In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Wendy Schiller joins Julia, Lee, and James to talk about how we elect senators in the United States. Schiller is Professor of Political Science, Professor of International and Public Affairs, and Chair of Political Science at Brown University. She has also experienced politics as a practitioner, having served on the staffs of Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the Senate and Governor Mario Cuomo in New York. Schiller is the author of several books, including Electing the Senate: Indirect Democracy before the Seventeenth Amendment (Princeton University Press) and Partners and Rivals: Representation in U.S. Senate Delegations (Princeton University Press). And she has published articles in the American Journal of Political Science, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Studies in American Political Development, and the Journal of Politics.What is the best way to pick United States senators? What are the consequences of different modes of electing senators? Does direct election of senators impact their behavior inside the Senate differently than indirect election? What would happen if Americans repealed the 17th Amendment? And why are there two Senate seats up for grabs in Georgia at the same time? These are some of the questions that Wendy, Julia, Lee, and James discuss in this week’s episode.

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Seth Masket joins Julia, Lee, and James to discuss the future of the Democratic Party. Masket is professor of political science and director of the Center on American Politics at the University of Denver. He is the author of numerous books and articles about political parties, elections, state politics, and, on occasion, Star Wars. He is also the founder of the political science blog, Mischiefs of Faction. His most recent book, Learning From Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020, examines how Democrats’ perceptions of why they lost in 2016 shaped their behavior in the 2020 presidential election.How did Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss to Donald Trump influence Democrats’ decision to nominate Joe Biden in 2020? To what extent do broad narratives impact voters’ perceptions of what is at stake in elections? Do those narratives also impact the behavior of elected officials in-between elections? And if election narratives have this kind of power, does that create a feedback loop that inhibits serious change? These are some of the questions that Seth, Julia, Lee, and James discuss in this week’s episode.

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Philip Wallach joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider how the 2020 elections will impact Congress. Wallach is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute where he studies and writes about the administrative state, Congress, and the separation of powers. He is the author of To the Edge: Legality, Legitimacy, and the Responses to the 2008 Financial Crisis (Brookings Institution Press) and has published articles in numerous publications, including in the Brookings Center on Regulation and Markets, Studies in American Political Development, Fortune, National Affairs, National Review, Law & Liberty, The Los Angeles Times, RealClearPolicy, The American Interest, The Bulwark, The Hill, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. Most recently, Wallach examines how Congress fell behind the executive branch in a chapter in the forthcoming edited volume, Congress Overwhelmed: The Decline in Congressional Capacity and Prospects for Reform.Does it really matter which party controls Congress next year? Will the House and Senate still be dysfunctional if Democrats control both chambers in the 117th Congress? Or is a change in Congress’s partisan balance of power just what it needs for its members to get back to work? These are some of the questions Philip, Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode.

n this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Charlotte Hill joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider how Americans conduct national elections. Charlotte is a Ph.D. candidate at the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. She studies how election and voting laws impact political engagement. Her current research examines how voting barriers reduce youth turnout and how electoral reforms can increase voter participation. Outside of academia, Charlotte previously served as Vice President of the San Francisco Elections Commission and currently sits on the boards of nonpartisan advocacy organizations FairVote and RepresentUs. She recently co-authored a New America white paper and a New York Times op-ed with Lee advocating for establishing a nonpartisan and independent agency to oversee federal elections.How do Americans conduct elections at the federal level? Why are they so confusing? Would a national elections agency have improved the 2020 election? These are some of the questions Charlotte, Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week's episode.  

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Julia, Lee, and James discuss what happened in this year’s  election and what it means for American democracy. How should Americans interpret the results of the election? Should they be worried about Republicans’ ongoing efforts to change the outcome? And what do the election results reveal about the future of the Democratic and Republican parties? These are some of the questions Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode. Julia Azari, “For 4 years I’ve written that Trump was a disjunctive leader. Now I’m not so sure,” Mischiefs of Faction (November 10, 2020).

Ezra Klein joins Lee and James to discuss what the 2020 election reveals about the present state of American democracy. Klein is the editor-at-large and founder of Vox. He is the host of The Ezra Klein Show and the author of Why We’re Polarized. Klein has also written for the New Yorker and the New York Review of Books. He has appeared on Face the Nation, Real Time with Bill Maher, The McLaughlin Report, the Daily Show, and many more.How well did democracy do on Election Day? Will Donald Trump’s post-election behavior have long-term consequences for the health of America’s political system? Will Democrats try to capitalize on their Election Day gains? And how will Republicans respond to their efforts? These are some of the questions Ezra, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode.Ezra Klein, “Trump is attempting a coup in plain sight,” Vox (November 7, 2020).

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Julia, Lee, and James debate presidential debates. What role do they play in campaigns? In their current form, do they really help people to evaluate candidates? If not, how should debates be administered? And how should people evaluate presidential candidates? These are some of the questions Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode.Show NotesLee Drutman, “There is a better way to run presidential debates. Actually, there are several.” Vox (November 5, 2015). Lee Drutman, “Want to be president? Show us how you’d handle a disaster.” Washington Post (July 30, 2015).

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Matt Green joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider whether Democrats should play constitutional hardball if they control Congress and the presidency in 2021. Matt is a professor (and chair) of the Department of Politics at the Catholic University of America. His research focuses on political institutions (especially Congress), state and local politics, and federalism. Matt is the author of numerous books and articles on Congress and is currently working on a research project examining cases of legislative hardball at the state and federal levels. He is also a staff writer at Mischiefs of Faction.What is constitutional and legislative hardball? Is it a bad thing in and of itself or does that depend on what Democrats use hardball to accomplish? Is it possible to undermine the political system by using the rules authorized by that system? These are some of the questions Matt, Julia, Lee, and James discuss in this week’s episode.Show NotesSteven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die (New York: Broadway Books, 2018).Mark V. Tushnet, “Constitutional Hardball,” Georgetown University Law Center (2004).Lee Drutman, Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020).Keith E. Whittington, Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The President, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009).Jacques Derrida, Negotiations: Interventions and Interviews, 1971-2001 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2002).David Hume, Political Essays, ed. Knud Haakonssen (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994).Hannah Arendt, Between Past and Future (New York: Penguin Books, 1977).James Madison, “Federalist 58,” in The Federalist Papers.

In this week’s episode of Politics In Questions, Judith Resnik joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider how a democracy should select its judges. Judith is the Arthur Liman Professor of Law at Yale Law School and the Founding Director of the Arthurs Liman Center for Public Interest Law. Her scholarship focuses on the relationship of democratic values to government services; the roles of collective redress, class actions, and arbitration; contemporary conflicts over privatization; the relationships of states to citizens and non-citizens; the forms and norms of federalism; and equality and gender. Judith has written numerous books and articles, including: Representing Justice: Invention, Controversy, and Rights in City-States and Democratic Courtrooms (with Dennis Curtis, Yale University Press, 2011); Federal Courts Stories (co-edited with Vicki C. Jackson, Foundation Press, 2010); Migrations and Mobilities: Citizenship, Borders, and Gender (co-edited with Seyla Benhabib, New York University Press, 2009); “Punishment in Prison: Constituting the ‘Normal’ and the ‘Atypical’ in Solitary and Other Forms of Confinement” (with Hirsa Amin, Sophie Angelis, Megan Hauptman, Laura Kokotailo, Aseem Mehta, Madeline Silva, Tor Tarantola, and Meredith Wheeler; Northwestern Law Review, 2020); “(Un)Constitutional Punishments: Eighth Amendment Silos, Penological Purposes, and People’s ‘Ruin’” (Yale Law Journal Forum, 2020); and “Collective Preclusion and Inaccessible Arbitration: Data, Non-Disclosure, and Public Knowledge” (with Stephanie Garlock and Annie J. Wang; Lewis & Clark Law Review, 2020).How should a democracy like the United States select its judges? Why do we need judges in the first place? How do we ensure that the president and Senate appoint good judges?  Is there a single best way? Or does the ideal process change across time? And what reforms can address the dismal state of today’s confirmation process? These are some of the questions that Judith, Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode. Show NotesJudith Resnik, “Judicial Selection and Democratic Theory: Demand, Supply, and Life Tenure,” Cardozo Law Review Vol. 26, no. 2 (2005).

In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Ted Johnson joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider the role that political parties play in perpetuating popular dissatisfaction with politics. Ted is a senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. His work explores the role that race plays in electoral politics, issue framing, and disparities in policy outcomes. Previously, Ted was a national fellow at New America and a research manager at Deloitte. He is also a retired commander in the U.S. Navy following a two-decade career that included service as a White House fellow, military professor at the U.S. Naval War College, and speechwriter to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ted’s work has appeared in the Washington Post, Atlantic, New York Times Magazine, Wall Street Journal, National Review, and Politico, among other publications. He teaches law and public policy to master’s and doctoral students and is currently working on a book about national solidarity and race relations.How well do the Democratic and Republican parties represent Americans in general and black Americans in particular? What options do the two parties offer Americans once in government? And what can voters do when Democrats and Republicans ignore their concerns in office? These are some of the questions that Ted, Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode.