COURSE SYLLABUS

Political Science 5352: Empirical Democratic Theory

2:30-5:15 p.m., Monday, Spring Semester, 2010

Contact Information
Marianne Stewart
Office E-Mail: mstewart@utdallas.edu
Office Hours: 1:00-2:30 p.m., Monday and Wednesday, and by appointment
Office Location: 3.226 GR
Office Phone: (972) 883-2011

Course Information
This course is designed as a seminar that promotes student thinking about major theories in
empirical studies of democratic governance. After considering several sets of rival theories, the
course examines the role of useable theory in the construction of research designs and hypothesis
tests. The course concludes with an assessment of the power of theory and the development of
knowledge in the study of democratic governance. More specifically, the course objectives are to
help students learn to:
• describe main currents and major controversies in democratic theory;
• understand how democratic theory has informed empirical investigations and vice-versa;
• use democratic theory to identify interesting and important research questions and to develop
empirically testable hypotheses.

Required Books
Caporaso, James A. and David P. Levine. 1992. Theories of Political Economy. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Held, David. 2006. Models of Democracy, third edition. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Calendar
Part I: Major Theories and Empirical Studies of Democratic Governance
January 11/25. An Introduction to The Course and to Usable Theory.

Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, Chapter 1: "Politics and economics"
Held, Models of Democracy, introduction.
Goodin, Robert E. and Hans-Dieter Klingemann, eds. 1996. A New Handbook of Political
Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press:
Iris Marion Young, "Political Theory: An Overview," pp. 479-502.
Bhikhu Parekh, "Political Theory: Traditions in Political Philosophy," pp. 503-518.
Klaus von Beyme, "Political Theory: Empirical Political Theory," pp. 519-530.
Johnson, Janet Buttolph and H.T. Reynolds with Jason D. Mycoff. 2008. Political Science
Research Methods, 6th edition. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press:
Chapter 2: "Studying Politics Scientifically"
Chapter 3: "The Building Blocks of Social Scientific Research"
 2

January 18. Martin Luther King Day - University Holiday.

Part II. Classical Theories: Private Life and Public Virtue

February 1-8. Classical Theories.
Required Reading
Held, Models of Democracy, Chapter 1: "Classical Democracy: Athens"
Bartlett, Robert C. 2008. "Aristotle's Introduction to the Problem of Happiness," American
Journal of Political Science 52 (July), pp. 677-87.
Cherry, Kevin M. 2008. "Aristotle and the Eleatic Stranger on the Nature and Purpose of Political
Life," American Journal of Political Science, 52 (January), pp. 1-15.

Recommended Reading
Aristotle. 1981. The Politics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Aristotle. 1976. Nicomachean Ethics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Plato. 1970. The Laws. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Plato. 1974. The Republic. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Elshtain, Jean Bethke. 1981. Public Man, Private Woman: Women in Social and Political
Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

February 15-22. Republican Theories.

Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, Chapter 2: "The classical approach"
Held, Models of Democracy, Chapter 2: "Republicanism: Liberty, Self-Government and The
Active Citizen".
Hanley, Ryan Patrick. 2008. "Enlightened Nation Building: The 'Science of the Legislator' in
Adam Smith and Rousseau, " American Journal of Political Science 52 (April), pp. 219-34.
Powell, Robert. 2002. "Game Theory, International Relations Theory, and the Hobbesian
Stylization," in Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, eds., Political Science: The State of the
Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 755-83

Recommended Reading
Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1975. The Prince. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1983. The Discourses. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Hobbes, Thomas. 1968. Leviathan edited by C.B. Macpherson. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Laski, Harold J., trans. n.d. Vindiciae contra tyrannos - A Defence of Liberty Against Tyrants.
Locke, John. 1963. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rousseau, J.J. 1968. The Social Contract. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Smith, Adam. 1981/1976. An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations, Book
I: chs.. 1-9, 10 art1; Book II: chs. 1-5; Book IV: chs. 1-2, 9; Book V: chs. 1-3. Indianapolis:
Liberty Classics/Oxford University Press.

March 1-8. Liberal Theories.

Required Reading
Held, Models of Democracy, Chapter 3: "The Development of Liberal Democracy: For and
Against The State"
 3

Clark, Tom S. 2009. "The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy,"
American Journal of Political Science 53 (October), pp. 971-89.
Eulau, Heinz, John C. Walkhe, William Buchanan and Leroy C. Ferguson. 1959. "The Role of
the Representative: Some Empirical Observations on the Theory of Edmund Burke," American
Political Science Review 53 (September), pp. 742-56.

Recommended Reading
Wollstonecraft, Mary. 1982.Vindication of the Rights of Women. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Madison, James. 1966. The Federalist Papers. New York: Doubleday.
deTocqueville, Alexis. 1969. Democracy in America. New York: Anchor Books.
Mill, J.S., 1972/1859. Considerations on Representative Government, in H.B. Acton, ed.,
Utilitarianism, On Liberty and Considerations on Representative Government. London: J.M.
Dent and Sons
Mill, J.S., 1972/1861. On Liberty in H.B. Acton, ed., Utilitarianism, On Liberty and
Considerations on Representative Government. London: J.M. Dent and Sons

Dahl, Robert. n.d. How Democratic is the Constitution? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Pitkin, Hannah. 1978. On The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California
Press.

March 15-20. Spring Break.

Part III. Theory Shift

March 22. The End of Politics and a Revolution in Economics?
Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy:
Chapter 3: "Marxian political economy"
Chapter 5: "Keynesian political economy"
Held, Models of Democracy, Chapter 4: "Direct Democracy and The End of Politics"

Recommended Reading
Simon, Lawrence H., ed. 1994. Karl Marx: Selected Writings, pp. 27-39, 54-79, 98-101, 157-86,
209-300. Indianpolis: Hackett Publishing.
Keynes, John Maynard. 1964. The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. New
York: Harvest Harcourt Brace, especially Chapter 18..

Part IV. Neoclassical Theories

March 29-April 5. Economic Calculus and Democratic Governance.
Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy:
Chapter 4: "Neoclassical political economy"
Chapter 6: "Economic approaches to politics"
Held, Models of Democracy, Chapter 5: "Competitive Elitism and The Technocratic Vision"
Kuklinksi, James H. and Paul J. Quirk. 2000. "Reconsidering the Rational Public: Cognition,
Heuristics and Public Opinion," in Arthur Lupia, Mathew D. McCubbins and Samuel L. Popkin,
eds., Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice and the Bounds of Rationality. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
 4

Weingast, Barry R. 2002. "Rational-Choice Institutionalism," in Ira Katznelson and Helen V.

Milner, eds., Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 660-92.

Recommended Reading
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1950/1942. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper &
Row.
Black, Duncan. 1958. Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.
New York: Schocken Books.
Riker, William. n.d. Liberalism v. Populism: A Confrontation between The Theory of Democracy
and the Theory of Public Choice. Waveland Publishers.
Simon, Herbert A. 1987. "Satisficing" in John Eatwell, Murray Milgate and Peter Newman, eds.,
The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics. London: Macmillan.

Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for A New Age. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Dahl, Robert A. 1961. Who Governs?: Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Macpherson, C.B. 1977. The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Pateman, Carole. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Part V. Contemporary Theories and Communal Well-Being

April 12. Power Theories.
Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, Chapter 7: "Power-centered approaches to
political economy"

April 12-19. State Theories.

Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, Chapter 8: "State-centered approaches to
political economy"
Held, Models of Democracy:
Chapter 6: "Pluralism, Corporate Capitalism and The State"
Chapter 7: "From Post-War Stability to Political Crisis: The Polarization of Political
Ideals"
Brittan, Samuel. 1975. "The Economic Contradictions of Democracy," British Journal of
Political Science 5, pp. 129-59.
King, Anthony. 1975. "Overload: Problems of Governing in the 1970s," Political Studies 23, pp.
162-74.

Recommended Reading
Guttman, Amy, ed. 1988. Democracy and the Welfare State. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
 5

Habermas, Jurgen, 1975. Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.

Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective
Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

April 19. Justice Theories.

Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, Chapter 9: "Justice-centered theories"

Recommended Reading
Hochschild, Jennifer L. 1981. What's Fair: American Beliefs about Distributive Justice.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Part VI. Conclusion

April 26. The Power of Theory and the Development of Knowledge
Required Reading
Caporaso and Levine, Theories of Political Economy, conclusion
Held, Models of Democracy:
Chapter 9: "Deliberative Democracy and the Defence of the Public Realm"
Chapter 11: "Democracy, the Nation-State and the Global System"

Recommended Reading
Barry, Brian. 1970. Sociologists, Economists & Democracy. London: Collier-Macmillan.
Fishkin, James. 1991. Democracy and Deliberation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Held, Models of Democracy:
Chapter 8: "Democracy After Soviet Communism"
Chapter 10: "Democratic Autonomy"
Shapiro, Ian. 2002. "The State of Democratic Theory," in Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner.
eds., Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 235-65..

May 3. Completed essays due. Essay presentations scheduled.

Grading Criteria and Assignments

Class participation = 20% (Attendance 5%; Contributions and presentations 15%);
Test #1 = 25%
Test #2 = 25%
Review Essay = 30%.
A+: 95-100%; A-: 90-94; B+: 83-89; B: 77-82; B-: 70-76; C+: 65-69; C: 60-64; F: Below 60%.

Class Participation: Assigned reading prior to the class meeting when it will be discussed, regular
attendance, and constructive and frequent presentations and contributions to class discussions.

Two Tests: Each test is open-book and out-of-class, involves essay answers, and with university
honesty policy is force. Test #1 will be distributed on February 15 and is due February 22. Test
#2 will be distributed on March 22 and is due March 29. All students are expected to comply
with these dates.

Essay: A 12-page, double-spaced, typed/word-processed essay that:

• introducss the topic by stating what it is and why it is interesting and/or important (1 page);
 6

• reviews a literature selection that involves a main current and a major controversy in
empirical democratic theory and that uses relevant books, book chapters, and/or published
articles (4 pages);
• discusses how this literature/current/controversy can be "converted" into one or more
coherent and testable hypotheses (4 pages);
• identifies the independent and dependent variables, precisely defines the core concepts
associated with these variables, and discusses what several indicators or measures of these
variables would be (3 pages);
• lists endnotes and references in appropriate form.
Due May 3 – All students are expected to comply with this date.
 7

Course Policies

The University of Texas System and The University of Texas at Dallas have rules and
regulations for the orderly and efficient conduct of their business. It is the
responsibility of each student and each student organization to be knowledgeable
about the rules and regulations which govern student conduct and activities. General
information on student conduct and discipline is contained in the UTD publication, A
to Z Guide, which is provided to all registered students each academic year.

The University of Texas at Dallas administers student discipline within the

procedures of recognized and established due process. Procedures are defined and
described in the Rules and Regulations, Board of Regents, The University of Texas
Student Conduct
System, Part 1, Chapter VI, Section 3, and in Title V, Rules on Student Services and
and Discipline
Activities of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures. Copies of these
rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of the Dean of Students,
where staff members are available to assist students in interpreting the rules and
regulations (SU 1.602, 972/883-6391).

A student at the university neither loses the rights nor escapes the responsibilities of
citizenship. He or she is expected to obey federal, state, and local laws as well as the
Regents’ Rules, university regulations, and administrative rules. Students are subject
to discipline for violating the standards of conduct whether such conduct takes place
on or off campus, or whether civil or criminal penalties are also imposed for such
conduct.

The faculty expects from its students a high level of responsibility and academic
honesty. Because the value of an academic degree depends upon the absolute
integrity of the work done by the student for that degree, it is imperative that a student
demonstrate a high standard of individual honor in his or her scholastic work.

Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, statements, acts or omissions
related to applications for enrollment or the award of a degree, and/or the submission
Academic as one’s own work or material that is not one’s own. As a general rule, scholastic
Integrity dishonesty involves one of the following acts: cheating, plagiarism, collusion and/or
falsifying academic records. Students suspected of academic dishonesty are subject
to disciplinary proceedings.

Plagiarism, especially from the web, from portions of papers for other classes, and
from any other source is unacceptable and will be dealt with under the university’s
policy on plagiarism (see general catalog for details). This course will use the
resources of turnitin.com, which searches the web for possible plagiarism and is over
90% effective.
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the
making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials, including
music and software. Copying, displaying, reproducing, or distributin copyrighted
works may infringe on the copyright owner’s rights and such infringement is subject
to appropriate disciplinary action as well as criminal penalties provided by federal
Copyright Notice
law. Use of such material is only appropriate when it constitutes “fair use” under the
Copyright Act. As a UTD student, you are required to follow the institution’s
copyright policy (Policy Memorandum 84-I.3-46). For more information about the
fair use exemption, go to
http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm.
The University of Texas at Dallas recognizes the value and efficiency of
Email Use
communication between faculty/staff and students through electronic mail. At the
 8

same time, email raises some issues concerning security and the identity of each
individual in an email exchange. The university encourages all official student email
correspondence be sent only to a student’s U.T. Dallas email address and that faculty
and staff consider email from students official only if it originates from a UTD
student account. This allows the university to maintain a high degree of confidence in
the identity of all individual corresponding and the security of the transmitted
information. UTD furnishes each student with a free email account that is to be used
in all communication with university personnel. The Department of Information
Resources at U.T. Dallas provides a method for students to have their U.T. Dallas
mail forwarded to other accounts. If you have a problem with your UTD account,
then you may seek help from assist@utdallas.edu, or the UTD Computer Helpdesk at
(972) 883-2911.

The administration of this institution has set deadlines for withdrawal of any college-
level courses. These dates and times are published in that semester's course catalog.
Withdrawal from Administration procedures must be followed. It is the student's responsibility to
Class handle withdrawal requirements from any class. In other words, I cannot drop or
withdraw any student. You must do the proper paperwork to ensure that you will not
receive a final grade of "F" in a course if you choose not to attend the class once you
are enrolled.

Procedures for student grievances are found in Title V, Rules on Student Services and
Activities, of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures.

In attempting to resolve any student grievance regarding grades, evaluations, or other

fulfillments of academic responsibility, it is the obligation of the student first to make
a serious effort to resolve the matter with the instructor, supervisor, administrator, or
committee with whom the grievance originates (hereafter called “the respondent”).
Individual faculty members retain primary responsibility for assigning grades and
Student evaluations. If the matter cannot be resolved at that level, the grievance must be
Grievance submitted in writing to the respondent with a copy of the respondent’s School Dean.
Procedures If the matter is not resolved by the written response provided by the respondent, the
student may submit a written appeal to the School Dean. If the grievance is not
resolved by the School Dean’s decision, the student may make a written appeal to the
Dean of Graduate or Undergraduate Education, and the deal will appoint and convene
an Academic Appeals Panel. The decision of the Academic Appeals Panel is final.
The results of the academic appeals process will be distributed to all involved parties.

Copies of these rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of the
Dean of Students, where staff members are available to assist students in interpreting
the rules and regulations.

As per university policy, incomplete grades will be granted only for work
unavoidably missed at the semester’s end and only if 70% of the course work has
Incomplete
been completed. An incomplete grade must be resolved within eight (8) weeks from
Grades
the first day of the subsequent long semester. If the required work to complete the
course and to remove the incomplete grade is not submitted by the specified deadline,
the incomplete grade is changed automatically to a grade of F.

The goal of Disability Services is to provide students with disabilities educational

opportunities equal to those of their non-disabled peers. Disability Services is located
Disability in room 1.610 in the Student Union. Office hours are Monday and Thursday, 8:30
Services a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday and Wednesday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.; and Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

The contact information for the Office of Disability Services is:

 9

The University of Texas at Dallas, SU 22

PO Box 830688
Richardson, Texas 75083-0688
(972) 883-2098 (voice or TTY)

Essentially, the law requires that colleges and universities make those reasonable
adjustments necessary to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability. For
example, it may be necessary to remove classroom prohibitions against tape recorders
or animals (in the case of dog guides) for students who are blind. Occasionally an
assignment requirement may be substituted (for example, a research paper versus an
oral presentation for a student who is hearing impaired). Classes enrolled students
with mobility impairments may have to be rescheduled in accessible facilities. The
college or university may need to provide special services such as registration, note-
taking, or mobility assistance.

It is the student’s responsibility to notify his or her professors of the need for such an
accommodation. Disability Services provides students with letters to present to
faculty members to verify that the student has a disability and needs accommodations.
Individuals requiring special accommodation should contact the professor after class
or during office hours.

The University of Texas at Dallas will excuse a student from class or other required
activities for the travel to and observance of a religious holy day for a religion whose
places of worship are exempt from property tax under Section 11.20, Tax Code,
Texas Code Annotated.

The student is encouraged to notify the instructor or activity sponsor as soon as

possible regarding the absence, preferably in advance of the assignment. The student,
so excused, will be allowed to take the exam or complete the assignment within a
reasonable time after the absence: a period equal to the length of the absence, up to a
Religious Holy maximum of one week. A student who notifies the instructor and completes any
Days missed exam or assignment may not be penalized for the absence. A student who fails
to complete the exam or assignment within the prescribed period may receive a
failing grade for that exam or assignment.

If a student or an instructor disagrees about the nature of the absence [i.e., for the
purpose of observing a religious holy day] or if there is similar disagreement about
whether the student has been given a reasonable time to complete any missed
assignments or examinations, either the student or the instructor may request a ruling
from the chief executive officer of the institution, or his or her designee. The chief
executive officer or designee must take into account the legislative intent of TEC
51.911(b), and the student and instructor will abide by the decision of the chief
executive officer or designee.
Off-campus, out-of-state, and foreign instruction and activities are subject to state law
Off-Campus and University policies and procedures regarding travel and risk-related activities.
Instruction and Information regarding these rules and regulations may be found at
Course Activities http://www.utdallas.edu/BusinessAffairs/Travel_Risk_Activities.htm.
Additional information is available from the office of the school dean.

These descriptions and timelines are subject to change at the discretion of the Professor.