Jump to content

I need a theory argument that says the judge role in the round is to act as the usfg

Recommended Posts

The normative question of federal policy-making means the judge must make decisions from the perspective of the federal government.

Ravitch 10 [Diane Ravitch, preeminent historian of American education, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education, educational policy analyst, and research professor at New York University's Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Basic Books: New York, NY, 2010, p. 10-11]

Anyone who is a policymaker, aspires to be a policymaker, or wants to influence policymakers must engage in “seeing like a state.” It is inevitable. Policymaking requires one to make decisions that affect people’s lives without their having a chance to cast a vote. If no one thought like a state, there would probably be no highways or public works of any kind. Those who make the most noise would veto almost everything. It is the job of representative government to make decisions without seeking a majority vote from their constituents on every single question. Anyone who recommends a change of federal or state policy engages in “seeing like a state.” Improvement also depends on having a mix of views and new ideas to prevent the status quo from becoming ossified. Those who make policy are most successful when they must advance their ideas through a gauntlet of checks and balances, explaining their plans, submitting them to a process of public review, and attempting to persuade others to support them. If the policymaker cannot persuade others, then his plans will not be implemented. That’s democracy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now