The Promise of Democratic Equality in the United States explores the ways in which the American political system fails to fully respect political equality. Douglas D. Roscoe argues these deficiencies are not necessarily failures of justice, but often reflect attempts to balance important but competing principles and values. He analyzes the balance among these competing values in a variety of contexts, including congressional representation, the Electoral College, voting regulations, campaign finance, lobbying, the Senate filibuster rules, and protections for civil rights and liberties. A diverse set of methodological approaches is employed to carefully evaluate whether the limits placed on political equality are reasonable and necessary. Using a rigorous normative framework, while leaning heavily on high-quality quantitative evidence and social science research, this book provides students of democratic theory and American politics with a compact and manageable review of the degree to which democratic equality is supported in the United States.

Presentation of a new, ethical vision of democracy built around self-rule, civic education, and ethical cultivation.

Examining the current state of democracy in the United States, 'The Unheavenly Chorus' looks at the political participation of individual citizens - alongside the political advocacy of thousands of organized interests - in order to demonstrate that American democracy is marred by ingrained and persistent class-based inequality.

Huntington examines the persistent gap between the promise of American ideals and the performance of American politics. He shows how Americans have always been united by the democratic creed of liberty, equality, and hostility to authority, but how these ideals have been frustrated through institutions and hierarchies needed to govern a democracy.

A bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the Constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the Òrepublican form of governmentÓ the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the Constitution as if it has almost nothing to say about this threat. But as Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath show in this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Fishkin and Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this Òdemocracy of opportunityÓ tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of slave power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the Òeconomic royalistsÓ and Òindustrial despots.Ó But today, as we enter a new Gilded Age, this tradition in progressive American economic and political thought lies dormant. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution begins the work of recovering it and exploring its profound implications for our deeply unequal society and badly damaged democracy.

More than Kings and Less than Men: Tocqueville on the Promises and Perils of Democratic Induvidualism examines Alexis de Tocqueville's hopes and fears for modern democracy, arguing that the distinctive political philosophy informing Democracy in America can help us to think more profoundly about the problems facing liberal democratic society today. L. Joseph Hebert, Jr. argues that Tocqueville saw the historical power of democracy as originating in its promise to liberate human nature, and the greatness it is capable of achieving, from the artificial constraints of conventional hierarchy. He probes Tocqueville's fear that the momentum of democratic change may violate that promise by neglecting or even stifling human greatness in the name of an artificial equality of conditions. Hebert explains why Tocqueville saw the need for a 'new political science' to regulate democracy, and why Tocqueville thought that the central task of this science, supported by enlightened statesmanship, was to combat 'individualism,' an extreme form of civic, moral, and intellectual apathy capable of ushering in a historically unprecedented form of despotism. Hebert looks in depth at the principles of Tocqueville's political science, their relation to classical, modern, and contemporary political thought, and their practical applications in his time and ours. He outlines the model Tocqueville recommended for a free and flourishing modern democratic order and analyzes the primary mechanisms Tocqueville proposed for avoiding the perils and securing the promise of democracy in his own day. Hebert observes that many of Tocqueville's fears regarding individualism are occurring today, and analyzes how Tocqueville's insights might be applied to combat individualism and promote genuine liberty in our own time.

Freedom in the World, the Freedom House flagship survey whose findings have been published annually since 1972, is the standard-setting comparative assessment of global political rights and civil liberties. The survey ratings and narrative reports on 195 countries and fifteen territories are used by policymakers, the media, international corporations, civic activists, and human rights defenders to monitor trends in democracy and track improvements and setbacks in freedom worldwide. The Freedom in the World political rights and civil liberties ratings are determined through a multi-layered process of research and evaluation by a team of regional analysts and eminent scholars. The analysts used a broad range of sources of information, including foreign and domestic news reports, academic studies, nongovernmental organizations, think tanks, individual professional contacts, and visits to the region, in conducting their research. The methodology of the survey is derived in large measure from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and these standards are applied to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development.