Author: The American Partnership

by

Why the Philadelphia Eagles Need a Little Federalism

by J. Wesley Leckrone

Assistant Professor, Political Science

Widener University

The end of the Andy Reid Era in Philadelphia cannot come soon enough. Perhaps the current sad state of the Eagles could have been avoided if Jeffrey Lurie would have heeded the philosophy of the Founders that designed the American governmental system.

As Jeff McLane noted in yesterday’s Philadelphia Inquirer:

In 1999, when Lurie last looked for a head coach, he had director of football operations Tom Modrak and team president Joe Banner to aid him. The new coach would have to defer to Modrak in personnel matters and Banner when it came to contracts and the salary cap.

Now most of the power is consolidated in Andy Reid’s hands and the responsibility for the decline of the franchise rests in a pattern of ill conceived decisions that he has made over the last several years. Reid made the decision to bring Michael Vick on as the franchise quarterback. Reid hired a defensive line coach with a gimmicky “wide-nine” formation before hiring a defensive coordinator. He then promoted his offensive line coach to defensive coordinator despite the fact that Juan Castillo had no defensive experience in the NFL. Castillo was replaced by another gimmicky offensive line coach, Howard Mudd, who’s scheme has failed to protect the quarterback. The list goes on….

John Boruk of CSN Philly defines the problem:

Clearly, the on-the-field product has suffered as a result of poor drafting, bad free-agent signings and an overall lack of identity, and the dual responsibilities Reid currently juggles should be separated moving forward.  Giving one person that much power and authoritative control hasn’t produced the desired results.

The Founders warned against such concentration of power and designed a system of government that would prevent one person from obtaining too much decision-making capability over the country. James Madison described these safeguards in Federalist Paper #51. The first method of dispersing powers is adding checks and balances to our system of separation of powers. Subsequently each of the three branches of government (legislative, executive, judiciary) are given the power to impede the activities of the others. Madison argues that

it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others.

The Founders realized that separation of powers was not enough because over time one branch could consolidate power over the others. Consequently they put several checks in place to avoid this scenario. Madison states

the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others….Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.

Federalism provides the second method to prevent the consolidation of power. Madison makes the argument that while

all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority.

The problem for the Philadelphia Eagles was that they initially created a system that divided power between equal and rival interests within their decision-making apparatus. However, as Andy Reid achieved success Jeffrey Lurie was lulled into believing that the head coach should administer the reigns of the organization with little or no checks. Reid installed staff dedicated to his football philosophy that were unwilling to expend their capital to challenge him because they were his proteges. Madison specifically warned against this:

It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.

The solution is to FIRE ANDY and create a new system of organizational governance that divides coaching, personnel, and contract negotiations into separate and rival interests. Of course, that could lead to the mischief of factions. But that’s an argument for another day when we examine Federalist #10.

by

Two Views on the Secession Petitions

The following are two opinions of the petition drive for Secession by Widener University American Government Students Danny Griffin and Erica Sharp:

A Divided America

Danny Griffin

A surprising amount of Americans have signed petitions to secede from the United States in recent weeks. The online proposition has found the most popularity in Texas, attaining over 100,000 signatures. The petition has versions founded by supporters in all 50 states, however. Some people feel that those who have signed the petition should be stripped of their citizenship and deported, while others assert that these people should be allowed to secede as long as they pay their share of the national debt.

In my opinion, I find the statements about stripping citizenship of the political dissenters to be outrageous. How can such harsh treatment for free speech be justified? If such a course of action was ever taken, what kind of example would it serve as to others? People would be terrified to speak out against government. This nation was founded on the principle that the people should be able to voice their opinions without fear of any repercussions from the government.

As for the statement about paying a share of the national debt, I also find it to be deluded. Many of these people are probably signing the petition simply to voice their disgust at President Obama winning a second term. Therefore, they most likely voted for Romney, which in their eyes would have significantly helped reduce debt. In effect, these people would feel that they did their part already in attempting to negate national debt.

In regard to the entire situation, I see nothing wrong. I am doubtful that many of these people are serious about seceding from the US; they just hope to see a change in the way the country is being run. If these citizens especially did not want to be a part of America anymore, they move and relinquish citizenship. I see the acts as perfectly valid executions of free speech.

Will We Secede Again?

Erica Sharp

Throughout an election there are some that are in full support of either their candidate or their political party. It seems some people have taken this idea to the extreme, most people have heard or seen someone state that, “if so and so doesn’t win the election I’m moving to Canada.” This idea is completely irrelevant and is just some people’s simplistic way of showing how they feel when their candidate does not win. Unfortunately, this was not the case this presidential election period. Citizens have returned back to the old idea of if we don’t agree with who’s running the government and his ideas we should have our state secede from the Union. As we know this idea worked extremely well the last time it was implemented, leading our nation into a Civil War.

So which states feel this way and what do they want to happen and why? The list of states continues to rise, now consisting of, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. Their idea is that they want to withdraw formally from the membership of our federal union. People from these states have begun supporting petitions to secede from the U.S. right after the President was announced to win himself a second term in office. They need to gain at least 25,000 signatures in 30 days or less for the administration to grant a formal review. As of right now Texas seems to be the closest to its goal with 23,000 signatures already. But then getting back to it why do they want to secede in the first place? It seems these people that are petitioning truly believe that this government has become in their mind “destructive,” and they see it as there right as American citizens to alter or abolish it and create a new form of government.

This idea and the large support being shown towards it is beginning to scare some of the other citizens of this nations. The fears should really be put to rest right now because as it is seen these states are very reliant, probably more than they know, on the government and what it does for them. Without this help these states wouldn’t survive. So although there is always that slim chance of a state seceding it shouldn’t be a main concern for now.

by

Closer to Compromise

by Amanda Raimer

Widener University American Government Student

Now that Obama has successfully won re-election his focus has become passing a budget and with no worries about trying to win another term he has set a hard line. He has said that we will reject any budget that does not raise the tax rates on income above $250,000. While it may seem that Obama is suffering from a subtle bout of “triumphalism” and is supercharged from winning the election, at the same time he admitted that there must be compromise and that the top tax rates may end up being lower than during the Clinton administration. The Republican Party has also stated that there needs to be a compromise from both sides. The problem is that both sides have a different idea about what a compromise would entail and how to reach it.

I think that even the process of admitting that there needs to be a compromise and both parties realizing that that they are going to have to give up parts of the budget that they feel strongly about shows that they have become more open to a reasonable compromise. Also, Obama’s deadline has also set a fire beneath Congress to get something settled before the start of the New Year. Obama has also admitted that while he is interested in trying to pass other policies on subjects such as immigration and climate change, he realizes that this will take time and the budget must be the focus at this point. While I’m not saying passing the budget has suddenly become a piece of cake, the more open attitudes of both parties along with the ultimatum set by Obama makes me think that a budget is much more likely to be passed this time around.

by

The Billy Beane of Politics?

By Ryan Devine

Widener University American Government Student

As an individual who has read “Moneyball” 13 times, and counting, I am very familiar with the undeniable benefits that saber metrics provided over the traditional methods of scouting and forming a baseball team.  Thankfully, sabermetrics and classical baseball evaluation seem to have merged in a harmonic balance that keeps the purity of the game with the advances in statistics.  However, one man has decided to take what he learned from baseball and has become a force of nature in the world of political science.

Nate Silver, who started off working for Baseballprospectus.com, has taken his specially developed talents for looking beyond the face numbers to deliver two simply stellar performances in predicting the 2008 and 2012 elections.  He began the 2008 campaign by predicting the number of super delegates within a dozen of President Obama’s actual count.  He then followed up his early predictions by throwing a gem, correctly predicting 49 of the 50 states in the Electoral College and correctly predicted every senatorial seat that was up for grabs.  However, Silver was not done there; he decided that he would follow up his 08 election with an even better performance. He did by throwing a perfect game in this election.

While Silver begun his career of political analyzing after just a year of focusing on politics, he has clearly brought a validity and popularity to the world of political science, registering 5 million web hits the day of the election alone.  Nate has effectively taken the science of voter research and developed a method to predict the winner independent of the biases of the conventional media markets that are simply looking to spin polling information one way or another in order to fit their agenda.

by

Just Go Away Romney

by Frank Heleniak

Widener University American Government Student

Before the election Mitt Romney was “the man,” “America’s comeback team,” and the next president. The GOP suddenly and blindly stood behind their candidate as the answer to the Obama question. Well now they just want him to go away. Post-Election sounds like the primaries all over again. Republican strategists will liken Romney to that of McCain who never established a strong foothold in the party and not seen by Republicans as one of their own. So why did those who did vote Romney ever vote for him in the first place?

Maybe 2012 wasn’t much unlike 2008. Another lame duck candidate? Or that the GOP is at fault and is too extreme and needs to change? Honestly, I think the real issue might be the general Republicans. It’s fair to say the Rs threw away the election in 2008. So 2012 could have been different, instead we allowed the candidates to destroy each other giving fuel for the Democrats. I’m sure some of the moderates like myself even hated the idea of voting for Romney then come election time offered our full support. That’s why it’ll be so easy to forget this election and Romney. Does the GOP need to rethink strategy and campaigning? Sure. But without regular Republicans demanding more from the party itself, the presidency is going to stay blue.

by

Who Needs an Election?

By Ryan Devine

Widener University American Government Student

A fundamental principle in American culture has always been our ability and responsibility to vote in elections, especially the Presidential election.  For just as long, “experts” have attempted to predict the winner’s ahead of time through mock polls, demographic studies, political trends and other methods of taking the pulse of the nation.  However, it appears that all of the professional polling companies might need to look elsewhere.  There have been a few surprising elements that have an uncanny ability to predict the outcome of elections.

The first indicator that should be looked at is the sale of presidential 7-11 cups.  Since 2000, the candidate whose cup created a higher profit for the convenience chain has also gone on to occupy the White House.  While admittedly a short sample, going 3 for 3 in all of the elections the gimmick has been around is still impressive.

For a trend with a little bigger sample size, we can look at the most iconic team in sports today, the New York Yankees. Of the last 15 elections, the Bronx Bombers have made the playoffs 9 times.  With the exception of 1996, every year that the Yankees have won the World Series, the Republican candidate has won the election and every time the Yankees make the playoffs but loose, the Democrats have won.

While the Yankees have one incorrect year over the 9 elections that their trend has been eligible, Halloween masks have an uncanny ability to be right.  Since 1980 the candidate who has had the most replicas of his face sold as a costume for Halloween has won every election (which means Obama can stop working now and take a few days off according to several reports.)

The most popular and accurate best indicator is none other than the District of Columbia’s own Washington Redskins.  The franchise that has had exactly two winning years in the last 12 years, and on pace for another regardless of RGIII’s heroics, is still the best in the world at predicting elections.  Since 1937 there have been 18 elections.  Anytime the Redskins win their last home game before the election, the incumbent has won the election 17 times.  The lone exception was the 2004 election when the Redskins lost but President Bush retained the office.  While some argue that since Bush didn’t win the popular vote in 2000 the rule could be tweaked so that the party that previously won the popular vote and not the Electoral College was the one actually being predicted by the Redskins which would make them a perfect 18 for 18 it is kind of irrelevant since 17 for 18 is still a 94 percent accuracy rate.

With President Obama selling more masks and the Yankees bowing out to the Detroit Tigers in the ALCS, it appears Mitt Romney and his fellow Republicans will all be sporting brand new Cam Newton jerseys come Sunday when the Redskins host the Carolina Panthers in a game that Vegas currently has the Redskins as a 3 and a half point favorite.

Postscript: The Redskins lost their final home game before the election to the Panthers yesterday.