E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
The University of Texas Law School and Department of Government will be co-sponsoring a symposium, "Is Democracy Desirable," on Friday, January 31. It is free and open to the public.
For me, at
least, the question is not at all a rhetorical one, for I have become
convinced, in part because of the reaction to my earlier book Our
Undemocratic Constitution that most Americans are not particularly enamored
of what might be termed robust notions of majoritarian democracy. (And
perhaps they are right to hold such beliefs, which is why the question is not
rhetorical.) The format of the symposium will be to focus on three recent
books on the plausibility of what might be termed “the democratic project.”
The first, by Yale professor Helene Landemore, Democratic Reason, (Princeton,
2013)offers a quite vigorous defense of mass democracy, based on the
Condorcet jury theorem (and the associated argument about the “wisdom of
crowds”). Greater skepticism is expressed by Jamie Kelley, of Vassar, who
in Framing Democracy (Princeton, 2013) brings contemporary “frame
analysis” (associated, say, with the work of Noble Prize-winner Daniel
Kahneman), to bear to argue that “framing effects” work to make the idea of
intelligent choice by ordinary voters highly implausible. The most
vigorous critic of democracy is George Mason professor of law Ilya Somin, who
has just published Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter (Stanford University Press,
2013). Each of the first three panels will focus on one of these books,
with their central ideas presented and critiqued by two scholars, with the
opportunity for a short response by the author. There will be ample time
for discussion. The specific schedule is as follows:
IS DEMOCRACY DESIRABLE?
9:00 Opening Remarks
9:15-10:45
Panel One: Helene Landemore, DEMOCRATIC REASON: to be discussed by Dennis Thompson and Paul Woodruff
11-12:30
Panel Two: Jamie Kelly, FRAMING DEMOCRACY: A BEHAVIORAL
APPROACH TO DEMOCRATIC THEORY:Joseph
Fishkin and Jeffrey Friedman
2-3:30 Panel Three: Ilya
Somin, DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL IGNORANCE:Heather Gerken and Sandy Levinson
3:45-5:15 Panel Four: General discussion on the
current state of democratic theory and practice, led off by remarks by Dennis
Thompson, Jeffrey Abramson, and Jim Fishkin.
I anticipate that the panels and discussions will be available on a web site, though I will supply more information about that next week.
Yale Law Professor Heather Gerken will, incidentally, also be presenting an endowed lecture also co-sponsored by the Law School and Department of Government on Thursday, January 30, at 5:30. The title of her lecture is "The Loyal Opposition," which discusses federalism as a way of assuring the presence of at least some oppositionist government to any national government.