriate the holdings of a minority. To combat this danger, Madison sought to create a structure of government that would ensure the dominance of the propertied elite. Madison\u27s obsessive fear of redistribution spread to the newly created federal judiciary, which elevated private property to the status of a legal boundary limiting the political power of majorities. Although judicial protection of property has waned in recent decades, Nedelsky believes that Madison\u27s legacy continues to limit our ability to construct a more egalitarian and participatory constitutional order
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and James Madison. Two Models of Citizenship in the Tradition of Popular Sovereignty
No full textResearch objective:
The aim of the article is to analyse the thought of J.J. Rousseau and J. Madison (counted among the most prominent theorists of popular or republican government in the Eighteenth century), with a special emphasis on the issue of citizenry.
The research problem and methods:
The author focuses on the relationship between the accounts of the people and the associated concepts of citizenship. He wonders whether they can provide us with any coherent vision of the citizens’ role in government or – rather – reveal serious discrepancies within a broader doctrinal tradition. To that purpose the author refers to main works of these authors, supporting his conclusions by critical references to secondary sources, dealing especially with their views on popular sovereignty.
The process of argumentation:
The article begins with the analysis of Rousseau’s thought, turning then to that of Madison. It finishes with a sort of summary, which gives an opportunity to emphasise the main similarities and – above all – differences between their arguments.
Research results:
The analysis of the both authors’ thought indicates that there were at least two different views on citizenship within the Eighteenth century tradition of popular sovereignty. It points out that Rousseau viewed the common citizenry in a very active role of a sovereign, insisting on frequent assemblies of the people as a necessary means of identifying the general will. In that respect, Madison kept warning against a more direct or locally-oriented citizens’ activity, looking for such electoral and constitutional devices of majority rule that would more appropriately serve the public interest, securing the rights of minorities as well.
Conclusions, innovations, recommendations:
The far-reaching conclusion is that the two depicted models of citizenship reveal in fact considerably broad possibilities of defining popular sovereignty and – more specifically – the constitutional function of civic activity. The latter will be ultimately determined by assumptions of the public sphere and evaluations of the moral and political capacities of the very citizens.Cel naukowy:
Celem artykułu jest analiza myśli Jean-Jacques’a Rousseau i Jamesa Madisona (zaliczanych do najbardziej znaczących teoretyków powszechnego czy też republikańskiego ustroju w XVIII wieku), ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem tematu obywatelstwa.
Problem i metody badawcze:
Autor skupia się na powiązaniach między ujęciami ludu i wynikającymi z nich koncepcjami obywatelstwa. Zastanawia się czy składają się one na spójną wizję roli ustrojowej obywateli czy też – przeciwnie – ukazują one poważne rozbieżności w obrębie szerszej tradycji doktrynalnej. W tym celu sięga autor do najważniejszych prac tych pisarzy, wspierając swe wnioski krytycznymi odniesieniami do literatury sekundarnej, dotyczącej zwłaszcza ich poglądów na temat suwerenności ludu.
Proces wywodu:
Artykuł rozpoczyna się on analizy myśli Rousseau, przechodząc następnie do myśli Madisona. Jest on zakończony rodzajem podsumowania, które daję okazję do uchwycenia zasadniczych powiązań i – przede wszystkim – różnic między ich argumentami.
Wyniki analizy naukowej:
Analiza myśli obydwu autorów wykazuje, że w obrębie osiemnastowiecznej tradycji doktryny suwerenności ludu. Wykazuje ona, że Rousseau postrzegał zwykłych obywateli w kategoriach bardzo czynnego zwierzchnictwa, domagając się częstych zgromadzeń ludu, uznanych za konieczne narzędzia ujawniania woli powszechnej. W tym względzie Madison ostrzegał stanowczo przed bardziej bezpośrednią czy zorientowaną lokalnie aktywnością obywatelską, poszukując takich mechanizmów wyborczych i ustrojowych tzw. rządów większościowych, które bardziej służyłyby interesowi publicznemu, zabezpieczając jednocześnie prawa mniejszości.
Wnioski, innowacje, rekomendcje:
Dalej idącym wnioskiem jest ten mianowicie, że dwa opisane modele obywatelstwa odsłaniają w istocie stosunkowo szerokie możliwości definiowania suwerenności ludu i – ściślej biorąc – roli ustrojowej aktywności obywatelskiej. Ta ostatnia będzie zależeć ostatecznie od założeń dotyczących dziedziny publicznej oraz oceny możliwości moralnych i politycznych samych obywateli
Zero-Sum Madison
Get PDFThe ultimate message of Nedelsky's book is that private property is a social institution, collectively defined and collectively enforced. Property is of course a social institution, not a natural right. But there is no inherent contradiction, as Nedelsky seems to believe there is, between the idea that property is a social institution and the idea that the law - another social institution - should protect reliance interests associated with specific property rights. Property is a social institution in the sense that it emerges from customary forms of interaction among people with respect to specific material resources, and then is defined and protected against private interference by state law. The constitutional protection of property is also a social institution, but it involves a different source of law (the federal Constitution rather than state law), different institutional actors (ultimately the federal courts), and different objectives (protecting specific entitlements against public rather than private interference). Thus, the fact that both processes are "social" does not mean that they collapse into a single undifferentiated mass. Moreover, neither the social origins of property as an institution, nor the social nature of the constitutional protections we recognize, tells us much about what collective measures may be adopted (at either the state or the federal level) to reallocate relative shares of fungible wealth. We are fortunate that the Founders of our nation, most prominently James Madison, understood these distinctions. What is puzzling is that so many contemporary American academics would like to obscure them
\u3ci\u3eMarbury v. Madison\u3c/i\u3e as the First Great Administrative Law Decision
Get PDFMarbury v. Madison is our foremost symbol of judicial power. Not only is the decision regarded as the root of judicial authority to strike down statutes as violating the Constitution; it is also taken to mean that the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the Constitution. In other words, Marbury has come to stand for the proposition that courts should enforce their own understanding of the meaning of the Constitution, without deferring or even paying much attention to the views of the other branches.
I will not in this essay engage in yet another analysis of Marbury\u27s justification for judicial review, nor will I debate the virtues and vices of the aggressive judicial review for which the decision has come to stand – at least not directly. Instead, I will approach Marbury from a different angle. When the decision was handed down, and for many decades afterwards, Marbury was primarily regarded as being about judicial review of executive action, not legislative action. That is, Marbury was considered to be an administrative law decision. This essay asks what we can learn by considering Marbury from the perspective of the history of administrative law.
One potential payoff from considering Marbury in this light concerns our understanding of the role of the courts in preserving the rule of law. One can readily imagine a modern democratic state in which there is strong respect for the rule of law and yet no judicial review of legislative action. It is much more difficult to imagine a democratic state that adheres to the rule of law but makes no provision for review of executive action by an independent judiciary. Marbury v. Madison, as it happens, is the first important statement by the U.S. Supreme Court about how courts should respond to lawless executive action. As such, the decision is worthy of study for what it tells us about the promise and pitfalls of such an undertaking. It is also worth considering how Marbury\u27s solutions to the problem of lawless executive action have fared over time – what has worked, what has been discarded, and what has been importantly modified in response to accumulated experience.
The second payoff from considering Marbury as an administrative law decision is that it may teach us something about missed opportunities in the realm of judicial review of legislative action. There are, of course, important differences between judicial review of executive action and judicial review of legislative action. Yet in one critical sense, the two practices raise the same dilemma: how do we prevent courts, in the guise of enforcing their interpretation of the law, from usurping the rightful functions of the elected branches of government? That is, how do we prevent the rule of law from becoming the rule of the judges? By considering Marbury as a whole – the administrative law decision as well as the constitutional law decision – perhaps we can see this great symbol of American public law in a less imperial light: as a counsel of judicial strength through restraint, rather than what it has all too often become – a justification for judicial willfulness
Religion and church-state relations in the political and social thought of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison
No full textTekst dotyczy myśli społeczno-politycznej dwóch Ojców Założycieli, którzy wnieśli największy wkład w debatę nad kształtem relacji państwo-Kościół w USA. Oprócz analizy stosunku T. Jeffersona i J. Madisona do roli religii w nowej republice, esej zawiera próbę odtworzenia warunków i historycznych wydarzeń, które wpłynęły na ukształtowanie ich poglądów dotyczących wolności religijnej oraz rozdziału państwa od Kościoła. Autorka wychodzi z założenia, że aby lepiej zrozumieć intencje Ojców Założycieli dotyczące miejsca religii w nowo tworzącym się państwie, warto przeanalizować ich osobisty stosunek do spraw wiary. Wywarł on bowiem znaczący wpływ zarówno na treść Deklaracji niepodległości, jak i na kształt konstytucji, która w założeniu miała być dokumentem świeckim (a secular document).This is an analysis of the intentions of the Founding Fathers concerning the place of religion in the newly-created state. The author investigates this topic through the prism of Founding Fathers’ personal attitudes toward religion. The essay concentrates mainly on the political and social thought of T. Jefferson and J. Madison and evaluates their influence on constitutional solutions concerning religion and separation of church and state
A study of work autonomy and job satisfication of social workers in Metropolotan Atlanta, 1995
No full textThe purpose of this study was to analyze, describe and explain the relationship between work autonomy and job satisfaction of social workers. The study analyzed facets of work autonomy and job satisfaction in order to explain the contributions of the independent variables to variation in the dependent variables and to determine which of these facets were predictors of work autonomy and job satisfaction for social workers. Survey research was employed in a metropolitan area involving a randomly selected sample of 371 social worker respondents compiled from lists of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW) and Clark Atlanta University School of Social Work. The independent variables of the study were gender, ethnicity, education, annual income and age group. The questionnaire employed two instruments. Breaugh's Work Autonomy (BWA) Scale measured work autonomy and the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) measured job satisfaction. The work autonomy facets of methods, scheduling, and criteria; and the job satisfaction facets of work, pay, coworkers, promotions and supervision were codifed, measured and analyzed. The findings of the study indicated a statistically significant relationship between the work autonomy and job satisfaction of social workers: there was a statistically significant relationship between work autonomy, job satisfaction and the annual income of social workers; the methods facet was a predictor of work autonomy; the supervision facet was a predictor of job satisfaction; and, of the 371 social worker respondents, 78.9% experienced some work autonomy and 51.6% experienced some job satisfaction in their jobs
Author Co-Citation Analysis (ACA): a powerful tool for representing implicit knowledge of scholar knowledge workers
Get PDFIn the last decade, knowledge has emerged as one of the most important and valuable organizational assets. Gradually this importance caused to emergence of new discipline entitled ―knowledge management‖. However one of the major challenges of knowledge management is conversion implicit or tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge. Thus Making knowledge visible so that it can be better accessed, discussed, valued or generally managed is a long-standing objective in knowledge management. Accordingly in this paper author co- citation analysis (ACA) will be proposed as an efficient technique of knowledge visualization in academia (Scholar knowledge workers)
Pedagogical methodologies in teaching critical thinking skills to basic police recruits at Madison Area Technical College
Get PDFPlan BPolice officers working in the year 2000 have a much different job than those working a few short years ago. In the 1960s, despite the threat of faster response times and more officers on the street, crime rates continued to rise. To address this, police agencies developed community relations units to improve their image (Gaines, 1991). The focus of the police, as "crook catchers" and responding when called, was gradually transferred into preventing crime. This was the beginning of Community Policing. Community Policing requires officers to be pro-active in their function, rather than the time honored re-active. To be successful, officers must be able to solve problems using higher level thinking than was traditionally required. This higher level of problem solving necessitates that officers possess critical thinking ability. The research hypotheses of this study was that a majority of the instructional methodology used during the Madison Area Technical College Law Enforcement Basic Recruit Academy does not encourage critical thinking and problem solving skills in its graduates. The subjects for this study were adults accepted into the 69th Basic Police Recruit Academy of the Madison Area Technical College (MATC). The instrument chosen to test the level of critical thinking skills for this study was the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST). The instrument, as a pre-test, was presented to the subjects during their first week of training. A consent form along with a short demographic questionnaire accompanied the instrument. A post-test was presented to the subjects during their last week of training. Accompanying the post-test was a short questionnaire asking the respondents to identify the methods of instruction used during the training period and to estimate the percentage of time each of the methods were used. A similar survey was sent to instructors who presented material during the training, asking that they identify topics covered, time allowed for each topic, and methodologies used. The lecture method of teaching was by far the most often used methodology during the 69th Class of MATC’s Basic Recruit Academy. To learn critical thinking skills, trainees are best taught using interactive methodologies. Pre and post-test data collected indicated that the graduates of the 69th Class of MATC’s Basic Recruit Academy did not gain in the area of critical thinking skills
- …
