1

DRAFT

Schar School of Policy and Government

Spring 2018 Professor James Pfiffner

PUBP 805 524 Founders Hall

Doctoral Seminar pfiffner@gmu.edu [312Founders Hall] website: pfiffner.gmu.edu

The Foundations of Public Policy

The purpose of this course is to familiarize students with some of the most important political

and economic ideas that form the foundations of contemporary public policy, broadly known as

political economy. Readings will cover the 18th and 19th century roots of liberalism, socialism,

and democracy. The course will then turn to key thinkers of 20th century who have influenced

our understanding of current public policy. Finally, the course will take up several contemporary

public policy issues. The course will deal primarily with the development of Western ideas

about politics and economics and the political economy of the United States, but comparative

perspectives on public policy are important and some comparative scholarship will also be

covered

The course will be conducted as a doctoral seminar, and thus the quality of class discussions will

be critical to the success of the seminar. All participants will be expected to complete assigned

readings before each class and participate actively in class discussions. Participation includes an

engagement with the texts and other seminar colleagues in evaluating the reasoning, arguments,

and evidence presented in the scholarship under discussion. Twenty five percent of the grade for

the course will be based on contributions to class discussions.

For the final paper, students are encouraged to explore avenues of research that may inform their

eventual choice of dissertation topics

Learning Outcomes

Students who have successfully completed this course:

* Will be able to identify the major developments of Western political thought.

* Will be able to explain the foundations of economic thinking of the past several centuries.

* Will be able to explain the nature and development of political institutions.

* Will be able to compare major ideas concerning the scholarship of public policy.

* Will be able to analyze contemporary public policy issues and write about them from a

scholarly perspective.

Texts

Most assigned readings are available on line, and will be emailed to students.

Students are required to have copies of:

2

John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to

Reinvent the State (NY: Penguin Press, 2014).

Albert O. Hirschman, Exit, Voice, & Loyalty (Harvard University Press, 1970).

Written Assignments

1. Critical book review, for class presentation (4-6 pages) due February 17.

2. Research paper relating a contemporary public policy issue to readings of the course.

(15-20 pages) due on the last day of class.

Each written assignment is explained in detail below the class schedule.

Evaluation for the course: Critical book review: 25% (due February 27) Research Paper: 40% (due May 1) Class presentation: 10% Class participation: 25%

Class discussions are essential to the whole course, and it is expected that all students will be

present at all classes. If for some extraordinary reason, you cannot attend a class, you must

inform me before class and write a 500 word critical summary of the readings assigned for the

week. It is due before the next class period.

Use of electronic devices in class is not permitted. The main purpose of a seminar is to engage

with the ideas of other colleagues, the instructor (facilitator), and the texts. Engaging with ideas

cannot be done effectively with the distraction of laptops or other electronic devices.

Surreptitious use of cell phones, etc. will negatively affect your grade for class participation.

Schedule of Classes

Class 1: Introduction

(January 23)

Assignment:

Read the Syllabus for the course.

Francis Fukuyama, What is Governance?” Governance: An International Journal of

Policy, Administration, and Institutions (2013), pp. 1-21.

Jack Goldstone, “Why Great States Decline,” (8 August 2011)

http://newpopulationbomb.wordpress.com/

I. Foundations of Modern Political and Economic Thought

Class 2: Foundations of modern liberalism (January 30) Assignment: Professional Curriculum Vitae, hard copy, due in class to be turned in. Micklethwait and Wooldridge, Ch. 1, pp. 1-23. Machiavelli, The Prince (1532), Ch. 15-18, 21, 23 (excerpts).

3

Hobbes, Leviathan (1651), Part I, Ch. XIII-XIV, Ch. XVIII (excerpts). Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government (1689), Ch. II, III, VII, VIII, XIV (excerpts). Francis Fukuyama, “The Necessity of Politics,” The Origins of Political Order, Chapter One (NY: Farrar Straus & Giroux, 2011), pp. 1-16. Pfiffner, “Magna Carta and the Contemporary Presidency, Presidential Studies Quarterly, Vol. 46, No. 1 (March 2016), pp. 140-148 and 155-156. Class 3: US Constitution (February 6) Assignment: The U.S. Constitution, Articles I, II, and III. Federalist Papers: James Madison, Nos.10, 51, Alexander Hamilton Nos. 1, 69, 70. Charles A. Beard, “The Constitution as an Economic Document” (excerpt). Samuel Huntington, “The Gap: The American Creed Versus Political Authority,” from American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony (Harvard University Press, 198). Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Book II, Ch. I – IV, pp. 1-11. Pfiffner, Power Play, “The American Constitution,” Ch. 4, pp. 56-83.

Pfiffner, Power Play, “The Rule of Law,” pp. 231-233.

Class 4: Liberal Economic Theory (February 13) Assignment: Basic economics: markets, public goods, externalities, transaction costs Micklethwait and Wooldridge, Ch. 2, pp. 47-63, Ch. 4, pp. 81-101. John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty,” Ch. I, Introduction (pp. 1-7 of handout). Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776), Introduction and Book III, Ch. III-IV, VII, pp. 1-8. Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), Part I, Section III, Ch. III, pp. 1-4. Frederich A. Hayek, “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” American Economic Review (1945), pp. 1-10. Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, Introduction, Ch. 1. Class 5: Socialism, Marxism, and the Welfare State (February 20) Assignment: Micklethwait and Wooldridge, Ch. 3, pp. 65-80. Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto (1848), chapters 2 and 4 (pp. 8-13). Isaiah Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” pp. 1- 8. Arthur Okun, “Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff,” Washington: Brookings, 1975), pp. 1-16. Bromwich, David, “The Intellectual Life of Edmund Burke,” (review by Iain Hampsher-Monk), Foreign Affairs, (2014) pp. 156-161. Seymour Martin Lipset, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword (NY: Norton, 1996, Ch. 1, pp. 31-52.

4

II. Twentieth Century Political and Economic Institutions Class 6: Foundations of Political Institutions: Democracy (February 27) Critical book review due in class. Assignments:

Seymour Martin Lipset, “The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited,” American Sociological Review Vol. 59, No. 1 (February 1994), pp. 1-22. Seymour Martin Lipset, “The Centrality of Political Culture,” Journal of Democracy, Vol 1, No. 4 (Fall 1990), pp. 81-83. Francis Fukuyama, “Why is Democracy Performing so Poorly?” Journal of Democracy, Vol. 26, No. 1 (January 2015), pp. 11-20. Jack Goldstone, “Culture versus Institutions,” from NewPopulationBomb blog (Aug. 13, 2012). Juan Linz, “The Perils of Presidentialism,” Journal of Democracy, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Winter 1990), pp. 51-69. R. Kent Weaver, “Are parliamentary Systems Better?” The Brookings Review (Summer 1985), pp. 16-25. Class 7: Foundations of Organization Theory and Bureaucracy (March 6) Assignment: Max Weber, Bureaucracy: “Characteristics of Bureaucracy,” and additional excerpts. William G. Ouchi, “Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans,” Administrative Science Quarterly Vol. 25, No. 1(March 1980), pp. 129-141.

James Pfiffner, “Traditional Public Administration versus The New Public Management: Accountability versus Efficiency,” (e-mail)

“Coase’s Theory of the Firm,” The Economist (July 27, 2017), pp. 1-4. Amy Zegart, “Agency Design and Evolution,” Oxford Handbook on American

Bureaucracy. (NY: Oxford, 2010), Ch. 9, pp. 207-230.

March 13: Spring Break, no class Class 8: Rational Decision Making Theory and its Critics (March 20) One page paper proposal due in class. Assignment: Irving Janis, “Groupthink among Policy Makers,” from Sanctions for Evil, edited by

Nevitt Sanford and Craig Comstock (SF: Jossey-Bass, 1971), pp. 71-89.

Charles Lindblom, “The Science of ‘Muddling Through,’” Public Administration Review (Spring 1959), pp. 79-88.

5

Graham Allison, “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” American Political Science Review Vol. 16, No. 3 (September 1969), pp. 689-718). Horst W.J. Rittel and Melvin M. Webber, “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning,” Policy Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 2 (June 1973), pp. 155-169. [“wicked problems”] Class 9: Interest Group Liberalism in the United States (March 27) Assignment: Richard E. Wagner, Pressure Groups and Political Entrepreneurs: A Review Article of The Logic of Collective Action by Mancur Olson. Papers on Mon- Market Decision Making, Vol. 1 (December 1966), pp. 161-170. Albert O. Hirschman, Exit, Voice, & Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Harvard University Press, 1970), pp. 1-105, and conclusion. Jonathan Rauch, “Demosclerosis,” National Journal (September 5, 1992).j Joseph Stiglitz, “The Private Uses of Public Interests: Incentives and Institutions,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Spring 1998), pp. 3-22.

III. Contemporary Public Policy Thinking Class 10: The Polarization of Political Elites in the United States (April 3) Assignment: Alan I. Abramowitz and Kyle L. Saunders, “Is Polarization a Myth?” The Journal of Politics. Vol. 70 No. 2 (2008), pp. 542–555. Morris Fiorina, Samuel A. Abrams, and Pope, “Polarization in the American Public:

Misconceptions and Misreadings,” The Journal of Politics, Vol. 70, No. 2 (2008), pp. 556-560.

Marc J. Hetherington. “Review Article: Putting Polarization in Perspective, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 39 (2009), 413–448. Pew Research Center, “Partisan Divide on Political Values,” (Washington: PEW Charitable Trusts (October 5, 2017), pp. 1-7. Class 11: Inequality and Social Mobility (April 10) Tyler Cowan, “The Inequality That Matters,” The American Interest (January-February 2011), pp. 1-10. William Lazonick, “Profits without Prosperity, Harvard Business Review (September 2014), pp. 47-55. Joseph E. Stiglitz, The 1 Percent’s Problem,” Vanity Fair (May 31, 2012); adapted from The Price of Inequality (NY: Norton, 2012), pp. 1-6. “Inequality is not Inevitable,” (June 27, 2014). Steven Pearlstein, “Capital in the Twenty-first Century,” (review of Piketty), Washington Post (March 28, 2014), pp. 1-3.

6

Thomas Piketty, “About Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” American Economic Review, Vol. 105, No. 5, (2015), pp. 48-53. Steven Pearlstein, “Is Capitalism Moral?” Washington Post (March 15, 2013), pp. 1-5 Class 12: The Appeal of Authoritarian Capitalism (April 17) Assignment: Micklethwait and Wooldridge, Ch. 6, 7, 8, 9, Conclusion, pp. 133-270. Fukuyama, “The Decay of American Political Institutions,” The American Interest (December 8, 2013), pp. 1-14. Zakaria, “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 6 (Nov.-Dec. 1997), pp. 22-43. Class 13: The Insights of Behavioral Economics (April 24) Assignment: Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, Behavioral Economics, Public Policy, and Paternalism,” American Economic Review, Vol.93 (2003), pp. 175-179. Richard Thaler, Cass Sunsetein, and John Balz, “Choice Architecture,” The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy, pp. 428- Class 14: The Rise of Populism (May 1) Assignment: Margaret Canovan, “Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy,” Political Studies, Vol. 47, pp. 2—16. Francis Fukuyama, “What is Populism?” and “Why Populism Now,” The American Interest (November 28, 2017), pp. 1-5. Andrew Sullivan, “Democracies End when they are too Democratic,” New York Magazine (May 2,2016), pp. 1-3. Class participation evaluation: With respect to class participation: I expect that all students will make an effort to contribute actively to class discussions. Your comments should reflect your judgments about the assigned readings, rather than your person intuition or opinions. Opinions are fine, but they should be backed up by reasons and evidence (e.g. what the readings say and your judgments about them). Your comments should be cogent and lead to responses or observations from other students. Common courtesy is expected; no one should take offence if there are disagreements, as long as they are expressed with respect and civility. A- A

Without these people, the quality of discussion would be diminished markedly. --Frequent contributor in seminar discussions each week. Active and engaged. Has great self-awareness and does not ramble or consistently dominate the room. --Comments grounded in the readings and demonstrate depth of understanding or attempts

7

to grapple with them; ideas help to build momentum in discussions. Knowledge displayed indicates a wider range of reading than simply the assigned texts or articles. -- Never misses a seminar and is always courteous to other seminar participants.

B- B B+

Without these people, the quality of discussion would be diminished. --Consistent commenter each week in seminar, but some runs of silence or inactivity occasionally detectable. Active and engaged but occasionally may lack good self-awareness. --Comments are helpful and draw upon readings, but less consistently so and occasionally may be more grounded in intuition or personal experience. --Attends every seminar and is always courteous to other seminar participants.

C- C C+

Without these people, the quality of seminar discussion would be occasionally (but not frequently) diminished. --Infrequent participant each week in seminar, but may engage sporadically. May have inconsistent self-awareness. --Comments may be but not necessarily grounded in the readings; more reliant on intuition or personal experience (e.g., perhaps an excellent readings comment one day, but then a run of days with less substantive or relevant ones). --Perhaps one absence, but is always courteous to other seminar participants.*

*adapted from the syllabus of Professor Lawrence Wilkerson, College of William & Mary.

Writing assignments: 1. Analytical book review to be presented in class (4-6 pages) 2. Research paper (10-15 pp.); Each of these assignments is explained below. All papers must be double spaced, with 12 point font on 8½ X 11 inch paper and stapled in the top left corner. Do not put papers in any special cover. They must be submitted in both hard copy and electronic form (to my email address). You may not turn in any paper that was written for another course or for any other purpose. The papers must be written specifically for this course. Use the standard Chicago Style Manual type of citations for footnotes or “Turabian,” NOT

the APA or APSA style, in which names in parentheses refer to a list of references at the

end of the paper. For examples of the required reference style, see the Micklethwait and

Wooldridge book or refer to the instructions below on this syllabus.

Use footnotes rather than endnotes.

In evaluating papers, degree-of-difficulty will be considered. Just as a perfectly executed swan

dive may not receive as high a score as a slightly flawed full gainer with a twist, a paper that

engages a difficult question or takes a creative approach to a public policy issue will receive

more credit than a paper that takes a relatively straight-forward issue and addresses it in a

competent, though pedestrian, manner. Analytical Book Review (5-6 pages):

8

Each student must write an analytical review of one book from the list appended to this syllabus. No duplicates, first choices will be honored. You may propose a book that is not on the list to review, but it must be a scholarly book. The review should place the book in the context of political/economic thought considered in this course and present its main ideas and their implications. The review will be no more than six pages long (12 point font). It should be footnoted, referring to specific pages in the book. Each student will make an oral presentation to the class and conduct a discussion of the book. The final paper for the class may use the book reviewed, but it cannot be the main focus of the paper. The papers will be graded as well as the oral presentation of the paper and conduct of the discussion. Research Paper (15-20 pages): Pick a contemporary public policy issue that interests you and trace back the differences in values, economic and/or political, that are reflected in the policy issue. Deal with the political and economic circumstances that led to the consideration and adoption (or rejection) of the policy. Deal with the interest groups that influenced its development, and the formal policy making institutions and processes that were involved. Conclude with an analysis of its implementation (or continuing relevance) and its prospects. Examples: specific aspects of health care policy, housing policy, education policy, national security policy, transportation policy, agriculture policy, commerce policy, labor policy, welfare policy, taxation policy, budget policy, etc. The paper may compare policies in more than one country, as long as the United States is one of them. Your paper must reflect an extensive familiarity with the scholarly literature concerning your topic. In addition, you must cite at least three sources that are assigned in this course. A one page proposal, including description of the topic and several scholarly sources must be approved by the instructor. Scholarly sources include: articles in peer-reviewed scholarly journals scholarly books (e.g. books that use footnotes or endnotes) papers from think tanks (e.g. Urban Institute, Brookings, Heritage, AEI, etc.) reports of governmental organizations (e.g. CRS, CBO, OMB, GAO, departments, etc.) The book, The Fourth Revolution, has a number of ideas, some of which may be useful for 805 research papers or dissertations __________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Hours:

Mondays: 10am to noon.

Tuesdays: 1 to 3pm.

9

Thursdays: 3 to 5pm.

Office: 524 Founders Hall; Phone: 703-993-1417; e-mail: pfiffner@gmu.edu

I am in my Founders Hall office most days every week, and I am always available via email.

You do not have to come to see me during my office hours; just write to set up an appointment,

and we will set up a mutually convenient appointment.

Analytical Writing For purposes of scholarly writing it is important to write analytically. Analytic writing is more than merely describing what others have said or describing institutions of government or public policy making (though description is often an essential aspect of analysis). Analysis involves more. In analysis you are asking and answering questions about the causes and consequences

of whatever you are examining. You are seeking explanations for behavior. You are developing categories and frameworks that will help us understand political

behavior and generalize insights from one case to other cases. Ask the question: Of what is this an instance? When analyzing scholarly writing: Engage different ideas. Show how they differ and where they agree. Compare and contrast. Contrast different methods of understanding a phenomenon. What different types of evidence are adduced to make a point? Contrast different perspectives or approaches to a topic. Judge whether the reasoning is valid. Does the author’s evidence support the conclusion of the article? In Writing an Paper, Remember: The introduction should say what the paper is about and how you will approach the topic. The paper should address one central question and have a thesis. The paper should be organized logically, with an evident structure. The reader should be told how each part of the paper is related to the other parts.. Use subheadings to label different sections (except for very short papers). Outline your paper after it is written to see if it flows logically. Proofread your paper for spelling and syntax. Be sure to cite all of your sources and use quotation marks when you use another's words.

Plagiarism is using another’s words or ideas without giving proper credit. Plagiarism is a major scholarly sin; it is unethical, dishonest, and deceptive, and it has ended some people’s careers. It can easily be avoided by giving credit where credit is due. If you use more than three word of another author, cite the quote.

10

Hints on Grammar The singular possessive is formed by adding an ‘s (e.g. one president’s term was cut short), the plural by s’ (e.g. both presidents’ terms were cut short). The possessive for it is “its”: its = possessive; in contrast, “it’s” is a contraction for “it is.” If you cannot remember the rule for its, do not use an apostrophe and you will be correct. (That is, use “it is” rather than a contraction and its for the possessive.) Lead is in your pencil, but led is the past tense of the verb to lead. Effect is a noun and affect is a verb, almost always; if you do not know the exceptions, do not violate this rule of thumb. Cite is short for citation, site is a place (or web location), sight refers to eyes. Horses have reins, monarchs reign over countries, and rain falls from the sky: e.g. It often

rains in London, where the Queen reigns, but the Prime Minister holds the reins of power in Parliament.

Distinguish the meaning of ”Love Trumps Hate” from “Love Trump’s Hate.” From William Strunk and E.B. White’’s classic, The Elements of Style (NY: Macmillan, 1979), table of contents: “Place a comma before a conjunction introducing an independent clause.” “Do not join independent clauses by a comma” (use a semicolon or a period). “The number of the subject determines the number of the verb.” “Use the active voice.” “Omit needless words.” “Make the paragraph the unit of composition.” “Revise and rewrite.”

Citations for Research Papers The purposes of scholarly citations are several: 1) To show the source for a direct quote or fact not commonly known. 2) To give credit for an idea to the author of a work 3) To show the reader that you are familiar with other scholarship on your topic or to

indicate where further information or analysis can be found. 4) You may also use endnotes to explain something in the text or comment on the source.

The intention is to give readers enough information to find the source you are using so that they can see if you have quoted it correctly, interpreted it soundly, done justice to the author cited, or so they can do further research on the topic in question themselves.

Format: use the standard Chicago Manual of Style format, also known as “Turabian.” (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, most recent edition.) Books: author, title (place of publication: publisher, date), page number(s).

11

[Titles of books should be in italics.] Example: 1. John Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd ed. (New York: HarperCollins, 1995). After the first full citation, you may use a shortened version: e.g. 2. Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, page number(s). Articles: author, title, name of journal (volume, number), page number(s). [Titles of articles should be enclosed in quotation marks, names of journals in italics.] Example: 1. Theodore J. Lowi, “The State in Political Science: How We Become What We Study,” American Political Science Review Vol. 86, No. 1 (1992), pp. 1-7. After first full citation, you may use a shortened version: 2. Lowi, “The State in Political Science,” p. 3. Chapters in edited Books:

author of chapter (or article), title of chapter (in quotes), “in” editor of book, title of book (place and date of publication), page numbers.

Example: Hugh Heclo, “The Changing Presidential Office,” in James P. Pfiffner, ed. The

Managerial Presidency (College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 1999), pp. 23-36

Web Site Citations: In addition to author, title, etc, include the following information: Who put up the site, full URL, date of access. Number endnotes consecutively for the whole paper, with each note referring to the number in the text with the number in superscript or parentheses. Endnote numbers should be placed at the end of the sentence containing the information being cited. A bibliography of all the sources used in the paper along with other useful sources may be useful or required. Do not use more than one footnote number per sentence (even if Wiki does). If you are referencing more than one source, combine them in one footnote.

Schar School Policy on Plagiarism The profession of scholarship and the intellectual life of a university, as well as the field of public policy inquiry, depend fundamentally on a foundation of trust. Thus, any act of plagiarism strikes at the heart of the meaning of the University and the purpose of the School of Policy, Government and International Affairs. It constitutes a serious breach of professional ethics and it is unacceptable. Plagiarism is the use of another’s words or ideas presented as one’s own. It includes, among other things, the use of specific words, ideas, or frameworks that are the product of another’s work. Honesty and thoroughness in citing sources is essential to professional accountability and personal responsibility. Appropriate citation is necessary so that arguments, evidence, and claims can be critically examined.

12

Plagiarism is wrong because of the injustice it does to the person whose ideas are stolen. It is also wrong because it constitutes lying to one’s professional colleagues. From a prudential perspective, it is shortsighted and self-defeating, and it can ruin a professional career. The faculty of the School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs takes plagiarism seriously and has adopted a zero tolerance policy. This may lead to failure for the course, resulting in termination from the program and possible termination from SPGIA. This termination will be noted on the student’s transcript. For foreign students who are on a university-sponsored visa (eg. F-1, J-1 or J-2), termination also results in the revocation of their visa. To help enforce the SPGIA policy on plagiarism, all written work submitted in partial fulfillment of course or degree requirements must be available in electronic form so that it can be compared with electronic databases, as well as submitted to commercial services to which the School subscribes. Faculty may at any time submit a student’s work without prior permission from the student. Individual instructors may require that written work be submitted in electronic as well as printed form. The SPGIA policy on plagiarism is supplementary to the George Mason University Honor Code; it is not intended to replace it or substitute for it. (http://www.gmu.edu/academics/catalog/9798/honorcod.html)

Academic Accommodation for a Disability: If you are a student with a disability and you need

academic accommodations, please see me and contact the Disability Resource Center (DRC) at

703-993-2474. All academic accommodations must be arranged through the DRC before the

beginning of the semester.

Book Choices for Critical Analysis Daron Acemoglu & James Robinson, Why Nations Fail Alberto Alesina and Edward L. Glaeser, Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe Larry Bartels, Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age Sven Beckert, Empire of Cotton: A Global History Alan S. Blinder, After the Music Stopped: The Financial Crisis, the Response, and the Work Ahead Frank Buckley, The Once and Future King Daniel P. Carpenter, The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy Nicholas Eberstadt, A Nation of Takers: America’s Entitlement Epidemic

13

Christopher Faricy, Welfare for the Wealthy Francis Fukuyama, The Origins of Political Order Francis Fukuyama, Political Order and Political Decay: From The French Revolution to the Present Francis Fukuyama, State Building Francis Fukuyama, Trust Jacob S. Hacker & Paul Pierson, Winner-Take-All Politics Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy Frederick Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom Lane Kenworthy, Social Democratic America Paul Krugman, The Conscience of a Liberal John Lanchester, IOU: Why Everyone Owes Everyone and No One Can Pay Brink Lindsey, and Steven M. Teles, The Captured Economy Martin Lipset, American Exceptionalism: A Double Edged Sword Martin Lipset, Continental Divide Martin Lipset, It Didn’t Happen Here

McCloskey, Deirdre, Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, not Capital or Institutions

Enriched the World

Atif Mian and Amir Sufi, House of Debt Suzanne Mettler, The Submerged State Thomas Piketty, Capitalism Richard Neustadt and Ernest May, Thinking in Time Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia

14

Richard A. Posner, A Failure of Capitalism: The Crisis of ’08 and the Descent Into Depression. Eric Rauchway, The Money Makers: How Roosevelt and Keynes Ended the Depression, Defeated Fascism, and Secured a Prosperous Peace John Rawls, A Theory of Justice Reich, Robert, Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few Alisdair Roberts, The Logic of Discipline Dani Rodrik, Economics Rules: The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly David Rothkopf, Power, Inc. Paul Sabatier & Christopher Weible, Theories of the Policy Process Joseph Stiglitz, The Price of Inequality Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sustein, Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Richard H. Thaler, Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. James Q. Wilson, Bureaucracy Nicholas Wapshott, Keynes Hayek: The Clash that Defined Modern Economics Martin Wolf, The Shifts and the Shocks: What We’ve Learned – and Have Still to Learn – from the Financial Crisis Peter Zeihan, The Accidental Superpower You may suggest other books, but they must be approved by the instructor. Only serious, substantial, and scholarly books will be approved.