Take a Position

Read the "What's at Stake?" in this chapter, on the Philadelphia II national initiative proposal.

Take a position: Should the United States amend the Constitution to allow for a national initiative?

As you develop your argument, answer the following questions:

What view of democracy (elite, participatory, or pluralist) would supporters of the Philadelphia II initiative hold? What about its opponents? Which view is consistent with most Americans' views of democracy?

Why is a national initiative so important to people like Senator Gravel? What does he believe are the benefits of a national initiative?

Why do Senator Gravel's opponents think that direct democracy might actually make the country less democratic?

Based on what you've learned about public opinion in this chapter, do you think the American public is capable of voting on policy issues? If you argue "no," then how do you reconcile the fact that most American states have some sort of direct democracy? Is the initiative process problematic there, too, or are there differences between a national initiative and a state initiative? If you argue "yes," then why do you think the Philadelphia II movement has not been successful?

Materials developed by Matthew J. Streb, Northern Illinois University