In this synthesis of political philosophy, public administration, and American history, Rohr seeks to legitimize the administrative state in terms of constitutional principle. He tries to show that the fourth (or administrative) branch of government is compatible with the plans of the framers--both Federalist and anti-Federalist-of the U.S. Constitution and of the Bill of Rights. He argues that the combination of powers in administrative agencies does not violate the standard of separation of powers set forth in The Federalist (especially by James Madison); the higher reaches of the career civil service fulfill the framers' constitutional design by performing a balancing function originally assigned to the Senate; and the career civil service en masse heals the defect of inadequate representation in the Federal Constitution. ISBN 0-7006-0291-7 : $29.95.

"Examines the history, theory, and politics behind the age qualifications for elected federal office in the United States Constitution. Argues that the right to run for office ought to be extended to all adult-age citizens who are otherwise office-eligible"--Provided by publisher.

Americans hate bureaucracy—though they love the services it provides—and demand that government run like a business. Hence today’s privatization revolution. Jon Michaels shows how the fusion of politics and profits commercializes government and consolidates state power in ways the Constitution’s framers endeavored to disaggregate.

Billions of citizens around the world are frustrated with their governments. Why is this? And what can we do about it? In this groundbreaking book Michael Barber draws on his wealth of international experience advising political leaders, to show how those in power can make good on their promises. 'Refreshingly ruthless ... has an uplifting brio to it' Economist 'Michael Barber is a source of inspiration and wisdom' Andrew Adonis, New Statesman 'Excellent ... there is a lot of common sense and practical wisdom ... a breath of fresh air' David Willetts,Standpoint 'Barber is the global overlord of public policy ... a record around the world of actually achieving change' Philip Collins, Prospect

Originalism holds that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to its meaning at the time it was enacted. In their innovative defense of originalism, John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport maintain that the text of the Constitution should be adhered to by the Supreme Court because it was enacted by supermajorities--both its original enactment under Article VII and subsequent Amendments under Article V. A text approved by supermajorities has special value in a democracy because it has unusually wide support and thus tends to maximize the welfare of the greatest number. The authors recognize and respond to many possible objections. Does originalism perpetuate the dead hand of the past? How can originalism be justified, given the exclusion of African Americans and women from the Constitution and many of its subsequent Amendments? What is originalism's place in interpretation, after two hundred years of non-originalist precedent? A fascinating counterfactual they pose is this: had the Supreme Court not interpreted the Constitution so freely, perhaps the nation would have resorted to the Article V amendment process more often and with greater effect. Their book will be an important contribution to the literature on originalism, now the most prominent theory of constitutional interpretation.

Levinson here argues that too many of our Constitution's provisions promote either unjust or ineffective government. Under the existing blueprint, we can neither rid ourselves of incompetent presidents nor assure continuity of government following catastrophic attacks. Worse, our Constitution is the most difficult to amend or update in the world. Levinson boldly challenges the Americans to undertake a long overdue public discussion on how they might best reform this most hallowed document and construct a constitution adequate to our democratic values.