- American Government
- Ideas and Rights
- Political Behavior
- Political Parties
- Policymaking
- Digital Stories
Welcome to American Government 2013-2014
This class is not a civics course, nor is it an “introduction to” course. Nor is this a traditional survey course, the intended audience is college students. It is important to realize that the lectures and discussions will not summarize the readings nor describe the nuts and bolts of governmental bodies.
Instead, it offers an opportunity to explore in depth and systematically some rather sophisticated arguments, interpretations and controversies about the institutions (Congress, the Presidency, and the Judiciary) and the processes (Elections, Media, Public Opinion, etc.) of American government. Politics and the American political system are badly misunderstood by most citizens, and I will offer interpretations and analyses that may clarify some important events and practices.
I will present lectures and lead discussions that deal with specific aspects of American government and politics. We will critically interpret and evaluate significant parts of the political system. In the process I will try to debunk numerous deeply held but misleading beliefs people have about how politics work in this country. My mission is to challenge your basic beliefs, arouse your intellectual curiosity, and encourage you to think for yourselves. It is my hope that this hands-on experience of "doing" will both enliven your interest in political analysis and help you develop practical skills that you can use in other contexts as well.
Dr. Michael Thompson
Freedom of Speech
Jeromy Denton
Freedom of speech is one of the most precious rights we have as American citizens. One thing we should always remember is that we have power through our voices, there’s no limit to what a determined American with a voice that wants to make a difference. It gives us the right to speak our minds about any given topic and not have to think twice about it. This right has been the cause of many great things that have happened in our country. The only way a democracy can work is with ideas being openly expressed so that they can be heard by others, which may in turn produce more ideas, which is why the freedom is so great.
In today’s day and age the American people are always protesting something and in colonial days it was the same. The freedom of speech is also called the freedom of expression because sometimes thought or ideas can be expressed through ways other than speech. There are restraints to speech however, whereas libel and slander and a few others are not permitted. Article 11 states that, “The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but will be responsible for such abuses of this freedom will be defined by law.” The First Amendment applies to all, and under the First Amendment, we have freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, the right to assemble peacefully and petition the government. Freedom, by definition, means the right to do as you please without restraint, and so exercise your right America.
Resources
https://www.aclu.org/free-speech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/free-speech.aspx
Erica Cușnariov
Social Media – An Extension of the Democracy
Social media is essentially a virtual communication between people from the same community/ country/ continent etc. Communication means to use one’s right to free speech no matter in what form. Since US is one of the most democratic states in the world, it’s expected that social media will work also for the people and stimulate political participation.
Indeed, as Forbes says, from 60 % of Americans that use social media, 66% use it in political or civic activity. Those are very big numbers meaning that social media follows American’s requirements for own political manifestation. Pewinternet.org gives a detailed Political Fact Sheet that presents how American adults get involved in political and civic life through social media: 38 % use SNS(social networks) to “like” or promote material related to issues that matter to them; 35% use SNS to encourage others to vote; 31% use social media to encourage other people to take action on a political or social issue, 28% use them to connect political stories or articles for others to read; 20% have used the tools to follow elected officials and candidates for office etc. All of these statistics show that people use their tools and opportunities to be at the same step with everything that matters to them and, most importantly have a greater chance to connect with or persuade others in matters they care about. This statement is confirmed by statistics on the same site: 25% users of SNS became more active after discussing/ reading posts about an issue, 16% changed their views about a political issue and 9% became less involved in a political issue. Last two numbers reflect indeed the impact of social media, and specifically SNS, which manages to change people’s views to other side or diminish interest for something. That can have two sides: either people get indeed more informed and they take a different part of the issue or understand that it doesn’t matter that much; or, the worse, people also can be manipulated. So social media has two sides of the coin: informing people more complex and easy than ever, but it is also an easy tool for manipulation.
An example of practical and powerful use of social media and SNS in social participation is the Occupy Movement. As sociology.unc.edu says, “social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter have been central organizing locations for spreading information about Occupy Wall Street”, Facebook pages accumulated 390,000 “likes”, “the number of Facebook activism is approaching the number of online Tea Party activists”. So, SNS are one of the main tools available for spreading information about political and social issues and it makes a huge impact on those involved rising to bigger and bigger numbers of those involved, each day.
The truths exposed might seem obvious and natural at the first sight, but we should realize the power of the social media. SM and SNS continuously get more and more users so it makes it more and more important as the primary source of information and primary path of political manifestation for US citizens. And something on which people strongly rely always presents a source of power and vulnerability. The power of SM reflects directly the extant of democracy – it is not a democracy if the social and political issues aren’t instantly discussed with no censorship. But, because of the amount of daily published information any user can get lost and overwhelmed with the quantity of information, as a result not keeping track of it credibility and get manipulated. Social media is a knife with two ends: it is a democratic tool and a manipulative tool at the same time.
Finally, no matter what can be the effects of SM and SNS, full and free use of those is democracy, and the huge numbers of people involved as well as the impact confirms that people are fully aware of their power and they use it as they want dictating their will.
References:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkantrowitz/2012/10/19/pew-almost-40-of-american-adults-using-social-media-for-politics/
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/politics-fact-sheet/
http://sociology.unc.edu/features/sociologist-tracks-social-media2019s-role-in-occupy-wall-street-movement
Kaice Allen
Civil Rights
The definition of civil rights is the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality. Examples of civil rights include freedom of speech, press, and assembly; the right to vote; freedom from involuntary servitude; and the right to equality in public places. Defining civil rights has helped us by not allowing discrimination to occur and if it does occur being able to legally fight that discrimination. Discrimination occurs when the civil rights of an individual are denied or interfered with because of their membership in a specific group or class.
Such groups and classes that have been previously discriminated against are race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitations, national origin, and in some cases sexual orientation. The most important expansion of civil rights occurred in the Thirteenth and Fourteen Amendments, which abolished slavery in all states. Also during an era called the reconstruction era, Congress enacted many civil rights statutes that helped stop discrimination, such as Section 1981 of Title 142 protects individuals from discrimination based on race in making and enforcing contracts, participating in lawsuits, and giving evidence.
Believed to be the most prominent civil rights legislation since the reconstruction is the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which stated discrimination based on "race, color, religion, or national origin" in public establishments that have a connection to interstate commerce or are supported by the state is prohibited. One of the most noted and memorable aspect of our civil rights is the Civil Right Movement which came to national prominence during the mid 1950s. During this movement there were non-violent protests that were meant to break the pattern of public facilities’ being segregated by race in the South.
The Civil Rights Movement activists achieved the most important breakthrough in equal rights legislation for African Americans since the reconstruction period. Even though it is stated in our Constitution that everyone is equal it was not being upheld for slaves and servants who did not have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not only did African Americans have Civil Rights Movement, but women also had one to show that they should be treated the same as men. It occurred between 1848 and 1920, the first meeting was held July 19-20 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York, and about 100 people attended.
Initially women addressed social and institutional barriers that limited women’s rights, such as a lack of educational and economic opportunities, and the lack of voice during political debate. The turning point for the women’s movement came in the late 1880s and early 1890s when the nation experienced a surge of volunteerism in middle class women activists in the progressive causes. By August 26, 1920 women were given the right to vote in the Nineteenth Amendment, which stated that women had full voting rights nationally.
One big issue today is there is no specific civil law protecting gay and lesbians from discrimination, however a key goal of gay and lesbian political movements is to win civil rights in protection against discrimination in employment, housing, and elsewhere. Gays and lesbians have faced a lot of discrimination that has turned violent towards them and even deadly and they have however made progress and are now protected by the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) and the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (formerly known as the Hate Crimes Prevention Act). Also, recently, there is a movement for people with different sexual orientations to have the right to marry. In this movement many have joined gay, lesbians, and bisexual people to give them the same right as heterosexuals to marry, some states have allowed gay marriage and many more are joining their lead.
Resources
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/civil_rights
http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/WIC/Historical-Essays/No-Lady/Womens-Rights/
Erica Cușnariov
Does Dissatisfaction Mean True Democracy?
Gallup polls inform that American’s satisfaction (from most recent poll on 7-9 Jan, 2011) with the “system of government and how well it works” and the “size and power of the federal government” decreased to 42% and 31% respectively. So, Americans seem extremely unhappy with their government, on the other hand they are satisfied on 77% with the overall quality of life. There comes the contradiction: why Americans declare to be dissatisfied with their government as much as they are happy about overall aspects of life.
I am not an US citizen, but I am coming from a country that attempts to achieve more and more democracy. US is a worldwide idol of democracy, thus any statistics about people’s happiness are an important source to analyze for the worldwide sake of democratic systems. If to try to reduce, to the most simplistic words, the point of the democracy, than that would be happiness: happiness in family where parents have decent jobs and can give all that they desire to their children, stability, security etc. that would generally be included in the concept of quality of life. Logically then, one of the most important indicators of a successful democracy, and thus of a satisfactory government should be people’s satisfaction about their quality of life. Than why do Americans still blame their government and being happy with what it does at the same time? That is the question that can appear only in a true democracy, because democracy is the rule by people.
In a democracy, people must use their right to be extremely critical about any aspect of their society, forever and no matter how satisfied they already are. A democracy can’t limit people in their continuous and endless desires for their “pursuit of happiness”, in any form it comes to people – and that is the very essence of the democracy: people want to do what they want and nobody should stop them. Hence, possibly the main cause of such low satisfaction rate, continuously decreasing is that people constantly will find something they want to change or, without any real urge, would still criticize and not agree with some government actions – because it’s their right and it’s the pylon of the entire system they want to live in.
To compare with statistics outside of US, let’s refer to BBC: “examples of the levels of dissatisfaction with modern government: 65% in Western Europe, 73% in Eastern and Central Europe (worrying that post-communist governments have not done that well)”. The comment in the brackets is an important point – a high satisfaction % doesn’t mean satisfaction indeed if it was influenced by fraud of collected data or inertial resentments (as in post-communist countries) that would stop people from fully expressing their dissatisfaction. The final point would be that, low satisfaction might be an indicator that people are more aware and critical about what they expect and how the government should act according to their desires – the only condition that will always keep the democracy alive: people desires for more. It also, doesn’t mean that the bigger the dissatisfaction, the better it is. It means only that democracy will never be an easy political regime and that politicians will never forget about people they govern.
Winston Churchill said this truth in his famous words: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all other forms that have been tried from time to time”. He said these words when he didn’t win the election in 1945 even though he was the English that mobilized Britain the most and he can be named the main hero that stood against Nazi in WWII from UK. You’d think that people should have been happy for his huge achievements during war, but NO, they used their rights to choose whom they wanted to represent them further – and that is democracy.
References:
Gallup polls - http://www.gallup.com/poll/145760/satisfaction-gov-morality-economy-down.aspx
BBC - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4245282.stm
David Kaumpungan
Right to Bear Arms
There are many important American ideas and rights. A majority of Americans believe in the right to bear arms. This right is just as important as freedom of speech, religion, and the press, although some liberals may disagree. The Harvard Law Review and many scholarly peer reviewed articles can be used to reinforce the ironclad guarantees of this particular and unique American right.
For example, according to Siegel’s article in the Harvard Law Review, “The contemporary debate over gun control began in the 1960s, when President Johnson called for restrictions on firearms sales on the wake of President Kennedy’s assignation. The National Rifle Association was able to spur opposition to the proposed measures. In the 1950s and 1960s, guns were popular (Siegel 2008, 7-8). Guns are still very popular and they tend to become even more popular every time a politician threatens to try to take them away.
Thus the Gun control fight continues to this day. Siegel says, “In the early 1970s, gun control initiatives continued to gather support, spurred on by the assignation attempt that crippled presidential candidate George Wallace in 1972, and two more assignation attempts against President Ford in 1975. Siegel continues, “resistance to gun control laws was growing in the 1970s… national support for handgun bans dropped from sixty percent in 1959 to forty-one percent in 1975 (Siegel 2008, 9). So, despite changes in public opinion Americans still love their guns.
Even an American icon as adored as apple pie loved guns. President Reagan is quoted by Siegel, “Criminals aren’t dissuaded by soft words, soft judges, or easy laws. They are dissuaded by fear and they are prevented from repeating their crimes by death or by incarceration.” In constitutional terms Reagan said, “The Second Amendment gives the individual citizen a means of protection against the despotism of the state. The rights of the individual are pre-eminent” (Siegel 2008, 10). Guns are instruments that can be used to do good and bad. Just like the pen can be used for good and evil so too can guns be used for good or evil.
The gun rights movement is often associated with conservatives and the republican right. Not only are they generally in favor of gun rights they are also in favor of limiting or eliminating judicial activism. Siegel points out, “the individual rights claim on the Second Amendment was a new right, at odds with judicial precedent and in tension with complaints about judicial activism (Siegel 2008, 16). This though is echoed by textbooks, diverse scholarship. Guns are not a new American right, they have been there all along.
America loves guns. A clear majority of the U.S. public, 73%, believe the Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantees the rights of Americans to own guns” (Jones 2008, 1). Its not America’s fault that these weapons get smuggled in Mexico and other places to be used for evil. If bad people didn’t have guns they could have worse weapons that guns that could hurt even more innocent people that would be less surgical.
According to the Harvard Law Review, “Over forty million Americans own a gun. Between 55,000 and 120,000 times a year an American uses his gun in self defense. Gun ownership is perhaps one of the oldest and most prevalent characteristics of American culture. For over two hundred years the Second Amendment has protected some right of American to keep and bear arms. Yet, in nearly every state, gun owners must comply with some form of gun control laws. (Harvard Law Review, 2008, 1) Americans may not be able to have a F-16 fighter jet with rocket launchers or surface to air missiles, but they can have a hand gun and a rifle.
An interesting observation is from the medical community. According to Merritt, “The Second Amendment declares our right to arms to protect ourselves from the government should it violate our human rights. There will be no Tiananmen Square or Holocaust here. Additionally, to continue to give up our rights because bad people don’t follow the law only hurts we who take every step to be compliant. An armed society is a polite one. My trauma calls are overwhelmingly MVAs, with a huge portion of those involving motorcycles. Stabbings and beatings are second, and GSWs are a very distant third. Most GSWs are self-inflicted” (Merritt 2008, 1). Using the public safety argument as a way to take away American guns is disingenuous at best.
References:
Siegel, R. (2008). Dead or alive: originalism as popular constitutionalism in Heller. Harvard Law Review. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from Academic OneFile Database.
Jones, J. (2008). Americans in Agreement with Supreme Court on Gun Rights; Nearly three in four say Second Amendment guarantees right of Americans to own guns. Gallup Polls News Service. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from Academic OneFile Database.
District of Columbia v. Heller: the individual right to bear arms. Harvard Law Review. (2008). Retrieved October 28, 2014, from Academic OneFile Database.
Merritt, D. (2008). Fewer guns don’t necessarily mean fewer casualties. Contemporary Surgery. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from Academic OneFile Database.
RAKIM DEAN
civil rights
Civil rights are what we get as humans were supposed to be treated equally. There was an act passed 1964 that gave us these rights. It outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin blacks Hispanics ect, feels as if there not being treated right in America and always feel as if they’re not getting the rights they deserve. An example is North American whites enslaved blacks. But a little after war abolished slavery. But even after whites gathered together and made places such as bathrooms, schools, churches, homes, water fountains for whites only. There were even signs posted up that said no blacks or dogs allowed.
This example is just one of many that had to do with the civil rights. There were marches during these times to stop. In 1955 the civil rights movement was a political social and economical struggle of blacks to gain full citizenship and really become a part of being a free American in America. But African Americans were fighting as early as slavery to gain equality and be treated equal. The reason I’m talking about this historical event is because it was the biggest event in the last 60 years. The NAACP was involved in the civil rights heavily and its one of the oldest and largest civil rights organization and it is still running until today its job was to fight for the rights of colored people.
Times have changed drastically and things have calmed down a lot but there is still racism and police brutality and slavery going on but everyday were working on putting a stop to it civil rights should come natural and we should know how to treat people we know that kicking a sleeping dog is bad now what would we beat an unarmed civil? But civil rights are slowed down and civil rights are great for the minorities.
There are many cases that occurred that has people really thinking our civil rights are not being treated how there suppose to there has been a recent case where an UN armed teen was shot and killed during an incident with a police officer this happened august ninth 2014 when the cop asked brow and a friend to get out the middle of the street and go on to the sidewalk the cop says brown came close to the police car window and that’s when the shots were fired but others say brown had his hands up but regardless of the situation brown was shot six times and killed the FBI is investigation the dispute and is seeing if the officer was violation browns civil rights. There has been protest just life back in the 1950 to fights for the rights of blacks and other minorities. in 1954-68 the goals dealing with the civil rights was to end segregation and the discrimination of black Americans and to get the same protection and rights as the other citizens of America this civil rights movement was characterized by campaigns of civil resistance. There were non violent protest that produced crisis between the police government and also local governments.
Communities really had to react fast before things got out of hand which they did like the watts riots but there were achievements from these protest sit ins and marches there was an act passed in 1964 called the civil rights act of 1964 that banned the things I spoke of earlier in the writing there was also an act passed called the voting rights act of 1965 that restored and protected voting rights
http://www.civilrights.org/publications/reports/long-road/policing.html
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/
Ashley Riley
Freedom and Rights
Law according to the web “is a system of rules and guidelines which are enforced through social institutions to govern behavior”, and they are based on the rights of every single human being. The world we live in is enforced with many different laws in which we are to live by for our own safety or perhaps to just sit back and say “Hey, we have a new law.” There are laws such as the famous marijuana smoking and underage drinking, in which I feel should not be. As a young man in my late teens I feel as though some laws/Rights don’t make much sense. The fact that I’m not an American citizen makes it even easier for me to believe this, for I look at American laws and laugh. Some laws such as the drinking law will always be broken, for millions of other teenagers feel as though they should be allowed to drink if they are allowed to drive. Why is it that one at the age of 18 can own a car, drive to and from school and work, but can’t go to the liquor store for a drink when the school works gets stressing? These are questions that will be asked for eternity. Yes, teenagers are irresponsible and will probably handle drinking worse than an adult, but maybe if they were tot how to drink and did it more often, then they would possibly be more responsible drinkers in their later adult years. All people/adults don’t look at situations the same, and may say that it’s a great law etc.; however they are the ones to set the examples causing the new generation to wonder how it feels to have a hangover.
If teen are allowed to fight in war why are they looked down upon when seen pregnant or holding a bottle of bud light? Society is messed up and has rights and laws in all the wrong places. Basically society tells us that it is okay for one to go and die for his or her country at the age of 18, but when a teen is pregnant and decides to bring a new life into the world its wrong. If there is any that should be changed it’s the age to fight in war, for is the government trying to get rid of teens? Only God one knows. Here is another law that will forever be questioned: weed. Why is it that one can spend just as much time in prison for weed possession as the guy that commits a homicide, for weed harms no one? People should have a right to smoke, and maybe the crime rate would drop someday. Imagine everybody high and on one great accord people would have no reason to fight, but that’s just my crazy imagination. To my opinion these laws should be looked at again, for they could be the next great change that the world needs.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/rights.htm
+privacy
Rakim dean
Privacy is a right that every human should get. But it seems like are right to privacy has been taken away by the government. Privacy is a natural right and it something we feel like were born with. Privacy is our property its also are home out body, property and feelings. Government should have no part in watching or surveillance these aspects of or life. “In recent years there have been attempts to clearly define a right of privacy in 2005”.
Privacy is taken away when you’re in school because schools are run by the government. As for student athletes are privacy of using certain drugs are also taken away because there seen as role models of the society. So if and student athlete was asked to take a drug test he would have to. Some feel the future of privacy remains an open question. But any government representative will most likely tell you that privacy should be given to citizens seeing that its moral and we know as humans we should have the right of privacy Mark zuckerberg contacted the president and expressed his feeling on the government using facebook to keep surveillance on people.
The government does not just watch face book they watch the whole internet and also watch your every move. The right to privacy is not in the constitution but it is said by the Supreme Court that some of our amendments do create this right. The definition of privacy is” the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves selectively”. One of the biggest ways the government throws our privacy out the window is by the internet. They can track down any of the information that’s on there about you.
Another way the government takes away our privacy is from our cell phones. There are many cases where the government has leaked into someone’s messages and convicted them of things. People feel like the privacy has been taken away all the way and they have been fighting to cut the government out of there life’s. There was also a time where the people had to house the soldiers even though it was there private property. See privacy is what the government wants it to be and I’m sure a lot of people would agree with me. A human without privacy is simple a slave to the government because they’re taking away the privacy of one. As for surveillance while your outside every step you take is being recorded and people don’t even know it. The government does not make it clear that we are being watched 24 hours a day 7 days a week. They will let us know that they will be taking money out of are checks or gas is finally going down. There’s more to just or privacy being taken. Were being watched for a reason.
I think we could be being watch because we may have terrorist in the US and the government wants to keep a watch but honestly we will never really know. to sum the privacy and surveillance we as people do deserve the right to privacy and hopefully soon the government realizes we deserve privacy. The government does a lot of things behind the citizens of Americas back and was not able to track them and see what’s really going on behind the doors of the white house. How does the government think its okay to keep the things they do private and we can’t. Were suppose to run the government but really I runs us. Privacy is what we need and government watch needs to stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy
http://www.theguardian.com/world/privacy
Taylor Packard
Do We Even Have Rights?
What are rights anymore? This day and age the government has taken away all of our rights. I feel like I can’t even walk out of my own house without someone knowing my business. Or even be in my own home and feel like I’m being watched. The government has taken over the whole world and for their mistakes we suffer. For instance if we want to buy a clip for our gun it can’t be any bigger than ten rounds. They want everyone to be registered when we buy a gun, so later they can go in and take it away. They are slowly eliminating everything. Setting rules beyond rules, slowly taking everything away until they have everything. For farming and ranching you have to now follow every little thing they say. If you have cattle they have to be EPA certified or you can’t run them next to a creek. Even if you don’t have a crop you have to still pay taxes and they think you’re just trying to get money out of them. I feel like my rights have been completely taken away.
Do we even have a constitution anymore? The government finds away around everything, they abuse the constitutional rights we did have. You can’t even speak your mind anymore or give someone your input without being penalized or arrested. If you protest to close to someone you will immediately be arrested. Things like this just blow my mind. Like I said we have had so many rights taken away because they simply can. The government can track your every move these days. With any type of signal or technology you have your privacy has been taken away as well. When you’re on your computer it would be so easy for someone to hack in and look at you through your webcam. There was something going around about a “Talking Angela” on cell phones that some child molester was talking to young kids and asking them inappropriate questions. So therefore, our privacy right has been taken away. It’s like you can’t hide anywhere because they will always find you.
What happened to our freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to due process of law, the right to a speedy and public trial, freedom from cruel and unusual punishments, the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Before doing research about this I new maybe one or two of these rights. So I personally think teachers should teach students more about the constitution and the rights we have. Rather than sending us off into the world and us not knowing the rights, and if something happens we will bow down and give in to the government.
Another thing that really ticks me off is that the government takes advantage of teachers. The funding that they take away really effects us and they think its no big deal. We may just be “teachers” to them, but lets get real; who else will teach their kids everything they need to know to be able to graduate the twelfth grade. Teachers put up with snotty bratty kids who don’t give a care in the world. Some teachers impact a lot of kids lives and even save lives. So the fact that we get rights taken away as teachers just isn’t right.
This world is going down hill way to fast and I hope one day things will change before it is too late. If it could be like the old days things would be just fine. Simple and sweet.
References
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/10/americans-have-lost-virtually-all-of-our-constitutional-rights.html
http://constitutionus.com/
Civil Rights: Privacy
By Danielle Schaffer
Civil rights need the governments involvement to guarantee individuals rights. Civil liberties on the other hand, restrict the government’s involvement to protect the individual’s rights. It’s often possible for civil rights to restrict certain people’s civil liberties. They sound like opposites, but in reality if it weren’t for the fight for civil rights, there would be no civil liberties to protect.
The Bill of Rights was created specifically for the federal government. After the Civil War it did slowly begin to make changes towards giving the states these rights as well. Using a process called selective incorporation, meaning giving rights to each individual state one right at a time, that depending on the case brought to them that they would see if the right was necessary for the state. This process was very slow. The Court likes to use a “hand off approach”, so it took from 1897 to 2010 to apply all of the rights to the states.
One of the more controversial rights is privacy. What makes it so controversial is that, privacy is never directly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and instead it is only implied. The first time this implied right was tested was in 1965 when a Planned Parenthood in Connecticut started dispensing condoms, something that was outlawed at the time. The Court made a drastic ruling, that everyone has the right to privacy. Justice Douglas explained that the Bill of Rights have penumbras to give them purpose. Penumbras are shadows, to protect the people.
There have been several other Court cases since then, one of the main ones being Roe Vs. Wade. A case brought forward in Texas, over a woman’s right to choosing if she wants to continue on with her pregnancy or not. The Courts decision was clear. They believe that the individuals right to privacy should also include the woman’s choice to have a baby. This became extremely controversial and created “pro-life” and “pro-choice” sides of the argument. The controversy over this ruling goes on today.
There are many other lawsuits dealing with the public’s privacy. Individual’s opinions always come up in the cases and later after the judges ruling. Not everyone will agree on which side of the lawsuit is right, but we can all agree we want our privacy.
References:
By The People By: James A Morone and Rogan Kersh
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html
Gun Control
Matthew Nickelson
Why put more laws restricting Americans from obtaining firearms? The constitution gives American individuals the right to “keep and bear arms.” Self-defense should not be taken away by the government. Law abiding citizens fallow laws, but law breakers break the law. Thus, for every gun law passed that’s just one more firearm in the hand of a “good guy”. Do the law breakers, the people who own/carry firearms illegally, obey the law? No, it as simple as that. So who do the laws really affect? Just Americans that support their freedom granted to them by the constitution. Villains would love to know their next victim will be unarmed. In 2010 California had the most restricting gun laws. As a result gun crime arose.
Now look at New York currently, gun laws rising, while firearm violence rises also. So looking at this, ask yourself if gun control will lower gun violence. The answer is no. fascinatingly some of the states with lower gun control have relatively lower gun crime. Let’s take a look at the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The liberal media indicated that Adam Lanza used assault weapons to kill 20 children and six school staff members. The shooting also prompted more gun control. Would more gun control have stopped the tragedy? Adam Lanza did use an AR-15 rifle, but this if not an assault rifle. A assault weapon has “selective fire” this is feature on the firearm that enables the user to shoot semiautomatic (fires one round for every time the trigger is pulled back), full automatic (the firearm keeps firing rounds as long as the trigger is back) and/or burst (fires a set number of rounds for every time the trigger is pulled, usually three rounds).
The rifle Adam Lanza used was just a semiautomatic rifle. He illegally obtained the Bushmaster AR-15, Glock, and the Sig Sauer by killing his mother, Nancy Lanza, and stealing her firearms from her personal collection. He also stole some other firearms, but they were not used in the shooting. So, he illegally stole the firearms. Gun laws would not have stopped him from obtaining the firearms. I have also heard that “guns kill people”. This is probably one of the dumbest statements I have heard. I have seen firearms at gun shops. They sit there lifeless occasionally one will be taken off the rack and analyzed by a potential buyer. But I have never seen a firearm lift itself off the rack take aim, and open fire and open fire at people.
Granted the guns may be lazy. I searched online and spoke to some firearm dealers about the statement “guns kill people”. After extensive research I came to this conclusion, guns don’t kill people. If guns don’t kill people who do? “Bad guys” the law breakers do. So we have discussed the effects of gun control and what comes of it. If the “bad guys” knew there next victim would be armed do you think they would be as eager to rob or hurt them? I believe they wouldn’t. In conclusion American citizens have the right to “keep and Bear arms.” People who don’t want anything to do with firearms don’t have to support that right. We are free to carry and protect ourselves and our families with firearms. I want to end with this quote “no free man shall be debarred the use of arms.” Thomas Jefferson.
Gun Rights
Obama is after our guns. There is no doubt about that. All the extreme left wing, tree hugging, pot smoking hippies have it made up in their mind that guns apparently kill people. So my response is let’s throw a gun and a table and tell it to kill someone. Go ahead gun, kill someone. Clearly the gun isn’t going to kill people so their argument is invalid. Guns do not kill people; people kill people. For some odd reason they don’t get that threw their mind.
On April 9, 2013, something tragic happened. A crazed lunatic with an exacto knife went on a rampage at Lone Star College in The Woodlands in Texas. He attacked many and injured 14 as he went through classrooms, lunging at people in an attempt to hurt as many as he could. Thankfully, no one was killed. We need to be more focused on getting these crazy SOB off the streets rather than take a 60 year old farmer out on the plains .22 rifle away.
The way they settled is that they are going to make damn near impossible for you to get a gun. The company you buy the gun from has to go through every single record of yours just to purchase. Hell if you have a parking violation your chances of purchasing a new firearm are decreasing very very quickly. The regulations seem to be working but in all reality they are not. Drugs are illegal and people can still get their hands on it. Why would guns be any different? If somebody wants one bad enough, they will do anything to acquire one.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is shit in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won just purely because they are bigger than them and inflict major injuries on the loser.
"The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens …. from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams. Now the government is going against the words of one of Americas founding fathers.
People who aren’t trained properly in the safety of firearms are the ones that kill people! The mentally insane are also in that category. But the farmers back home who are teaching their kids the proper and safe ways to operate a firearm should not be harmed in this. It takes so long for a person to purchase a gun. And also the ammo is so scarce that there basically isn’t even a reason to have a firearm!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-gun-control-kills/
Freedom of Speech
Jason Manning
Time and time again I find myself turning on the television and seeing some report or news story about a group of protesters who are gathering around an office complex of some sort or some kind of factory or other working establishment. They stand out in the open picketing the ground with there signs screaming and shouting all while simply trying to get there point across. All the while I see this I can only think of a few things. “The freedom of speech is both powerful and highly un appreciated.” Without the freedom of speech people wouldn't be able to host there opinions in such a manner as riots and rallys, or other similar functions of group propaganda. Common people would be tracked down and arrested for some of the things they say if it wasn't for freedom of speech. I believe that a persons freedom of speech needs to be more appreciated. Without freedom of speech the idea of a dystopian society may surely raise to the peripheral of your thought process. An overpowering government ruling over the people not letting them decide thing or express their own opinions does seem quite bleak, and that is why freedom of speech is a fantastic right of the people that needs to be appreciated more.
So what is freedom of speech? In simple terms it is the simple ideal of freedom of expression. That everyone is entitled to their own opinions of things and that they as people hold the right to express there opinions out to the public to anyone who is willing to hear them. The ability to be able to express oneself is truly a good right of basic human needs that everyone should have, after all people should be entitled to their own rights and opinions, correct? The ability to publish, write down, and use many other options of a media such as art to express oneself is a wonderful thing. It is perhaps our greatest right, fundamentally with out the ability to express themselves were would we get our creativity? Truthfully when it comes to freedom and democracy isn't it better to allow the large group of people to express their displeasure for something and to vent out their ideas then to let them maybe perhaps start a revolution?
Still the freedom of speech is not perfect and does have some limitations. One such limitation is the fact that the very people expressing themselves need to take responsibility for what they are trying to state and get across to whoever will listen to them. Another limitation to the human right of freedom of speech is that it should not be offensive, therefore not falling into a type of offence principle. Personally I disagree with this idea of a offense principle. Think about it this way, someone cant say something cause its offensive so another complains that something else was offensive. People in general are simply whiners but that's my personal opinion. Some limitations to freedom of speech can go as far as bannings, were something such as a book will be banned from print due to controversy.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/free-speech.aspx
Reference
By the People By: James Morone and Rogan Kersh
Changing Our Perspective
By: Lauren Mountford
Civil Rights has been an issue since the founding of the government. Our rights as citizens have been defined and changed many times throughout our time as a nation. This fight is still going on today, as we battle for equality. However, it began with a need for equality in races and gender. Winning rights is a process that takes place in steps, and within this process many people who have not previously had rights have gained them.
One of the first steps to gaining civil rights is a group must define itself. This takes time and effort in order to create the definition of victimization. This group must be looked at as discriminated against for people to take notice and begin a social movement. When we redefine ourselves as a group that needs help gaining civil rights, we create a need for people outside our group to then begin to help us.
When people feel they have been discriminated against, it is often not taken lightly, and when a group gets together to solve an issue, it is easier to make an impact than when just one person alone tries to make an impact. A good example of a group working together is when the abolition movement began in the nineteenth century. It was very important to the African Americans and those who supported them to immediately end slavery. The African Americans were some of the most discriminated against as they were not treated like humans. Eventually, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 drew a line closing slavery to the northern states.
Although this began the civil rights movement for African Americans, it did not completely end slavery until Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. By 1865 the Thirteenth Amendment had abolished slavery, and the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 protected the former slaves, as well as established that anyone born in the United States is a citizen. The Fourteenth Amendment is known for the phrase “equal protection of law” as it requires that the government protect every citizen’s rights equally.
Although the slaves were freed the discrimination did not end here. The South still tried to keep African Americans from their freedom with the grandfather clause, which did not allow anyone to vote if their grandfather did not vote, and literacy tests, which many African Americans did not pass because they were made extremely difficult.
The Ku Klux Klan also developed in the South, causing the death of many African Americans due to due to the violent group.
It was not until 1909 when the group National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was formed that America began to really knock down the walls by desegregating schools and standing up for their beliefs. Eventually, this led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made it illegal to discriminate based race, sex, religion, or national origin.
Although the process to gain civil rights is a long one, it is possible. It is difficult to believe that our nation is capable of this discrimination and various hate crimes. With discrimination still going on today, it is good to be able to know it is possible for change.
References
By The People By: James A Morone and Rogan Kersh
Gun Control
Obama is after our guns. There is no doubt about that. All the extreme left wing, tree hugging, pot smoking hippies have it made up in their mind that guns apparently kill people. So my response is let’s throw a gun and a table and tell it to kill someone. Go ahead gun, kill someone. Clearly the gun isn’t going to kill people so their argument is invalid. Guns do not kill people; people kill people. For some odd reason they don’t get that threw their mind.
On April 9, 2013, something tragic happened. A crazed lunatic with an exacto knife went on a rampage at Lone Star College in The Woodlands in Texas. He attacked many and injured 14 as he went through classrooms, lunging at people in an attempt to hurt as many as he could. Thankfully, no one was killed. We need to be more focused on getting these crazy SOB off the streets rather than take a 60 year old farmer out on the plains .22 rifle away.
The way they settled is that they are going to make damn near impossible for you to get a gun. The company you buy the gun from has to go through every single record of yours just to purchase. Hell if you have a parking violation your chances of purchasing a new firearm are decreasing very very quickly. The regulations seem to be working but in all reality they are not. Drugs are illegal and people can still get their hands on it. Why would guns be any different? If somebody wants one bad enough, they will do anything to acquire one.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is shit in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won just purely because they are bigger than them and inflict major injuries on the loser.
"The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens …. from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams. Now the government is going against the words of one of Americas founding fathers. People who aren’t trained properly in the safety of firearms are the ones that kill people! The mentally insane are also in that category. But the farmers back home who are teaching their kids the proper and safe ways to operate a firearm should not be harmed in this. It takes so long for a person to purchase a gun. And also the ammo is so scarce that there basically isn’t even a reason to have a firearm!
http://conservatives4palin.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Gun-Rights.jpg
David Taylor
People Kill People
by Loretta Harmison
Throughout the years there have been a lot of arguments about gun control. Many democrats believe that guns kill people
instead of people kill people. With all the arguments that are being spouted to the public about how dangerous guns are, the government thinks it needs to step in and take our right to own a gun away .
Obama is one of the biggest threats America has on keeping our guns. In his presidency, he has tried to convince the people that guns kill people instead of people kill people. He wants to persuade the congress to pass laws to try and take way citizens' right to bear arms, so the common person has no way to protect their family.
There have been multiple studies around Eastern Europe that show less guns does not mean less violence. In Russia, only 4000 out of 100,000 populations own a gun, in that population the violence rate is 20.52 out of 100,000. To put this into a better perception, Russia has a banned on handguns yet they have a murder rate of 30.6%, while in the United States, with the right for the citizens to own handguns, has a rate of 7.6%. These studies show that taking our guns will not decrease our murder rates.
A person, who owns a gun or who is trying to purchase one, should be educated on gun safety, and about the usage of it. There are many hunter safety courses that explain all the different safety tips; for example, never pointing a gun, loaded or unloaded, at anything that you do not want to shoot. No law abiding citizen should not have their guns taken away because some unstable person purchased a gun, legally or off the black market, then went and shot up a school or public place. It is not the guns fault; it is the person who uses it illegally. The farmers or the people without mental issues should be able to teach their children the proper use of guns. They should be able to give guns to their family members to protect themselves from trespassers and burglars.
There are many different purposes for keeping guns other than protection, like for outdoors use like hunting, from hunting big game to flying game. Hunting helps keep the animal population down and in check, which helps the ecosystem. If there were not any hunters, the number of animals would increase and the habitat would steadily become more crowded. This would be devastating for the environment because the land would become over used forcing the animals to spread to areas that they would not ordinary inhabit like cities or areas near roads. With animals living closer to humans, it could increase the number of diseases and animal related accidents.
Just because the government wants to take our guns away, doesn’t mean that guns are going to disappear and with them so will the violence. There will always be a black market. Even if you can’t get your hands on a gun there is always different ways to injury or kill someone, especially when an unstable person has it in their mind that they want to do harm to that person or persons. When they get in their mind you can’t change their mind, they will do it with or without a gun.
References
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/27/Harvard-Study-Shows-No-Correlation-Between-Strict-Gun-Control-And-Less-Crime-Violence
http://prosandconsofguncontrol.net/the-pros-and-cons-of-gun-control/
Let Gays Love
By: Kendra Trussel
The topic of homosexual marriage has been around for years. In the last decade or so there has been a big push for it to be legalized in all 50 states. As seen on TV and other protests that take place it is obvious that this is something that probably will not be resolved over the next few years. Though some states are taking a stand and allowing people in love to love but others are standing behind their populations of people who think it is against a religious code.
I was raised in a religious home but I have always been taught to treat people with respect and love them for who they are and that includes loving them for who they love. I come from a stand point where no matter what people in life are always not going to agree with something that you do in life so there’s no reason to dwell on it. But there also is no reasons for others to butt into your life when it really has no effect on them what so ever. If people who just let people be free and love who ever they want it wouldn’t be a topic of discussion at all. Everyone else in America gets to choose who they want to love so why is it so hard to let other people do it. Just because they don’t choose to love the same gender as you doesn’t mean that their type of love is wrong or shouldn’t be expected in any way.
While it is clear why so many people are opposed to having such a law, there are millions of people on the other side of the debate. Most people disagree with these things because of religious reasoning’s. It has always been told in the bible that man should not sleep with same man of his kind, but more today this is becoming something not as strict. In many states they are making it legal for same sex couples to get married. This is becoming very popular, same sex dating has been happening for a long time it is just not becoming important to them to get married. If they love each other they should be able to get married just like every other couple that loves each other.
Even though this topic has been around for a long time, I think it is becoming so much more popular that we are going to be seeing a lot more states legalize it. There are more than 10 states that already have it legalized and their population is becoming more and more so that couples can move to those states and feel comfortable to love who they would like to love. I believe it will benefit states to legalize it. In my opinion there is not many reasons why people cannot be married to who they would like to be married too. It is not my job to judge them on whether or not they will be going to hell or heaven depending on who they choose to lay with. Who they choose to love will not affect me in any way so why not let them live their lives how they choose to live it, and be happy just like the rest of the world who gets to married who they would like to marry!
http://www.hrc.org/?gclid=CKCZ4ciJ97wCFa5DMgodykUAOw
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory
Ideas for Who?
By Daniel Mackay
With all of the increasing amount of ridiculous ideas that the government is spewing, it brings up the question who exactly do the ideas benefit? The never ending thought of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer keeps getting shot down, simply because one politician took a "tax increase", when in reality they are still being drove around in limos and the newest Bentley. The fact of the matter is that all of these new ideas are really helping the politicians keep a position of power that they would have a hard time losing. For example, the most recent election for president was between Barack Obama, a man who preaches about change and establishing affordable healthcare, but in the meantime is spending money out of the ying-yang to fund a war that is supposed to be over. Then you have Mitt Romney who promoted change by trying to run the country like a company if he would've won the election, which would work for a matter of 3.5 seconds.
Every politician is corrupt, no matter how high up the totem pole they are. Money talks and if it's the right amount, any person will flip flop on subject. The fact of making healthcare affordable is great but looking at the bigger picture, it's to make up for all of the screw ups that have happened since it was proposed. Like the amount of money Obama and Congress have spent since he took office, including a 10 year plan where he plans on spending $47 trillion. I'm no genius but where the hell do they think money is going to come from? That is more money than every president before Obama has spent combined. It is ludicrous that we can pull a random number out of a hat and say that we need to spend that much money in order to make the world go around. So saying that healthcare is going to be more affordable is a joke, because in a sense, someone is going to have to pay all of this ridiculous amount of money back, meaning the 90's and 00's generation should be in for a rude awakening when tax season comes around.
Lastly, everyone should take a good hard look at how negative of an impact the government is placing upon the citizens by making all of the terrible spending and tax cut laws which make the middle to lower class of citizens look even poorer than they should be. By having the division of classes getting steeper, it furthers the need for people to be more and more gullible. Not that I am about to agree with how my next point turned out so don't think I'm a supporter of it, but Hitler and the Nazi's took power by seeing a cry for help and taking advantage of the people by giving them false hope to make Hitler the chancellor of Germany. We all know where this is going. Not that our government is going to start a genocide, but the point is that in all reality, the government has all of the power and they control how gullible we as citizens are. If they need money, they jack up the taxes or make some reason to help a cause. Whenever these ideas get questioned, they are deterred by avoidance or they are put to rest, forcefully or quietly. The scariest thing about that is the fact that the government can hear and see everything you do, whether it be over the phone or over social media that the careless person posted on. Nobody finds an issue with this, or nobody has been heard making a stand against this.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/18/The-Biggest-Spender-Obama-Has-Spent-More-Money-Than-Anyone-In-History-of-World
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-facts.php
Cordae Mckelvy
Who said that's right?
You do not have the right to everything that you feel is right. Rights vary from state to state. Everyone may not have the same rights as others. Every U.S citizen do share a lot of the same rights, these laws and rights can be found in the Constitution. Now far as everything else you want to do outside of the constitution, have to first be approved by state laws established by each states separate government. States are not allowed to pass laws that goes against or coincide with a law that has been passed by national government. However, national government can pass a law that can overrule a state law. Each state do have to recognize and respect the laws passed by other states, this is known as the Full faith and credit clause. Because it is legal to purchase marijuana in Colorado does not mean its ok to bring those substances to any surrounding state that prohibits the paraphernalia.
All fifty states have passed a conceal and carry law. Illinois being the last state to pass the law. This gives citizens of each state to have the right to carry firearm on their person or close by. However, each states have different boundaries and requirements that comes with the conceal and carry law. In some states you can carry a weapon that is not concealed. In some states you have to have a permit or license to carry or even purchase a gun. The idea of the law is for people to be able to feel safer and be able to protect themselves. Studies show that states that have stricter gun laws have a higher murder rate due to firearm. If someone see that you have a legal weapon on you then you are lease likely to be harmed.
In the past two years two states have legalized the usage and sale of marijuana. Those states are Colorado and Washington. As of 2012 anyone over the age of 21 could purchase and consume marijuana within those states. 23 states have passed medical marijuana laws making it legal. They amount you can have and the price vary from state to state. Some stakes you can consume marijuana but you cannot smoke it. For medical marijuana you are issued ID cards. Some of the 23 states that allow medical marijuana do not allow you to purchase marijuana with your id card that was issued in another state.
As of September 2014 there are 19 states in the United States that have passed laws allowing same-sex marriage. These laws were approved either by popular vote, legislation or by the court. The most recent states that has passed the law was determined by court decision. Some states feel like to ban same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and treats people unequal. Amongst the debate of this topic is hate crimes. I feel that it’s your own personal business who you decide to be with and it doesn’t have an effect on anyone else. Others tend to make it their business and react with violence towards people who may be gay or those that’s support gay people.
In conclusion, take advantage of your rights. In order to take advantage of your rights you have to first know what your rights consist of. Things you and people in the state that you live in are allowed to do others in different states are not. Just because you can smoke drugs legally in one state do not mean you can do the same thing in the state next door. Know that laws vary from state line to state line. Once you’ve crossed over that state line know that the rules may have changed. You are at fault for the free information that you do not have knowledge of. Knowing your rights will allow you to live louder and not be taken advantage of.
References:
http://humanevents.com/2014/01/03/study-shows-concealed-carry-laws-result-in-fewer-murders/
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000881
http://gaymarriage.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001607
Civil Rights
Ashton Nicholson
10-6-2014
An African American in today’s society has no idea how it feels to live in a world of segregation. Back in the 1800s the life for a black was excruciating. They were used as slaves for the white people, beaten to death if they did wrong. They were only allowed to drink at certain water fountains, eat in certain restraunts, they were only allowed to sit in the back of a bus. They had all black schools, and weren’t allowed to vote. Anymore these days we don’t know any different than having a combined social status, it’s just the way it is.
Civil Rights are defined as “the nonpolitical rights of a citizen; especially: the rights of personal liberty guaranteed to United States citizens by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution and by acts of Congress” (Merriam-Webster). In less complicated words, the rights that every person should have regardless of his or her sex, race or religion. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery in the U.S., and the 14th Amendment gave African Americans legal citizenship and equal protection under the law. The Civil Rights Movement was intended to give African Americans the right to have equal opportunities, people of this era pleaded to end discrimination and segregation for all blacks.
There were many important dates that occurred to get the rights of African Americans to where they are today. In 1808 they stopped the import of slaves, yet the trade continued. The Emancipation Proclamation was issued by President Lincoln to officially end trade, it did not take place immediately for the attitudes of the citizens and the country were still trying to transform. In 1865 the Emancipation was confirmed and officially ended slavery, which created the 13th Amendment. In 1869 the Plessy vs. Ferguson was established to give African Americans a policy of separate but equal.
The Civil Right Movement is assumed to have happened somewhere between 1955 and 1965, due to all the events involved during the time they can’t pinpoint exactly when it happened. Even though the government set standards to allow African Americans the equal rights of everyone else, the public and some local governments refused to accept the practices of segregation. In 1954, the Brown v. the Board presented it was unconstitutional to allow the segregation in school. The Civil Rights Act gave African Americans the right to vote, which occurred in 1957. In 1960 the freedom riders came about, they wanted to test the new rule set by the court that said segregation in interstate bus and train stations was illegal. 1962, Troops were sent to the university of Mississippi to reinsure that James Meredith, the school’s first black student, was not injured. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave blacks the protection to feel safe, and have no discrimination upon them in any public place. These events all occurred to give African Americans there sense of equality, and allow them to be free. If it weren’t for this act who knows where we would be today as a society, we sure wouldn’t have Barack Obama as President.
The Civil Rights Movement was a very significant piece of history, it showed the discrimination of African Americans was very unjust and would no longer be allowed. The act gave blacks the right to drink from any drinking fountain or attend college. They were allowed to go to public school with the white community, they could sit anywhere on public property without being told “they weren’t allowed because it’s for the whites”. It brought the nation together as one instead of segregation because of color.
One of the most well-known people of the Civil Rights Movement was Rosa Parks, who was involved in the bus boycotts. She was a very strong witted woman who stood up for herself and the rest of the black community. The whole ordeal began when she refused to give her seat up to a white man on a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Her actions affected the Civil Rights Movement greatly, it gave African Americans the hope that things could possibly change. Almost a year after her strong will to stand up for herself, the busses were desegregated.
References:
http://learningtogive.org/papers/paper13.html
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil%20rights
Freeom Of Speech
Austin Avelar
10/9/14
Freedom of speech comes from the first amendment that grants us the right to speak freely about almost anything. Anyone and everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs and can talk about them almost wherever and whenever. It in fact is one of the most important rights we possess. Without this right, we wouldn’t be able to talk about sports, criticize movies, or write music that have meaningful lyrics people all over can relate to. It truly is our greatest right.
However, there are certain restrictions that occur during the practice of this right.
In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes formulated one of the most famous tests for free speech. He states, “Speech is not protected if it poses a, clear and present danger that will lead to substantive evils.” By clear and present danger, he’s saying that a Court doctrine permits restrictions of free speech if officials believe the speech will lead to prohibited action like violence and terrorism.
Symbolic speech also comes into effect as well. An example of symbolic speech would be someone burning a cross, or burning a flag. Now both are completely ridiculous ways of showing it, however they are both essential. If we allowed it to happen with no emotions displayed then we would have no meaning or feelings about them being burned. The first amendment does in fact protect symbolic speech, but within certain limits. The government cannot prohibit the expression of an idea even if society finds it offensive.
Even though we are granted the right to speak freely, the government as put regulations on it trying to keep people from causing violence. One particular regulation has to do with hate speech, also known as fighting words. Basically all people cannot use speech that is likely to provoke violence including racial epithets. This also allows school administration to keep students from using indecent speech during school. Even though it is our greatest right, we must not forget that there is always limited protection of it. Some have to regulate speech that is vulgar, while others restrict fighting words.
References
http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/freedom-of-speech
https://www.aclu.org/free-speech
Gun Control
James Koehn
10-06-2014
Most gun laws are trying to restrict people from being able to own guns, buy guns, or sell guns. Some Governments believe that by enforcing gun laws that it will help the crime rates go down; however, there are some facts that would say the opposite.
Russia, a country where handguns are banned, has a murder rate of 30.6% where as in the United States; a country where handguns are not banned, the murder rate is at a low 7.8 %. It’s not a direct correlation; however, it is something that makes you think that banning guns doesn’t really help. What it shows is that even though guns are banned people can still find ways to get guns, and when people have guns in places where the guns are banned not only are murder rates up, but crime rates would rise as well.
What people don’t seem to understand is that it is not the guns that are killing people; it’s when the wrong people have guns. But when you take guns away from citizens that use the guns in a proper manner they lose defense from people the criminals that have guns regardless of the regulations. The "Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013" is one of the gun regulations that I agree with. It allows any citizen, who has not been prohibited to carry a gun, to carry a concealed weapon if they have the certification to do so. With laws like these we can try to prevent the wrong people from having guns and still gives law abiding citizens the chance to have guns and have a chance to defend themselves from a person who may not have right to carry a gun.
I believe that the government is too big as it is. I don’t think that they should be that involved in our lives. The government taking our guns away is just another reason for them to interfere with more aspects of our lives. If you look at the fact our country is doing pretty well with guns. As one can see countries with strict gun laws still have problems with gun related murders. I think that some of the government’s actions of taking gun rights from people who have committed serious crimes is a good step in the right to control guns; however, they should not be able to interfere with the law abiding citizens’ rights.
Changing the 2nd amendment would be unconstitutional. The government shouldn’t be allowed to do so; however, they should be able to step in and try to stop certain people from having the right to have a gun. This won’t stop the gun related crimes but neither will taking away all the guns. America is on the right path with gun control I just hope that they do not try to get more involved.
References:
http://www.nraila.org/hunting.aspx
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/27/Harvard-Study-Shows-No-Correlation-Between-Strict-Gun-Control-And-Less-Crime-Violence
Loren Evans
Gay rights
In my opinion gays are not treated equally and do not have the same rights as others. Because we love the same sex we are not treated equally. We are all human and we love who we love but yet we are punished for it. In most states we are not even allowed to get married to the person we are in love with and want to spend the rest of our lives with. It should not have anything to do with the government who were are kissing, sleeping with, getting married to, etc. In some states gays being together is illegal and they can go to jail.
Laws affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people vary greatly by country or territory—everything from legal recognition of same-sex marriage or other types of partnerships, to the death penalty as punishment for same-sex romantic/sexual activity or identity. LGBT rights are considered human rights and civil rights.[2] LGBT rights laws include, but are not limited to, allowing of men who have sex with men to donate blood, government recognition of same-sex relationships (such as via same-sex marriage or similar unions), allowing of LGBT adoption, recognition of LGBT parenting, anti-bullying legislation and student non-discrimination laws to protect LGBT children and/or students, immigration equality laws, anti-discrimination laws for employment and housing, hate crime laws providing enhanced criminal penalties for prejudice-motivated violence against LGBT people, equal age of consent laws, equal access to assisted reproductive technology access to sex reassignment surgery and hormone replacement therapy legal recognition and accommodation of reassigned gender, and laws related to sexual orientation and military service.
Anti-LGBT laws include, but are not limited to, the following: sodomy laws penalizing consensual same-sex sexual activity with fines, jail terms, or the death penalty, anti-'lesbianism' laws, and higher ages of consent for same-sex activity. In 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights, which was followed up with a report from the UN Human Rights Commission documenting violations of the rights of LGBT people, including hate crime, criminalization of homosexuality, and discrimination. Following up on the report, the UN Human Rights Commission urged all countries which had not yet done so to enact laws protecting basic LGBT rights.
The mission of the ACLU LGBT Project is the creation of a society in which lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people enjoy the constitutional rights of equality, privacy and personal autonomy, and freedom of expression and association. The ACLU has a long history defending the LGBT community. We brought our first LGBT rights case in 1936 and founded the LGBT Project in 1986. The ACLU’s LGBT rights strategy is based on the belief that fighting for the society we want means not just persuading judges and government officials, but ultimately changing the way society thinks about LGBT people. To end discrimination, the ACLU seeks both to change the law and to convince Americans that sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination is wrong. The ACLU carries out this work in five priority areas: Basic Rights and Liberties, Parenting, Relationships and Marriage, Youth and Schools, and Transgender Discrimination.
They even tried to have rights against gay parenting. Fighting restrictions on parenting by LGBT people is critical because this discrimination causes serious, enduring harm to the lives of LGBT people and their children. The ACLU challenges policies and laws that prevent qualified and caring LGBT people from foster parenting or adopting kids. We also strive to change laws or practices that interfere in custody and visitation relationships between LGBT parents and their children. Our work debunks myths about the undesirability of same-sex couples raising children – myths often heard in the nationwide debate over marriage. It should be up to the person and not the government of people’s personal lives.
Resources
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0761909.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory
Loren Evans
Rights and Ideas
I chose rights and ideas because it is a very big subject but yet very touchy. Civil and political rights are rights that are given to the people and that protect an individuals’ freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals, and which ensure a persons’ ability to participate in the civil and political life of the society and state without discrimination or repression. The word civil right is a translation of Latin ius civis which means rights of a citizen. Roman citizens could choose to be free which was worded libertas or servile which was worded servitus, but they all had rights in law. After the Edict of Milan in 313, these rights added the freedom of religion. Roman legal doctrine was lost during the Middle Ages, but claimed that universal rights could still be made based on religious doctrine. According to the leaders of Kett's Rebellion, “all bond men may be made free, for God made all free with his precious blood-shedding.” In the 17th century, Judge Sir Edward Coke got the idea of rights based on citizenship by saying that Englishmen had enjoyed the rights. The English Bill of Rights was adopted in 1689. The Virginia Declaration of Rights, by George Mason and James Madison, was adopted in 1776. The Virginia declaration is the direct ancestor and model for the U.S. Bill of Rights (1789).
I find all of this funny though, because no matter what is said and stated to this day there is still forms of segregation and racism. The African-American Civil Rights Movement has to do with social movements in the United States. Their goals were to end racial segregation and discrimination against black Americans and to make sure that legal recognition and federal protection of the citizenship rights were in the constitutional amendments made soon after the Civil War. This movement happen between 1954 and 1968, mainly in the South. There were acts of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience, but they produced crisis situations that did not turn out well. There were several forms of protest and civil disobedience which included major boycotts. A boycott is a withdraw from commercial or social relations with protest. There were boycotts such as the very successful Montgomery Bus Boycott which happen in 1955–56 in Alabama. This occurred because the late great Rosa Parks would not give up her seat on the bus and because of that she was arrested. After this all of the African Americans decided to get together and boycott and not ride the bus until you could get on and sit anywhere you wanted. The boycott turned out to be a major success in African American History.
There were sit-ins such as the influential Greensboro sit-ins which occurred in 1960 in North Carolina. Sit-ins were when African Americans and others that believed in equal rights would go into a restaurant and sit until they were served which wouldn’t happen but they stood there grounds no matter if they were beat on, spit on, and so much worse. There were marches, such as the Selma to Montgomery marches in 1965 in Alabama. Marches happen all through the world were people marched and protested with picket signs for what they felt was right and what wrong doing that was going on in the world towards a\African Americans. And last but not least a wide range of other nonviolent activities. Even though these activities always started off non-violent there was always that one person out of the crowd that was totally against it and would start a riot. Martin Luther King Jr. was all out keeping violence out of the picture and he was gunned down. Even when the ended slavery we were still segregated by having to use separate water fountains and bathrooms. This segregation went on up until near the sixties. It is now 2014 and we still have acts of segregation and racism in a sense such as Mexican being checked to being illegal when being stopped for a traffic violation. But we are “free” so to say.
References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_and_political_rights
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/civilrightstimeline1.html
**Two-party system
By Stephen Cornett**
According to the article “two-party system” by Encyclopedia Britannica, a two party system is a political system in which the electorate gives it votes largely to only two major parties and in which one or the other party can win a majority in the legislature. United States is a prime example of a nation having a two party system. The two party’s Untied States have is a Republican Party and Democrat party.
There are more pros than cons for having a two party system according to the article Two Party System: Pros & Cons by Grant Pipe. One con of having a two party system is it creates division in government leading to trouble on issues. One pro though is a two party system encourages voter turnout by mobilizing the people to vote between two candidates. If there were more, the would be even more confusion, lack of knowledge and conviction might cause voters to stay home. Another con is that it leaves some issues too cut and dry with no room in the middle. A pro of this though is two parties create a neat division of issues which helps to clarify and classify issues based on separate and differing ideologies. More than two would muddy some cut and dry. Another con is it limits the choice for voters. Perhaps you agree with some of the Democrat and some of the Republican stances: the only other option to vote for a third party which might not be a better choice. A pro to this though is two parties make it easier to run for office. It’s easier to stand out as one of two parties instead of one of many. Another pro would be that government is more effective with coalitions, when you can get a group of likeminded people to agree and work together to compromise and efficacy is born.
Ideally if both parties work together, willing to compromise, actually care for its voters and what would benefit them. The government would be able to continue to function; quid qou pro, not uncompromising purity standards. The problem is both parties have forgotten what they were thought by their parents, be willing to comprise and play nice with one another. Both parties believe each one is better than the other. It is not helping maters that republicans have another party within a party. This party is the Tea party there are making a lot of matters worse than better. Although the ideas of the tea party are good ones the people in the party have no clue what they are or what they mean. Pretty soon the tea party could be its own party. I hope this does not happen because the tea party would just cause more turmoil to our already mess up government. Instead of having to comprise with just on party, you would have to party’s to compromise with. Recently the government shut down because the republicans would sign a bill they already past back in July. Instead of the speaker of house put the bill to a new vote, which would pass, he didn’t want to make the tea party mad so we had a shutdown for 17 days. The saying two heads are better than on come to mind because we need two parties and not one party to make decisions that affect millions. The saying three is a crowd also comes to mind because the two parties already have a lot people within the party that have different views, why had another one that to that mix.
Sources"two-party system." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Library Edition.
Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
<http://library.eb.com/eb/article-9073962>.
http://www.conservativepolitico.org/2012/09/two-party-system-pros-cons.html
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/14/opinion/frum-tea-party-third-party/
Money in American politics
Brad Ellis
Money runs our political elections, money runs most of politics in America, but this article is going to talk about the money involved in elections. In America we have Political Action Committees (PAC’s). These Political Action Committees can contribute money straight to candidates or against candidates. They can get donations and have fund raisers to contribute to the candidates. With regular Political Action Committees they have a limit of donating $5,000 dollars per person. Super Political Action Committees are different though.
Super PAC’s can contribute as much money as they want. They cannot contribute directly to the candidate or campaign. They find ways to work around that though with commercials and other things advising people to vote the way that fits them best. Super PAC’s usually consist of very large companies or corporations that will spend endless amounts of money to get people to vote for the person that best benefits their corporation. Now these super PAC’s will convince the person running for office to do things the way they want or they will stop the flow of money to their campaign. This can cause politicians to sell out their views and policies to the highest bidder. The politicians can’t be blamed though. Who wouldn’t change their views on a few policy’s for millions and maybe even billions of dollars being put into their campaign.
Politicians should be doing what is best for the country not what is best for big corporations. America needs to get this fixed. There shouldn’t be money running the elections, it should be about what is in the best interest for the nation as a whole. The American people are very easily manipulated by what they hear. These super PAC’s contribute enough money that they can control what we hear, they can control what is being said on TV and on the radio. If they control what is being told to the public how are we supposed to make the right decision in who to vote for. Some countries like France make it so that everybody running for president has the exact same amount of TV time and radio time. They limit the amount of time one politician can be on TV. Now America shouldn’t necessarily do it like they do, but super PAC’s shouldn’t be able to buy the presidency. America needs to put a limit on how much can be spent on campaigns. It should be much lower than it is now. Politics will always be run by money in America and there isn’t much that can be done about it. We as a people need to try and look through the money and choose the best candidate for the position. If we don’t we will have big corporations running our life.sources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee#Super_PACs
https://www.google.com
**THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
Brian Wood**
In 1787 leaders of the states gathered to write the Constitution a set of principles that told how the new nation would be governed. The leaders of the states wanted a strong and fair national government. But they also wanted to protect individual freedoms and prevent the government from abusing its power. They believed they could do this by having three separate branches of government. The three branches of government they came up with where Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. I’ll break down each one and explain their purpose.
Legislative branch- is made up of the two houses of Congress the Senate and the House of Representatives. The most important duty of the legislative branch has is to make laws. Laws are written, discussed and voted on in Congress.
Executive Branch- the President is the head of the executive branch, which makes laws official. The President is elected by the entire country and serves a four-year term. The President approves and carries out laws passed by the legislative branch. He appoints or removes cabinet members and officials. He negotiates treaties, and acts as head of state and commander in chief of the armed forces. The executive branch also includes the Vice President and other officials, such as members of the cabinet. The cabinet is made up of the heads of the 15 major departments of the government. The cabinet gives advice to the President about important matters.
Judicial Branch- oversees the court system of the U.S. Through court cases, the judicial branch explains the meaning of the Constitution and laws passed by Congress. The Supreme Court is the head of the judicial branch. Unlike a criminal court, the Supreme Court rules whether something is constitutional or unconstitutional—whether or not it is permitted under the Constitution. On the Supreme Court there are nine justices, or judges: eight associate justices and one chief justice. The judges are nominated by the President and approved by the Senate. They have no term limits. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Its decisions are final, and no other court can overrule those decisions. Decisions of the Supreme Court set precedents - new ways of interpreting the law.
Sources
trumanlibrary.org
kids.usa.gov
+ The Executive Branch of the Government
By: Nabor Leal-Rodriguez
The executive branch of the government is a very crucial part of the government and with out it the Government may not be able to work as well as it does today. The Executive branch of the government is probably the most vital part of this system and that's because the man in charge of running the Government is in this section of it. There are many parts of this Branch but here are the most important parts of this branch and how they assemble this section of the Government.
The first and most important is the President himself. The President is the commander in chief of the armed forces and is also the head of the state and the government. The president is in charge of many things and has many powers. He gets some of these powers from article number 2 of the constitution which states that he is responsible for enforcement and execution of the laws created by the congress. The President also has the power to either sign a bill that is passed by congress or veto it. Even though this seems like a great power his say can be overturned by two-thirds of the congress. The man in the white house also has the power to negotiate with other countries and sign treaties. The president also has the powers of being able to extend pardons and clementines exempt in a case of impeachment. He also has the power to issue executive orders or clarify existing laws. The president seems to get many powers but as they always say with great power comes great responsibility. One of these is that he or she must give congress of the state of union and also recommend to their consideration. This is a lot of power and Responsibility and that is why the President must be 35 years old and has to be a natural citizen and must have lived in the united states for at least 14 years. The president is a crucial part to this branch but he is not the only part that is needed to build this branch.
The following person in the branch is the Vice President. The main responsibility that is issued to the Vice President is that he must be able to assume the presidency in a moments notice and be able to run the country just as the president. He or she is more like a back up president in case anything happens to the real one. He can take the presidents place if the president dies, resignation or is temporarily incapacitated or the vice president and the cabinet decide that the president can no longer carry out the presidential duties that are assigned to him. The vice president is chosen along with the president when he or she is elected. The VP can also serve as the president of the united states senate by casting a tie breaking vote . The VP also lives in the White house and also has his own office there.
The third important part of this branch may seem like it is not but in its own way serves a great purpose. This part of the executive branch is the Executive Office of the President. The EOP basically helps the president make decisions that he or she may not be able to make on their own. They can't provide advice and guidance to the president with the though of how it can affect Americas future in mind. The EOP is overseen by the chief of staff and is usually made up of the presidents closest advisers. This may be the case but first the senate has to confirm for some advisers that the president may be choosing. Each EOP member gets his or her office. The EOP has grown tremendous in size compared to what it used to be in the past because now it is employing over 1800 people. Many help the president with logistical support such as the ones working in the White House Military Office which is in charge of services ranging from the air force one t t dining facilities and the office of presidential advance. The EOP may not seem so glamorous but when the president needs some help from the some of the people that he can trust they really do come in handy.
These are just some of the parts of the Executive Branch of the united states, they may only be a few but they each play a great role in how our country is run and they also seem to be the most important due to the fact that each part relates back to the president. These parts of the branch also deal directly with America and its future. This branch carry's a lot of weight and that's why it is a great thing that the weight is distributed evenly amongst these few sections,because if all the weight fell upon on section the whole thing may fall apart and our country would not run like it would need to.
Sources
http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/executive-branch
http://bensguide.gpo.gov/3-5/government/national/executive.html
Daniel Mackay
The Legislative Branch
With the Legislative branch of government, they are really the foundation that makes the United States go around. Without them, the president could pass any law that he would want to without anybody really opposing it. When the Legislative branch sees a law that doesn't really make sense, they have two houses that it must go through in order to be passed and go into effect. The amount of power that needs to be spread around the government in order for it to work in a fashioned manor has to be divided into at least three sections. With this being said, the Legislative branch should have a majority of the power, considering they have possibly the biggest job, considering they have the power to enact war if prompted to. No other section has that much of a responsibility, in the sense of the that they have the most pressure filled lives day in and day out.
On that note, the Legislative branch still has quite a few flaws. For starters, there is quite the corruption in the two houses. Most are puppets to the system and do what is best for them, not for the greater of the people. Most see holding a seat in Congress as the next step to something bigger, such as presidency or speaker of the house or something along that nature. Most would throw their own mother's under the bus if it came to their political career staying alive. The main problem with it is honestly the fact of having two separate parties (i.e. democrats vs. republicans). If one proposes a law that would impact the other side negatively, that side disagrees and makes it difficult for the law to pass. Even if the law is for the better of the people of the US, a negative on one side puts a quick end to it. The bad thing about it is that it proves that politics are only for the people who make them, not for the people who need them. Rich, fat cats keep making about them, rather than the person who works three jobs and still doesn't have enough to make ends meet. In the long run, Congress is going to keep doing what makes them popular and what keeps them in office.
Nabor Leal-Rodriguez
Presidents Duties
Presidents play a very crucial part running the United States of America. They have come along way from how they first started. In the beginning the presidents did not have as many responsibilities as they do now. Even though they have progressed and developed into more responsible people no matter what they have always been looked to as the leaders of the most beautiful country in the world. Being the president requires a lot of intelligence and responsibility and is a job that seems like it is easy but its not. To be the president of the United States you must be 35 years old and has to be a natural citizen and must have lived in the united states for at least 14 years. As president of the United states you have to take care of millions of people and assure that the country keeps moving forward and never back. The president of the united states is also known as the chief of state. This means that the president is in charge of many ceremonial duties that are required of him while he is in the white house.
Another more important title that is given to the president is being the chief executive. This means that he basically runs the government. He enforces the laws and he also appoints important government officials. The president also grants pardons and coordinates departments and agencies. Another title that is given to him or her is Commander and chief and this means that the president is in charge of the United States Military Force. He is responsible for raising, Training and supervising the troops. This is a very important job because these are the defenses of our country and are our only way of defending ourselves against the people who want to harm our country. The president of the United States is also the legislative leader and this means that he recommends and guides the congress in law making. One more thing that he is labeled as is the leader of his political party. He is the face of what his party believes in and usually works to please them and while keeping the countries best interests first.
Sources:
http://www.archives.com/genealogy/president-clinton.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Kaice Allen
Theories of Political Behavior
Political behavior is defined as any action regarding authority; this paper is specifically based on government. An example of political behavior is voting, in this act you decide who will be in charge and who will not be. Another example that is more defiant is protests, demonstrations, and roadblocks because they relate to some authority. Now that I have stated what political behavior is and some examples I will go into the theories of political behavior. Theories of political behavior attempt to quantify and explain the influences that define a person’s political views, ideology, and levels of political participation. There is believed to be three ideas of what influences people, these are long term influences, short term influences, and the influence of social groups on political outcomes.
Long term influences are influences that affect you in the long run such as family, your family’s political view will directly decide what yours will be, whether you are defiant and decide to be on the opposite side of your family or you are going to believe what your family believes. Theorists have argued that your family is the most influential aspect of your political behavior. Another long term influence is your teachers and other educational authority figures. Students spend at least 25% of their lifetime with the teachers they have and this can influence their judgment almost as much as their family. An October 2004 study showed that post secondary education significantly raises political awareness and orientation in students.
After their parents and teachers people are also affected by their peers as long term influences, this occurs because they are in the same generation and with each generation a new political issue arises and since their peers understand the issue the way they do they tend to be more likely to side with their generation. Moving on to short term influences which are the media and the impact of individual election issues, these are more likely to have a direct impact on voting behavior because they are short lived but also in the moment ideas. Many theorists believe the media has a profound impact on an individual’s voting behavior. Another short term factor is the campaigning itself and how well the party portrays its idea on the issue and how well they can prove that they are the best choice to make a difference on the issues at hand.
If someone knows how to make a good campaign and influence the vote they can be successful in their campaign but they have to know what will influence the voter. Last is the influence of social groups on political behavior, which political scientists have been trying to find out the relation between the two for a long time through studies of the topic. Some of the social groups included in their studies include age demographics, gender, and ethnic groups. For example they have found that ethnic groups and gender play a huge role in political outcomes. Latin Americans for example have a profound social impact on the political outcome of their vote and are emerging as a strong up and coming political force. Woman have had a huge impact ever since they were allowed to vote and are now considered one of the main components in the countries decision making in both politics and the economy. Theories of political behavior are very important assets to the political scientists because it very well may help them determine the outcome of an election and if they can determine the outcome they might be able to influence it by using their knowledge to change the minds of the voters.
Resources:
http://www.kyoolee.net/political-behaviour.html
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Theories_of_political_behavior.html
Krista Mathies
Branches of Government
In 1787 leaders of the states gathered to write the Constitution, dividing the government into three different branches. Allowing all three branches equal power was the idea behind splitting them up, they were afraid one branch would have too much power and would become a dictatorship instead of the people ruling. The three branches were: The Executive branch, The Legislative branch, and The Judicial branch. Each branch was given their own power but not able to over throw each other, forcing the branches to work together to create a balance among the government.
The Executive Branch:
The president is the top dog in this branch. He is in charge of carrying out federal laws and suggesting new laws to be made. He directs national defense and foreign policy. His powers include: directing government, commanding armed forces, dealing with international powers, acting as chief enforcement officer, and vetoing laws. The vice president is also voted in at the same time the president is, and has the duty of taking the presidents chair if anything happens to him. In this branch there is also a cabinet of people advising the president on decisions involving important matters. The cabinet helps the president possibly see all views of the problem and possible solutions as well.
The Legislative Branch:
This branch is headed by congress, which includes the House of Representatives, and the Senate. These two bodies main task is to make laws. The laws are written, discussed, and voted on during this stage. Their powers include: passing laws, originating spending bills (this being the House of Reps), impeaching officials (this being the senate), and approving treaties (this also being the senate). The senate is made up of one hundred people, two people elected from each state, serve a six year term. The vice president is the head of the senate but does not vote on matters unless there is a tie. The senate must ratify all treaties by a two- thirds vote. The House of Representatives is made up of 435 representatives. Each state has a different number because the amount of representatives is based on the state’s population. The states elect the representatives and they serve only a two year chair in the house. The “speaker of the house” is elected by all the house representatives to be the head person over that part.
The Judicial Branch:
The Judicial branch is headed by the Supreme Court. The Judicial branch explains the meaning of the constitution and laws passed by congress. Unlike Criminal Court, the Supreme Court rules whether something is constitutional or unconstitutional, meaning whether it follows the constitution or not. Under the Supreme Court there are nine justices, or judges. They are nominated by the president and approved by the senate. They have no selected term limits. The judicial branches powers include: interpreting the constitution, reviewing laws, and deciding cases involving states rights. This branch is the highest any case can go and once they save the verdict that is the end of the case. There is no higher power then this branch.
Resources
http://www.congressforkids.net/Constitution_checksandbalances.htm
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0774837.html
Political Parties
Political parties are found all over the world; however, a Political Party is an organization of people who seek to achieve goals of political power, in other words, running one’s country. These are the groups in which the people we vote for belong to. While there is some international commonality in the way Political Parties are recognized, and in how they operate, there are many differences. Many political parties have a strong core, but some do not, and many represent very different ideas than they did when first founded. In democracies, political parties are elected to run a government by the electorate. “Many countries have numerous powerful political parties, such as Germany, some have a functionally two-party system such as the United States of America, and some nations are one party states, such as China”.
There are 100s of parties formed every election term and there are two methods by which political parties can qualify for official status. This assures that they can place candidates on a primary election ballot. According to research: “The qualification deadline for the method is 135 days before a statewide primary in an even-numbered year, based on the registration totals as of the 154th day before that election”. Therefore people with different visions for politics for their country go through this process every election year.
Parties are all of the fun aside from an election. In my country “The Bahamas” there are two main parties in which most people pay attention to, for they have been around for as long as I can remember. These two parties alongside the other less important ones hold rally’s upward until the day of the election and it is like the most exciting thing around that time of year. Huge concerts take place of house ministers, former opposition members, and future electives. Crowds fill the areas wearing their favored party colors from the early afternoon hours until late morning hours such as 2 and 3 am. This is the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of political parties. Political parties has such a great effect on society that when election time comes it is the time when police officers would work overtime doing their best to keep things in order. I’m sure that it is similar in every country around the world, for everyone wants there country to be run the right way; however no matter who is chosen the people will never be pleased.
Sources:
http://votesmart.org/
https://www.opensecrets.org/
Marcus Tibbles
Here in America where democracy roams supreme like a patriotic dinosaur, we as Americans get to choose how the country runs with the people we elect. Normally, nay, every one of the electees we elect with our elections belongs to some political party. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and in a recent election Jedis, all of these are political parties. These parties are solidified by the ideas and values of the people who make up their membership.
Democrats tend to be more flaming and liberal in their views. By that I mean they are more civilly minded towards everything. Marriage for homosexuals, they deserve to be unhappy like the rest of us. Supporting the women who want to kill their little bundle of mistake in their womb. Democrats are the main proponents of gun control, the dirty communists. Currently the Democrats have the White House with President Obama and Vice President Biden in the executive positions, and have control of the house. Though the Speaker of the House is a Republican, and the interaction between the two parties lead to the Government Shutdown of 2013 over the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act is positive step towards health care for all, although the Democrats totally dropped the ball on implementing it.
The Grand Old Party, otherwise now known to us as the Republicans are the right wing of the eagle that is the United States. Their views are pretty much the opposite of the Democrats. Gay people shouldn’t get married, because for some reason an issue like that still exists. Everyone can have guns even if you probably shouldn’t have one, because hey it’s your god given right to kill people. The last Republican president was George W. Bush who liked to make up words, who lead with Vice President Dick Cheney who liked to shoot people in the face. The Republican Party tends to appeal to middle age white males, and absolutely no one else. The GOP also house the extremists known as the Tea Party, the group so far right they’ve cut off their left hands.
Now the party for level headed smart people is the Libertarian Party. This party takes all the good from both parties and leaves the bad in the sock drawer. Their prime directive is less government and more liberty or freedom or whatever. They think that health care should be affordable without the need of insurance. They see that ownership of guns should not be a crime, and that the criminal who uses one should be held responsible, crazy. I don’t know their stance on gay rights cause it wasn’t listed on their website, but I’m sure its amazing. Speaking of websites, the Libertarian website was the easiest to navigate so they have that going for them.
There are other parties in the system other that just these three, but these are the big three that most people will claim to be a part of. Although some one could point out that having a party system is kind of silly and that we should base our choice of candidate through their stance on the issues and not just because they belong to a political party. Not me, I wouldn’t do something silly like that.
Sources:
http://www.democrats.org/
http://www.gop.com/
http://www.lp.org/
Image Source:
http://blog.timesunion.com/opinion/dismantle-the-two-party-system/17615/american-political-parties-stand-off/
Arielle Gil-Sanz
While I do agree that we require the above mentioned things, I also think that there is something else that we need on an urgent basis in our political system and which no one seems to be talking about it; campaign finance reforms. Even though it is the giant elephant in the room, I find it surprising that I have never come across a single discussion on it.
For those of you who are not familiar with the idea of campaign finance, let me try and explain it in the simplest of terms.
Every politician and political party that runs for elections does so by running a campaign. It costs money to get elected to parliament or any office for that matter. Candidates often spend hundreds of millions of rupees during election campaigns to improve their chances of getting elected. Political parties spend cash on everything from posters to jalsas (rallies), and yet somehow during all this, the most important questions remain unanswered:
Where did the candidates and political parties get this much money from? Was there an agenda that was attached to the money? Who financed their public meetings?
Common sense dictates that if money is donated to a political party or an individual candidate, there is something expected from them in return once they come into power. No one in their right mind throws away their money without expecting some kind of pay back; after all politics is not charity work.
This inherently means that even before our politicians get elected, they have agreed to look after the interests of different donors, where as the general public has no idea what they have signed up to support.
All over the world, campaign finance laws dictate that everybody who is contesting for elections needs to categorically spell out who is donating money and make public any agendas. This is necessary to protect the voters who get to see what leanings their candidates have based on the origin of their campaign contributions. In a country like Pakistan, campaign finance laws do exist but are often flaunted or simply ignored.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_funding
http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/10834/party-campaigns-where-does-their-money-come-from/
—-
Jason Manning
Political Parties
The United States of America is a nation ruled under a democracy. In other words the people of the nation are allowed to vote and make their own choice on most matters public, private and political. The people of the nation not only vote on the matters of their ideals and politics and how these matters can and will effect them, they also vote on who will represent them. These individuals that the main body of people will vote for is voted into an office or chair or another political seat. These individuals are usually voted into one of the political seats because they represent the main populous that voted for them's views and ideas. They represent the peoples motives and what they believe in. Although not always the case they usually tend to be a good representative of what the people want and why they were voted into the power. Modern political seats are divided into two different parties, the republicans and the democrats. In these modern times these two parties make up the political system. Most people usually tend to identify themselves and their loyalty to one of these parties. Not all people will identify with the democratic party or the republican party. Some people are liberals while others do not wish to belong to any time of party and do not wish to involve themselves in politics.
In the beginning of what was to become political parties the two main parties of what makes up political party history were known as the federalist party and the Democratic-Republican party. These two parties came to be around the 1790's. In 1816 however political parties were abolished for a decade of what was known as the Era of Good Feelings. When political parties made their revival in 1829 the Democratic-Republican party split up into the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig party. By the 1850's both of these parties had evolved into what we now know as the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Each of these parties have their own ideals that they believe in and have many supporters. Some people when voting for a candidate will vote for one person in particular purely based on their political affiliation and not on their views and ideals that they themselves are trying to hold. Most democrats support gay marriage. While mos republicans are pro gun. Many republicans support cash flow to military spending, While the democrats do not see that perspective. The democrats do not wish to allow money to be used on military spending and equipment. They have different views on things but at times they can come to a mutual agreement on a few certain things that need them too.
Political parties are not just found in the United States of America. They are found all over the world. Germany has many political parties in its borders. While china is a one party nation. The United States of America is a two party nation with our Republicans and Democrats.
Sources
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party
Political Parties
Macinzie Lehman
The United States has become a nation made up basically by two parties, the Democratic and the Republican parties. They have been built up incredibly over the years of the nation. There are many differences between the two, but both have had great influence on the history of the United States of America and how the government works today. The Democratic party was founded in 1824 and the Republican party was founded in 1854. Democrats tend to be more liberal and Republicans are generally more conservative. They have differing views on many major issues in the United States today.
These issues include taxation, military, gay marriage, abortion, the death penalty, and human ideas. Democratic views on taxation are they are for minimum wages and progressive taxation like having people with higher incomes have a higher tax, their view on the military is that they want to decrease the money they government is spending on it, and the majority of Democrats support gay marriage. Democrats believe that abortion should not be illegal and they support Roe versus Wade, they have mixed emotions on the death penalty some are in support but there is a fraction that are against it, and their views on human ideas are based in community and social responsibility.
Republicans believe that there should not be an increase of taxes for anyone even the wealthy and that wages should be based on the free market, they think that government spending should be raised for the military, and they are opposed to gay marriage. Republicans view on abortion is that it should not be legal and they oppose Roe versus Wade, the large majority of Republicans support the death penalty, and they believe that human ideas are based on individual rights and justice. These two powers have had many issues, but together were able to make the United States the great nation that it is.
Resources
http://www.gop.com/our-party/
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican
The Importance Of Voting
By Dana Wilson
In today’s society, it’s no secret that complete satisfaction with the government is an unachievable reality. Given that it’s hard enough to find a handful of people with the exact same opinions, asking an entire country to agree is simply unrealistic. However, there are groups who find themselves agreeing on core issues. These groups are political parties. An individual is expected to choose their political affiliation by the age of 18 in the US, and then expected to register as a voter for that particular party. Agreeing with everything a party stands for is not the main goal, but rather to agree on values most important to the individual.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of people in the beginning voter age range, for a lack of a better explanation: just don’t care. According to a recent statistic, only 58.5% of eligible voters ages 18-24 actually make an effort to vote. The most popular given reason for this lack of participation is being “Too busy.” It’s said by many that in certain states, one vote doesn’t really matter. On the other hand, if 41.5% of the younger voting age group took a much needed interest in the politics that shape their world, it seems a reasonable statement that big changes could be made.
Politics has become something that feels very out of reach for many citizens. If people feel as though their opinions are irrelevant, it only makes sense that they wouldn’t take the time to share them. It seems normal for many individuals to decline taking advantage of our right as American citizens to vote. What these individuals are forgetting are the many trials that were conquered to establish the right to vote for all. The Nineteenth amendment was a huge accomplishment in US history. People fought for many years to receive rights that are no longer appreciated by the vast majority of Americans.
The lack of interest shown by a large percentage of the younger generation when it comes to politics is obvious. What’s less obvious is the solution to this problem. Theresa Stephens gives a few suggestions for supporting young voters in the process in her article “Encouraging Young Voters.” Her most predominate suggestion is to make the utter simplicity of voting as well as its importance are known, “Voting is one of the most important responsibilities an American citizen can take undertake. Ironically, it is also one of the simplest of responsibilities to fulfill. It is critical that voters realize that it's not just the national elections that impact their lives. Young voters, especially, need to be made aware of the significance of their votes” (Stephens, 1).
Whether citizens feel like they don’t have the time to vote, or the desire, it’s important for the older generations as well as political figures to urge each individual to utilize their right to vote. Even though it may seem as though one vote is insignificant, there are very significant outcomes to each individual accepting their responsibility as a part of society and voicing their opinions, no matter what those may be.
Resources:
http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/
http://www.ehow.com/how_4546165_encouraging-young-voters.html
Macinzie Lehman
Running candidates for political office. Parties select candidates for many elected positions in American politics. With there being so many officials to choose, most voters can be and will be very overwhelmed by the steps and decisions they would have to make if candidates did not wear party "labels." Parties present policy alternatives for voters. Most voters usually choose candidates from the same party for all positions in that election.
Checking the other party. A party that does not hold the most votes in Congress, often keeps the party in power from taking over complete control. Party leaders have the power to publicly criticize actions of a President who is elected by the opposite party. The criticism of "partisanship" comes from this party because there are many Americans that think the "checking" becomes petty and self-serving.
Informing the public. Parties take stands on issues and criticize the points of the views of the other parties. They have well-publicized discussions help to inform citizens about the important issues and present other ways of solving societal problems.
*Organizing the government. Congress and the state legislatures are organized according to party affiliations. Legislative representatives usually support their party's position when considering potential laws and policies, and most votes fall roughly along party lines. Virtually all candidates run for public office with party labels that define their behavior after they win.
Most other democratic nations have multi-party systems. Even though third parties have popped up regularly throughout American history, they have either died, or their ideas have been absorbed by a major party. Three good reasons for the American two-party system include the following:
Alexander Hamilton contributed to laying the framework of the modern Republican Party. His support for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution led to the formation of the Federalist Party, which fizzled out by 1824.
Consensus of Values. It is easy to complain about petty bickering between Democrats and Republicans. What we sometimes forget is that Americans share a broad consensus, or agreement, of many basic political values. Both parties believe in liberty, equality, and individualism. Neither advocates that the Constitution be discarded. Both parties accept the election process and concede defeat to the winners. In many countries with multi-party systems, the range of beliefs is greater, and disagreements run deeper. For example, in modern day Russia, one party advocates a return to communism, some offer modified socialism and/or capitalism, and one promotes ultra-nationalism.
Resources:
https://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Political_Parties_vrd.htm
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm
Jeromy Denton
Growth of The Independent Party
According to the studies done for Gallup.com, approximately 25% of all independent voters are between the ages of 18-29. The growth of the independent party has been exponential the last 10 years, and people leaving the Big 2 parties, Republicans and Democrats, has also increased. When George Bush Jr. was reelected into office the Republican Party peaked with 34%, since then it has declined and is now at 25%. The Democratic Party has declined as well, it has fallen 5 points in the last 5 years from 36% to 31%. The Independent party has grown mainly because of the new generation of 18-29 year olds and should continue to grow immensely. However, politics as a whole has grown less popular among the new young adults in the U. S., congress approval ratings are at an all-time low which is around 10%. The democracy our founding fathers created has been failing, plain and simple.
The 2 Big parties have almost corrupted the system in such a way that nothing can be accomplished as a whole anymore, problems that should be easy to solve, are not. One of the first steps to solving this problems is hitting the refresh button on congress, this country needs new young honest representatives full of integrity. Quote from Chad Peaces’ article on ivn.us, “In fact, while Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton agreed on little, they would both be horrified to discover a Congress in which every resource of the institution is distributed through a binary partisan structure. It is a death of a thousand cuts.” (ivn.us) This is also another reason the independent party has grown, the main 2 have pushed young people away.
Independent voters have increased by 11% since 2008 in 24 states including the district of Colombia. If this trend continues it will make the presidential election of 2016 very interesting for republican and democratic candidates, the independent party will play a huge roll in who wins this next election. It will be very interesting how candidates approach the independent parties in different regions seeing how the area of the voters highly impacts what political party they join.
Many people feared the separation of government into two main parties for almost 2 centuries, even Jon Adams predicted it. This is why the independent party was born. The Independent party will continue to grow as the majority party.
Sources:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx
http://ivn.us/2013/11/07/growning-number-americans-want-end-partisanship/
http://www.independentamericanparty.org/
Nick Silva
Political Parties
There are several Political Parties in American Government but the main two are the Democratic party and Republican party. Every year these are the two parties that the two front runners for President are. Many people differ in their beliefs in American Government and it is always a tight race to see what party is elected into the white house.
The Republican Party or how it is nicknamed, Grand Old Party or GOP which is ironic due to the fact it is much younger than the Democratic Party. The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by northern anti-slavery activists and modernizers. The Republican Party rose to prominence with the Democratic Party in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. The party is based off of Conservatism which is the exact opposite of the Democratic Party supporting liberalism. The Republican party supports free markets, limited government along with laissez faire economics. Republican party rejects social liberalism as well. Basically their ideas are in more simpler terms you get what you work for, you earn what you work for and do not tax nearly as high as the democratic party. They also encourage personal responsibility, private sector non profit organizations and the elimination of government welfare problems. Meaning for how you earn your money and what you do with your money is your problem, welfare for those who actually need welfare get it and money is not wasted in this situation, and non profit organizations that do not involve the government. The Social policies consist of traditional values such as opposition to same sex marriage, abortion, and marijuana. Also they oppose gun control, affirmative action, and illegal immigration. The Republican Party is much more constitutional and traditional and believe in the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
The Democratic Party was founded in 1828 which promotes Social Liberal platform, supporting Social Justice, and a mixed economy. Until the late 20th Century they also were very strong conservative in the South, and over time that has diminished. The Democratic Party also believes in higher taxes and more government which is basically the exact opposite of the Republican Party. They are much more into Welfare than the Republican Party. The Democratic Party also believes in Liberalism. Liberalism is based off of classical economy, free trade, and a balanced budget. Liberalism also has an economic policy that the government will stimulate demand in times in which unemployment is at a high by spending works. Which basically means the government will create jobs and employment by government ran projects in the cities across the United States. The money for these projects and jobs come from better off people that are taxed. Recently the Democratic party has passed Marijuana as a legal substance in Washington and Colorado.
In the history of American Government there have been fifteen Democratic Presidents and twenty nine Republican Presidents. Obama being the most recent Democrat to be elected President and George W. Bush being the most recent Republican elected. Peoples views all differ for their Political Party and everyone is entitled to their own belief.
Sources
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm
http://www.ushistory.org/gov/5a.asp
image
http://lensofhistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/hide.jpg
Policy Making
Cordae Mckelvy
In order to make a rule law you it has to first be reviewed by a lot of different people and groups. Bills are sent to certain committees based on the subject of the bill that they are trying to pass. It could take years before a bill finally becomes law. Less than ten percent of proposed bills actually becomes law. The president proposes a law that have to be passed by congress. Once congress pas the law the courts have to uphold it. Then a bureaucratic agency publish the draft rules and gather comments and opinion from the public before it is published into the federal register. All these steps are necessary to make sure that the idea of limited government stays alive. We don’t want one huge decision that is going to affect every to be based off of one person or one groups judgment.
Any member of congress can introduce a bill, they will then be known as the sponsor after they introduce the new bill. Any member of that same house or senate can sign as the cosponsor of the newly introduced bill. Policies or bills may be laws, regulations, presidential executive orders, funding formulas, norms or some form of action planned out. Think of it as resolution to an issue or a way to prevent a future problem or issue that citizens or anybody may have. A way that our government try to serve and satisfy its people.
Each new bill is given a number then it is referred to the committee who has jurisdiction over the topic that is addressed in the new bill. New bills can go to a subcommittee or several different committees. Which will add more time on pushing the bill through the already long process of making it into an actual published law. The committee decides if the bill will have a hearing that the subcommittee will hold. The subcommittee and the committee can mark up a bill or make changes to the bill.
The idea of making a new bill comes about when there is a obvious problem that needs a solution. Now this has to be a huge problem that effects a great majority of the citizen living in the United States of America. Something that is catching headlines and everyone in the public and media is talking about. Some problems may be common or big just in one state it still has to be address and handled to where the public is satisfied.
It takes a step by step process to solving the issue. Policy makers have to consider the root of the problem, how bad is the problem, and what is the right response and perfect solution for this particular issue. If a situation reaches the policy agenda it is then reviewed by congress and legislators review it. If the bill is going to cost a lot of money then the outcome of the policy has to be of great benefit. This will help the bill to be pushed through to an actual law. If the bill is going to cost a lot but not be very effective then it is less likely to go through.
After considering tons of different factors and the public comments on the new rule and everyone is done reviewing it, it may finally make it into the federal register and be a new law.
References:
http://www.ushistory.org/gov/6e.
http://www.naeyc.org/policy/federal/bill_law
Taylor Packard
Who Makes Policies?
Political interactions of policy making include: congress, the President, the Cabinet, advisers, agency bureaucrats, federal and state courts, political parties, interest groups, and the media. Every single one of these people are a part of the policy making decisions.
The steps in policy making go by: 1.) recognizing the problem, 2) agenda setting, 3) formulating the policy, 4) adopting the policy, 5) Implementing the policy, and 6) evaluating the policy. During this policy making; they go through multiple steps and solutions to make everyone happy.
Another website breaks it down in four short steps. During the first step there has to be a problem to need a policy, that would need the attention of the government. During the second stage they come up with the solution to the problem. The third other people go over the problem and solution. The fourth is to decide how well the policy is working.
I personally think that the policy making we have right now isn’t the best. I think we need a better way to make sure that everyone is happy. The people involved now only care about themselves and what they want, so they don’t care who else it affects. There should be a separate policy making committee that knows what they are doing, but the choices they make won’t benefit them or limit them.
For instance an example of a policy that needs changed. I think the drinking age should be 18 instead of 21. There are multiple reasons why I think this: you can drink in other countries no matter your age when you get into the war, at 18 you’re not going to be any more of an adult than at 21, you’re parents have the right to kick you out at age 18 and make you live on your own. When you turn 18 you can be tried as an adult instead of as juvenile. If you have to go to the hospital for some reason at age 18 you are now responsible for the bill because you’re an adult. This doesn’t affect me in anyway, but I think at 18 you are pretty knowledgeable of your own risks, and if you do it at 18 you’re going to do the same thing at 21. So the policy committee should rethink this.
Just like another example I think should be changed is you have to be drug tested to get any form of government money. Whether it be a pell grant all the way to welfare. I don’t think it is fair that our taxpayers money goes to druggies. Think of the millions of dollars we could save by doing this in every state in the U.S.
Another example could be our “Privacy Policy”, like seriously, what privacy do we actually have. Any little thing we do wrong the government is right there to tell us what we have done wrong. All the security cameras everywhere people don’t know about, or them listening to our phone conversations. We have no privacy in our own homes anymore. Someone is always knocking on doors wanting money, or taking something away.
The way we choose and make policies needs a lot of work, but no one cares enough to do anything about it.
References
http://www.ushistory.org/gov/11.asp
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/more-subjects/american-government/public-policy/the-policymaking-process
Jo-elle Endreola
Political Institutions
Political institutions have a major impact on government and societies all around the world. Not only do these institutions keep criminals in jail, and the rest of society safe, but also are also useful for several other things. These institutions are also useful for helping needy families out financially, giving individuals a right to make a change through local, state, and federal representatives, and giving society good health care for a chance to live healthier and longer lives.
Political institutions are displayed, and emerged from many different societies in several different ways. These institutions could include, police force, political parties, court systems, prisons, and many different interest groups. These institutions can emerge not only in America’s government, but also from other types of governments all around the world. Different governments including monarchies oligarchies, and democracies create their own political institutions to accommodate to that governments needs. Political institutions also can differ depending on federal, state, and local government. Federal government institutions may include national park centers, institutions such as military, congress, Supreme Court, executive branch, and House of Representatives. State assistance programs such as welfare, and food assistance, hospitals, mental institutions, Kansas Bureau of Investigation, and high way patrolmen, are recognized as state institutions. Small local government institutions are considered to be things like city council, school boards, post offices, fire stations, local court systems, local police departments, and the local jail system.
Although political institutions can be good for government and society these institutions still has some downfalls. The major negative effect of political institutions is the affordability to run all of these institutions. In order to run these Institutions ran by state, local, and federal government, you have to pay employers to do these jobs. Police force, mailman, teachers, office ladies, and fire fighters are some examples of employers paid by the government to keep all of these institutions running. Not only does the government have to pay the employers to run these institutions but the government also has to pay for the properties to keep the institutions open. Along with paying for the money to build these institutions also comes paying for electricity, water, police cars, fire trucks, office supplies, police equipment such as guns, and scanners, and fire fighter equipment such as hoses and protective gear. Jus in local education alone our government spends about 277.2 billion in education alone, so just imagine what we spend annually on all of the political institutions combined.
Political institutions are a good thing, and help out a lot for people in society by protecting us, providing good health care, and giving us good opportunities of a quality education, but these institutions also have major downfalls as to why these political institutions negatively effect our government, such as financial struggles. Our government is truly lucky to have a government that can provide so many different institutions to keep us safe, and educated. Our society sometimes takes this for granite.
Sources:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0045838
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/current_spending
http://www.cato-unbound.org/2013/04/05/raymond-j-la-raja/how-political-institutions-constrain-power-corporate-money-politics
Brad Ellis
Trade Unions
Trade unions are made up of a group of worker who have come together to get better benefits for themselves. This can include maintaining the integrity of their trade, getting better pay, getting more employees, and safer working conditions. Trade unions are often referred to as labor unions or just unions. Trade unions began in the 18th century in Britain as industrialism expanded very quickly and pretty much everybody started working including women and little children. This created a large group of unskilled workers who were getting paid extremely low so they organized and started throwing riots. These were the beginning of the modern day unions.
Labor unions in America mainly focus on better pay for their workers. Labor unions are a great thing, America wouldn’t be where it’s at without labor unions. They were very influential for people working in sweat shops or coal mines. I believe that many labor unions nowadays are useless and not needed. In America these days there is so many job opportunities for people, you don’t have to work at a place with bad conditions or low pay. There is a lot of government organizations that make sure that companies have to have safe working conditions that labor unions don’t even have to worry about that. So labor unions are just there to help people get better pay for their jobs. I don’t believe that’s the right thing to do. If you’re not getting what you believe you should be, quit and find another job that pays better. I know America has a problem with high unemployment rates, but it’s not that hard to find a new job. Most of America is thinking the same because the rates of people in unions are decreasing dramatically.
Now to contradict my stance on labor unions, I believe they need to play a bigger role in education and the police. Teachers and police officers get paid a lot less than they should. Wouldn’t everyone want to live in the smartest and safest country? Wouldn’t it be better to have our smartest people teaching others what they know? Wouldn’t you want the most qualified people protecting other people from harm? The problem is that the smartest and most qualified people choose a different career path purely because they can get paid better in a different career. The major reason why teachers and police officers don’t get paid more is because it would increase government spending which would increase the taxes needing to be paid by the public. The public would rather have a poor education system and a more dangerous environment than pay extra money. The public can’t be blamed either because I sure don’t want to pay extra taxes. I think the government should adjust their spending to education and the police force, instead of unemployment and welfare. It’s up to unions to lobby for more spending on education and the police force. I believe unions need to be more active in getting better pay for teacher and police officers. America is falling behind on education and we need to step it up, the only way is to get better teachers. Drugs and gang violence are a huge problem in America, the only way to get that fixed is more police officers or smarter more trained officers.
Labor unions are not needed in private jobs, or jobs where people are working for a company. Labor unions are need in jobs where people work for the government or for the good of the people. Unions need to lobby with politicians to help get better pay for the jobs that need better pay.
Resources
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/LaborUnions.html
http://www.howstuffworks.com/labor-union.htm
Josh Frerichs
Gun control
Where to begin. Recently the government had tried getting some laws through which included butting a ban on assault weapons, having to do universal back ground checks and many other things. Well congress didn’t get anything passed but they tried. Well now things are switching up a little bit. Since congress can’t get anything done well things are starting to switch around as in they are switching towards the states. Lately gun control has been a hot topic lately in government. The anniversary of the Newton shooting is going to be coming up soon. Since the anniversary of Newton shooting is coming around the corner gun control groups want to use the shooting to promote more gun control. Gun control activists have largely given up on Congress. Lately gun control groups are moving efforts towards Colorado, which use to be a gun friendly state. Gun control groups have one enemy though the NRA, National Rifle Association. The NRA has focused on many years on building relationships with state legislators. New York mayor Michael R. Bloomberg runs one major group and by the way New York has the hardest gun control laws right now. Also another major group leader is Gabrielle Gifford’s. Her and other gun control advocates plan on spending over $25 million in 2014. Most of it would be spent in the states. Their strategy is to pressure the legislature and pressure their reelections that are coming up. The groups will not stop until they get something done. Gun control will always be a hot topic always. Especial with the latest shootings that had happened. Especially the Newton shooting. The one article says, “ We will not be silent”. Families of the shooting want to bring that to the gun issue and gun control. The Newton shooting was a horrible shooting. The Newton families would like to see congress do something with gun control but congress hasn’t done anything with it yet. Nearly 11,100 gun deaths where reported in 2010. Even though gun deaths have gone down but gun sales have gone up lately especially since the scare of banning guns on assault weapons. Change of tactics. On the other hand there are people that believe in their Second Amendment rights. Which gives us the right to bear arms. The Second amendment was put in place a long time ago. The NRA believes in the Second amendment. The NRA has always been a proud supporter for the people against anything involving gun rights. The NRA keeps getting bigger with more members and more money they keep getting in. Gun control and Gun advocates will always be out there. The NRA is a strong gun lobbyist and it will always be a strong one.
The Government and some state are getting to involve with in the second amendment. They are not honoring it. The NYPD are taking guns that have more then 5 rounds of shells that it can hold, they are taken them away. That isn’t right. People paid good money for those guns. They are disrespecting the Second Amendment rights. We the people of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA need to act now. We need to join forces with the NRA and tell Obama that he doesn’t have the right to take away our guns and the manufacture of them. It is time to act on Gun Control. Which side are you on?
snews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/12/21875065-we-will-not-be-silent-families-of-victims-vow-to-bring-newtown-effect-to-gun-control-debate
The Welfare Act
By: Kendra Trussel
Debates have gone on and on every state election, talking about welfare recipients being drug tested. There have been many court cases, many arguments, and many agreements, yet nothing is set in stone on whether it should be allowed or not. Not many people can come to the same conclusion and find a working solution to the problem at hand. Should people who receive welfare have to take random drug tests? Yes they should, anyone who wants to enter the system to receive welfare assistance should have to take a drug test, just like people who are applying for a job are required to!
According to Nacy Kaffer, a columnist for the Detroit Free Press, “ Drug testing welfare recipients doesn’t work. It’s not cost-effective, and such testing tends to reveal that, well, folks who get benefits use drugs about as much- and sometimes less- than those who don’t.” The underlying problem with this is, if people who don’t receive welfare are doing drugs, they’re using their own money to buy those drugs, not the taxpayers money. Welfare has become more of a mainstream thing, it is more of a long term assistance rather than just a short term “ until you get your feet back on the ground” sort of thing. More people are now dependent on government handouts in order to survive. ( Mark Besonen)
Since the government has no strict guidelines for receiving these handouts people are going to continue to milk to system until they have requirements people are going to have to meet. Most people who go out seeking a job have to abide by the employee standards of the company that they are working for, this usually includes required drug testing. Sometimes it is just to receive the job and other times there are random drug tests they are allowed to give you. This comes along with any type of job usually. College athletes receive money in scholarship to play for a school making it a job of some sort, they are required to give drug tests. The military gives drug tests to their employees, professional athletes have to give drug tests to fulfill their contracts.
It is a common routine procedure that people who want to continue to receive money and have a job have to abide by. This why I find is ridiculous that people who receive free federal assistance do not think they have to be held to the same amount of standards as the people who are actually out working for their money.
I believe that welfare and family assistance is a great program, that when used in the right way and when not taken advantage of is a great way to help keep everyone afloat. However, I also believe that most people are obviously taking advantage of the help these low income program provide. This is shown by the rapid increase in the number of families receiving welfare and the amount of time they continue to receive it for.
By adding random drug testing into the procedure for receiving welfare assistance, it will help lower the percent of money going into welfare in the long run because we could help those people get off drugs and find jobs, making them no longer in the welfare system. I think that if a person has a positive drug reading they should be put into a separate welfare system that is more strict and almost “babysits” them. Making weekly in home checks and drug screening a priority. We should have a form of a job clinic and fair where those people can go to and learn the basic needs they will need to know to hold a substantial paying job. They also should be enrolled and forced to attend drug classes.
I think this program would work because it would help keep individuals accountable for their actions and if they cannot follow the guidelines or pass the drug screenings than they will be removed from the system after a certain amount of time. The in home visits will also help make sure that the children in the homes are still being taken care of and the money they are given is actually being spent on his or her family and their families needs other than their own addiction. This program will also help keep those who are not doing drugs and live the proper lifestyles for obtaining a job in a different category, so they can’t say they are being treated unlawfully. I honestly think this idea would help get people back on his or her feet, it will help make sure that the taxpayers money is being used for what it was intended for. It is not a punishment and some could almost say it is a guiding tool to help. Welfare is mainly to help keep food on the table and a roof over childrens heads, so making sure that is what it is used for and they are living a happy life is the most important thing.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/06/stateline-drug-testing-welfare-states/6118111/
https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/drug-testing-welfare-recipients
The American Dream
Dana Wilson
Things change over time. Logically speaking, essentially everything will change over time, whether it is a long amount of time, or a short one. One thing that has held true thus far however, is The American Dream. The belief that hard work and talent are all you need to get ahead in this world has been around for a long time. Back in 1931 when the talented writer James Truslow Adams coined the catchy phrase, he described it as, “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement.” Everyone desires such a life for themselves, and most desire it for those around them as well. So what’s the problem? As I said, things have changed over the course of the last 80 years and a better, fuller life is getting harder and harder to achieve. Along with the economic differences in American society today, perhaps it has to do with the disturbing fact that there are many Americans who aren’t willing to put in the qualified effort, hard work and talent, but still expect to receive the reward. In spite of this, I believe that the American Dream is still within reach and should be more valued than ever.
Being that there are two polar opposite reasons why fulfilling the American Dream seems impossible for some people, there are also two opposite solutions. The first of those solutions than, is aimed towards solving the problem of economic crisis. According to an article by Dan Kadlec, one of the biggest accomplishments associated with attaining the American Dream is home ownership. Home ownership has always been an important factor, but in more recent years has become more dominant. Of course, with the housing bust, this important aspect has been under a heavy amount of stress, “Just 65% of Americans own their own home, down from 69% pre-bust, and four out of five Americans are rethinking the reasons they’d want to buy a house” (Kadlec). Regardless of the recent downfall in the housing market, the American government has put into place several loan options for first time home owners. The idea of going into debt is not exactly something people get excited about. Unfortunately, in today’s world, there are few life commitments possible without taking out a loan. On the upside of this, the statistics for Americans who are able to pay back their utilized loans on time are very high. Keeping the property you’re paying for, rather than an unlimited amount of rent with no ending reward is an added bonus. The ability to become a home owner is really less of a problem than simply making the decision to take advantage of the policies put in place to keep the American Dream alive.
On the other hand, for those who are unwilling to put in the necessary exertion, achieving the American Dream shouldn’t really be considered achieving at all. It’s no secret that the work ethic of today’s youth is on a steady decline from what it once was. Government assistance can be used in two ways: to take advantage, or to utilize. There are many who accept such assistance who spend their lives working to be able to go it alone; while others, the more well-known of the younger generation, accept such assistance to, well, just keep on accepting it. Work ethic has for many, become a thing of the past. Employers are forced to hire employees who put out minimal effort due to the rarity of employees that are willing to commit and work hard. Individuals want to get ahead, without actually working to get ahead. Welfare has become something that is taken advantage of rather than utilized. Government assistance should be awarded to those with the desire to make something of themselves, to achieve, and to strive to be better from one day to the next. That’s what the American Dream is all about, and those are the people who deserve to triumph in it.
The American Dream is not impossible. However, it simply cannot be accomplished without the key ingredient: Hard work. Statistic research shows that even out of those born into low income families, the success rate when it comes to achieving the American Dream is above 50% (Statistic Brain). While things have changed, one thing that should never change is for parents to teach their children the meaning of hard work and dedication. Success should never be denied to those who strive to achieve it. “Things may come to those who wait, but only things left by those who hustle.”-Abraham Lincoln
Sources:
http://www.movemequotes.com/top-25-work-ethic-quotes/
http://www.statisticbrain.com/chances-of-achieving-the-american-dream/
Policy Making
by: Loretta Harmison
Policy making involves many different groups. For example, the President, congress, the Cabinet, advisors, agency bureaucrats, federal and state courts, political parties, interest groups, and the media help make political decisions. These policies are goal oriented course of action that the government follows in dealing with the issues and problems that arise in the country. This process goes through many predictable series of steps.
The first step is called recognizing the problem where distress people with unhealthy working conditions or natural disasters. There are many different types of conditions and not all of them become big problems that make the government step in to try and fix it. For example, many people do not expect the government to try and prevent tornadoes. The citizens; however, would expect them to step in to help the victims of the tornado with quick relief.
Second the government gets an agenda or a set of problems that needs to be solved. There are several agendas, so this step is basically where the government puts them in order of most important to least. Agendas may get responses from political parties, the media, interest groups, and other branches of government. After every election, the new President changes or reshapes the agendas such as the crisis of war, natural disasters, and tragic accidents.
Third is the stage where the policy is formulated. There are various workers at this stage such as; the President and the White House aides, agency officials, appointed task forces, interest groups, private research organizations, also legislators that helps put together the parts of the new policy. In these steps, they review the existing policies and discuss with each other. They decide whether they need to use a similar format for the current policy. Then decide on who is going to be involved. The people who are involved need to work together in wording the policy appropriately.
After that, is the adopting of the policy. Once the plans are presented, only one policy is accepted by the decision-makers. There have been many cases when the policy has been adopted by the congress when it passes a law, by The President signing an executive order, or Supreme Court rules on an important case.
The fifth step in this process is implementing the policy. The public policy would be carried out by the administrative agencies in the executive branch. There are times that the courts may get involved in implementing decisions. Many techniques are used to see that the policy is carried out; sometimes they punish people and organizations who do not comply with the policy.
In the last step, the makers of the policy try and determine if the policy is actually accomplished or if it’s being carried out properly. This evaluation process proceeds over a long period of time and usually includes people that have been involved with carrying out the policy. Almost all of the evaluations have called for the policies to be revised to a degree. The whole process could begin again if the starting at the re-recognition of the problem.
These are the step of policy making from stating of the problem to evaluating the policy made. All of these steps make up how our government works. Many of the laws that we have today went through this process and are still enforced today.
Resources
http://www.ushistory.org/gov/11.asp
http://www.ehow.com/how_7550303_formulate-policies.html
Brian Wood
United States National Debt
America has dug itself in a deep whole and stands $17,474,701,108,625.66 in debt on May 9th 2014. The national debt has only gotten worse and is not turning in any different direction. The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $2.40 billion per day since September 30, 2012! The estimated population of the United States has 318,187,127 people. This means that it would take each citizen to pay $54,919.57 to get out of debt. The countries that are most dangerous to us we owe trillions and billions of dollars to. We are in debt to China the most at a whopping $1.26 trillion.
Resource:
(http://people.howstuffworks.com/5-united-states-debt-holders.htm#page=9)
(bensguide.gpo.gov)
Welfare
Krista Mathies
Welfare has always been a huge debate between elections, candidates, and among the people as well. Many stances and opinions have filled the air, along with the government with trials and open cases, because of the controversy over tax payer’s money and how it is being used. The debate is how can we help the people that need the help and actually use it for the greater good, vs. the people that abuse and take advantage of the system? Welfare could be an amazing system if used properly and had more regulations against the abuse.
Many people are getting this family assistance everyday because without it they could not afford to feed their children. In these cases I absolutely agree in them having the government help they need. The part that bothers me is the people that have a grocery cart full of chips, cookies, candy, frozen meals, and pop. None of that food has the nutrients the children should be getting. These items and foods should not be allowed to be purchased because with my experience of working in a grocery store for four years has proven to me that many people of the food stamps, or cash benefits system often by a lot of these foods. Some of the items I have seen came through a line but then got handed a food stamp card just did not seem right. Especially when one day I saw a couple with a few little girls and they had put up a basket of lobster and crab legs, now if you have ever bought or even thought of buying these items at a store you would realize they are NOT cheap; Then when ready to pay they handed me and EBT food stamp card, now please tell me how our government money can pay for them to eat this over priced food when a lot of the time not even a middle class person can afford to eat this, or a steak! This just proves something is wrong with the system.
There are many (so called) solutions floating around to fix these abuses to the system. One would be to keep a record of when, where, and what the person bought; however this has been fought a lot because that can infringe on the private right of a home. Another solution would be to drug test everyone wanting or obtaining these government assistance benefits. This has also had lots of troubles because of the fact that many people argue that we are wasting more money trying to drug test people then it is worth spending. A final solution would be would be that the person(s) needs to have proof, constant proof, which they are trying to obtain and maintain a job. Many people debate whether people are on government assistance to avoid have to work, this is not right to the people that are working a full time job and still barely making ends meet. These people are told they are making too much money for government assistance yet their child does not get the full three meals a day because they cannot afford to feed them. Many of these suggestions could benefit the system but many have to be reviewed and made sure they will help protect the rights of not only the people that need this money but also the people that are fairly paying taxes and giving their money up.
Resources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_fraud
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381063/welfare-abuse-almost-quelled-jillian-kay-melchior
Ashley Riley
Josh Frerichs
Stephen Cornett
Danielle Schaffer
Loren Evans, Cordae Mckelvy
Lauren Mountford
Marcus Tibbles
Jo-ellle Endreola
Sager
David
Jason Manning
Brian Wood
Brad
Loretta Harmison
Nabor Leal-Rodriguez
Presidents
Kendra Trussel
Daniel Mackay and Dana Wilson
Taylor Packard
Macinzie Lehman
Emi
rakim dean
Kaice Allen and Krista Mathies
Matthew Nickelson
Deja Cato
Police Brutality
Jeromy, Tyler, Ashton, Austin
Erica Cusnariov
SHANIA DIRKS
[[html]]
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/emVlnrAdYmM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>