1. Read online bio's of the U.S. Supreme Court Justices. What do you find interesting about their backgrounds? Pick one of the Justices, read about cases this Justice has written (majority or dissent) and explain whether you agree or disagree with his/her judicial philosophy.
I picked Ruth Ginsburg who attended Harvard Law School. She has worked as research associate, associate director, law clerk, a Professor of Law at Rutgers University School of Law, and a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford. She helped launch the Women’s Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. She took her seat on the Supreme Court in August of 1993. She is known for being liberal and adovacting the equal citizenship status of men and women which I support.
2. Is Judicial Review a power that should be exercised regularly or sparingly? Why?
Judicial Review is ok as long as it is not overused. It is an example of Seperation of Powers.
3. Is it the job of the High Court to apply the Constitution in light of the intent of the framers of the Constitution (strict construction) or should they interpret the Constitution in light of changes in society/technology (living Constitution)? Why?
They should probably interpret the Constituion in light of changes in society. Today's world is much different than it was when the Constituion was written.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Chapter 13
1. Research federal agencies and explain which one you feel is the most important one and why?
I feel one of the most important agencies is the Department of Homeland Security. It protects the security of America and keeps us safe. It has many of the important divisons/programs that have kept us safe such as The Border and Transportation Security division, the Emergency Preparedness and Response division, the Science and Technology division,etc. It also includes the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, and the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. It was established in 2002 after the 9/11 attacks and has done a good job protecting Americans.
2. Which federal agency could be terminated with the least impact (if any) and why?
Although it may have made some improvements, I think we could do away with the Department of Education. We instead should let the states handle the role of education. I think it is too much for the federal government to try to control education over the US.
3. Are any new agencies needed? In other words, if you were president would you create new agencies? If so, in what area(s)?
Off the top of my head, I can not think of any new agencies that would be needed. I think instead, if I were president, I would focus on improving the agencies we already have.
I feel one of the most important agencies is the Department of Homeland Security. It protects the security of America and keeps us safe. It has many of the important divisons/programs that have kept us safe such as The Border and Transportation Security division, the Emergency Preparedness and Response division, the Science and Technology division,etc. It also includes the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, and the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. It was established in 2002 after the 9/11 attacks and has done a good job protecting Americans.
2. Which federal agency could be terminated with the least impact (if any) and why?
Although it may have made some improvements, I think we could do away with the Department of Education. We instead should let the states handle the role of education. I think it is too much for the federal government to try to control education over the US.
3. Are any new agencies needed? In other words, if you were president would you create new agencies? If so, in what area(s)?
Off the top of my head, I can not think of any new agencies that would be needed. I think instead, if I were president, I would focus on improving the agencies we already have.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
chapter 12
1. What makes a great President (not which Presidents have been great) . . . what qualities are essential to greatness? Why?
There are many qualities that make a president great. First, he must be loyal to his country and his citizens. He must be educated and experienced in government/political/military jobs. I think he should be an attentive person who is understanding and willing to listen to others but also makes sure to make his own opinions heard. I think he should be comfortable with the media, public speaking, and with people in general. He should also be a confidant person who is willing to try new things.
2. Other than Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, which two Presidents have been the greatest and why?
I think Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a great president. He guided the country successfully through both the Great Depression and WWII. I liked some of the things he did such as the New Deal. Instead of just giving handouts, he also created job programs.
Another great president was Lyndon Johnson. He got the Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. He protected minority rights. He also helped the poor and the elderly by creating Medicare and Medicaid. He looked out for the,"little people" which is something I can respect.
3. Research a President that you're previously unfamiliar with - list at least three things you learned. Was this President effective? Why or why not?
I researched Millard Fillmore who was the 13th president. He was also the last member of the whig party to hold the presidential office. He assumed presidency after Zachery Talyor's death. One thing that is so interesting about him is that when he became president, the entire cabinet resigned. He supported the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act. I do not think he was an effective president because he was not very popular.
There are many qualities that make a president great. First, he must be loyal to his country and his citizens. He must be educated and experienced in government/political/military jobs. I think he should be an attentive person who is understanding and willing to listen to others but also makes sure to make his own opinions heard. I think he should be comfortable with the media, public speaking, and with people in general. He should also be a confidant person who is willing to try new things.
2. Other than Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, which two Presidents have been the greatest and why?
I think Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a great president. He guided the country successfully through both the Great Depression and WWII. I liked some of the things he did such as the New Deal. Instead of just giving handouts, he also created job programs.
Another great president was Lyndon Johnson. He got the Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. He protected minority rights. He also helped the poor and the elderly by creating Medicare and Medicaid. He looked out for the,"little people" which is something I can respect.
3. Research a President that you're previously unfamiliar with - list at least three things you learned. Was this President effective? Why or why not?
I researched Millard Fillmore who was the 13th president. He was also the last member of the whig party to hold the presidential office. He assumed presidency after Zachery Talyor's death. One thing that is so interesting about him is that when he became president, the entire cabinet resigned. He supported the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act. I do not think he was an effective president because he was not very popular.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Chapter 11
1. Who are your Senators and your Congressman?
We have two Senators: Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander.
Our nine congressmen are: Phil Roe, John Duncan, Chuck Fleschmann, Scott DesJarlais, Jim Cooper, Diane Black, Marsha Blackburn, Stephen Fincher, and Steve Cohen.
2.Research the areas they champion and find one you support. What is it and why do you support it?
Lamar Alexander wants to make changes to No Child Left Behind. He does not want to see the development of a national school board and nor do I. It would not work effectively. Alexander also made a statement about the new student loans that I agree with. He said that the growth of tuition should be slowed. He believes one way to do this is to reduce health care costs so that more state dollars can be used to support education.
3. Find an issue that one of your Senators or Congressman champions that you disagree with. Why do you disagree?
I do not like some of the changes that Bob Corker wants to make to Medicare. I think some of the changes would hurt some people. For example, he wants to raise the age to 67. While he did have some good ideas concerning medicare (such as eliminating fraud) some of them would hurt the people who truly need and benefit from it.
We have two Senators: Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander.
Our nine congressmen are: Phil Roe, John Duncan, Chuck Fleschmann, Scott DesJarlais, Jim Cooper, Diane Black, Marsha Blackburn, Stephen Fincher, and Steve Cohen.
2.Research the areas they champion and find one you support. What is it and why do you support it?
Lamar Alexander wants to make changes to No Child Left Behind. He does not want to see the development of a national school board and nor do I. It would not work effectively. Alexander also made a statement about the new student loans that I agree with. He said that the growth of tuition should be slowed. He believes one way to do this is to reduce health care costs so that more state dollars can be used to support education.
3. Find an issue that one of your Senators or Congressman champions that you disagree with. Why do you disagree?
I do not like some of the changes that Bob Corker wants to make to Medicare. I think some of the changes would hurt some people. For example, he wants to raise the age to 67. While he did have some good ideas concerning medicare (such as eliminating fraud) some of them would hurt the people who truly need and benefit from it.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Chapter 10
1. Read Bush v. Gore in the text. Do you agree with the majority or the dissenting opinion? Why?
I agree with the majority that Florida's method for recounting violated equal protection of the law. Like Bush pointed out, the standard of the intent of the voter used by Florida could mean different standards by different officials. I don't think it would have been an accurate recount. If a recount is to be done, it is extremely important that it is done accurately and correctly.
2. Is the ability to fundraise too important in elections? In other words, are good candidates prevented from running because they cannot raise the needed funds? Can/should something be done to correct this if it is a problem?
The ability to fundraise in elections is very important. It makes me think of the phrase, "survival of the fittest." I am sure that many good candidates are prevented from running for elections simply due to lack of funds. Without funds, they can not promote themselves and get their name out/what they will do in office out in public. They also can not hire as many staff members.
3. Why is there such voter apathy - in other words, why is there often such low voter turnout for elections? Is there a way to rectify this problem?
I think there are numerous reasons why many people do not vote. One would be that elections are hard to understand or that they are not enough informed about candidates/issues to be able to caste a vote. Another reason is that a low of people do not believe that their one vote really counts and others don't vote because they do not see a way that it will immediately benefit them to vote. Maybe others don't have the means of transportation or the time to vote. To rectify this problem, people should become more informed and involved. I also think schools should encourage kids to be informed and educated on current events/issues/politicians so that they will be more inclined to vote when they are old enough. The government could also find ways to entice more people to vote.
I agree with the majority that Florida's method for recounting violated equal protection of the law. Like Bush pointed out, the standard of the intent of the voter used by Florida could mean different standards by different officials. I don't think it would have been an accurate recount. If a recount is to be done, it is extremely important that it is done accurately and correctly.
2. Is the ability to fundraise too important in elections? In other words, are good candidates prevented from running because they cannot raise the needed funds? Can/should something be done to correct this if it is a problem?
The ability to fundraise in elections is very important. It makes me think of the phrase, "survival of the fittest." I am sure that many good candidates are prevented from running for elections simply due to lack of funds. Without funds, they can not promote themselves and get their name out/what they will do in office out in public. They also can not hire as many staff members.
3. Why is there such voter apathy - in other words, why is there often such low voter turnout for elections? Is there a way to rectify this problem?
I think there are numerous reasons why many people do not vote. One would be that elections are hard to understand or that they are not enough informed about candidates/issues to be able to caste a vote. Another reason is that a low of people do not believe that their one vote really counts and others don't vote because they do not see a way that it will immediately benefit them to vote. Maybe others don't have the means of transportation or the time to vote. To rectify this problem, people should become more informed and involved. I also think schools should encourage kids to be informed and educated on current events/issues/politicians so that they will be more inclined to vote when they are old enough. The government could also find ways to entice more people to vote.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Chapter 9
1. Which political party do you most identify with? Why? Are there things in the party platform with which you disagree? I do not completely identify myself with just any one party. I agree and disagree with certain beliefs and ideas from each party. Like Democrats, I believe in minimum wages and higher tax rates for those with higher income. I think Government should help monitor economics. But like Republicans, I favor a limited role for government in society. I could not just pick just one party to support.
2. Does America need political parties? The founders originally hoped that American politics would operate without need of parties? Would that work today? Why?
Even though not everyone can pick and support just one political party, I think they are still important. Political parties keep people informed of current events. They also encourage other citizens to become involved and vote. Political parties act as both informers and gates/gateways to political involvement. Without them, elections would not run as smoothly. Citizens would be less likely to understand who or what they were voting for.
3. Please research lesser known political parties - which one do you most identify with? Why?
There are many lesser known political parties out there that I was unaware of. One of them is the Constitution Party. It was formed in 1991 by Howard Philips. Their goal is "to restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Bibical foundations." It calls for stricter penalties on illegal immigrants, are anti-abortion, want to reduce spending, and supports the death penalty.
Another party I found was The Green Party of the United States. They officially formed in 2001 and support environmentalism, social justice, peace, and nonviolence. They also supported Ralph Nader.
2. Does America need political parties? The founders originally hoped that American politics would operate without need of parties? Would that work today? Why?
Even though not everyone can pick and support just one political party, I think they are still important. Political parties keep people informed of current events. They also encourage other citizens to become involved and vote. Political parties act as both informers and gates/gateways to political involvement. Without them, elections would not run as smoothly. Citizens would be less likely to understand who or what they were voting for.
3. Please research lesser known political parties - which one do you most identify with? Why?
There are many lesser known political parties out there that I was unaware of. One of them is the Constitution Party. It was formed in 1991 by Howard Philips. Their goal is "to restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Bibical foundations." It calls for stricter penalties on illegal immigrants, are anti-abortion, want to reduce spending, and supports the death penalty.
Another party I found was The Green Party of the United States. They officially formed in 2001 and support environmentalism, social justice, peace, and nonviolence. They also supported Ralph Nader.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Chapter 8
1. From figure 8.1 in the text, select one of the interest groups and do some research on their issues and beliefs. What did you learn? What did you find interesting? Do you agree/disagree with their positions on issues? Why?
For this I chose the National Education Association. They are educators who want to see improvement in public schools. Their core values are: equal opportunity, a just society, democracy, professionalism, partnership, and collective action. Like me, they are concerned with the No Child Left Behind Act. They listed that it relied too heavily on test scores, takes away teacher rights, and ignores good local ideas. I agree with this, especially the part about relying too heavily on test scores.
2. Find an interest group with which you associate (positively). What is the name of the group and what do you find persuasive about their position on issues?
There are many interest groups I like but I choose NOW (National Organization for Women) for this question. Their goal is to bring about equality for all women, eliminate discrimination/violence against women, etc. I think its important that there are interest groups to represent women.
3. Do interest groups have enough/too much/the right amount of power in the political system? Most believe it's a fine-line balance between freedom of speech for the groups and keeping unfair persuasion out of government. Where is that line and when is it crossed?
In general, I do not think they have too much power. I think it is a natural and common thing for people who have similar interests and beliefs to form groups. While some groups do have more power/influence than others, they tend to balance each other out. While they can have negative impacts, I think the positive outweighs the negative.
For this I chose the National Education Association. They are educators who want to see improvement in public schools. Their core values are: equal opportunity, a just society, democracy, professionalism, partnership, and collective action. Like me, they are concerned with the No Child Left Behind Act. They listed that it relied too heavily on test scores, takes away teacher rights, and ignores good local ideas. I agree with this, especially the part about relying too heavily on test scores.
2. Find an interest group with which you associate (positively). What is the name of the group and what do you find persuasive about their position on issues?
There are many interest groups I like but I choose NOW (National Organization for Women) for this question. Their goal is to bring about equality for all women, eliminate discrimination/violence against women, etc. I think its important that there are interest groups to represent women.
3. Do interest groups have enough/too much/the right amount of power in the political system? Most believe it's a fine-line balance between freedom of speech for the groups and keeping unfair persuasion out of government. Where is that line and when is it crossed?
In general, I do not think they have too much power. I think it is a natural and common thing for people who have similar interests and beliefs to form groups. While some groups do have more power/influence than others, they tend to balance each other out. While they can have negative impacts, I think the positive outweighs the negative.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Chapter 7
1. Does objectivity still exist in the media's coverage of politics? Of the major news outlets (CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, NPR, NBC, etc.), which are the most objective and which seem to have the most bias?
To a certain extent, some objectivity still exists. They are not usually openly biased when presenting the news. However, some of the news outlets do tend to lean 'left' or 'right.' I could not say for sure which ones because I often only hear about news through word of mouth.
2. How does talk radio (Rush Limbaugh, Air America, etc.) affect your view of politics? Why?
Overall, talk radio is not something that affects me. I do not normally listen to talk radio. It is something that is probably geared towards and more appealing to the older generations of people.
3. Is media objectivity important? Why or why not?
Media objectivity is very important. When media outlets do not present news in a way that is completely objective, they may cause people to misunderstand information. They also may influence people to believe or feel a certain way about political issues that they would not normally had they been completely objective. It is important that they simply present the facts so that people may form their own opinions without being influenced.
To a certain extent, some objectivity still exists. They are not usually openly biased when presenting the news. However, some of the news outlets do tend to lean 'left' or 'right.' I could not say for sure which ones because I often only hear about news through word of mouth.
2. How does talk radio (Rush Limbaugh, Air America, etc.) affect your view of politics? Why?
Overall, talk radio is not something that affects me. I do not normally listen to talk radio. It is something that is probably geared towards and more appealing to the older generations of people.
3. Is media objectivity important? Why or why not?
Media objectivity is very important. When media outlets do not present news in a way that is completely objective, they may cause people to misunderstand information. They also may influence people to believe or feel a certain way about political issues that they would not normally had they been completely objective. It is important that they simply present the facts so that people may form their own opinions without being influenced.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Blog 6
1. Is American news media too dependent upon polls? Is it appropriate for news agencies to create polls and then report on them? Why or why not?
I do not think the media is too dependent on polls. Polls are a good way to predict outcomes, general beliefs, etc. I do think its fine for a news agency to create polls and report on them as long as they are being honest and fair when making and tallying the results. The results can be educational and interesting to viewers or readers.
2.How important is political party identification to you (e.g. as a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc.)? Was it more or less important to your parents & grandparents? Does it seem more or less important to your friends? Why or why not?
To me, political part identification is not that important. Instead, it is more important to know what your views and opinions are on issues. In other words, it is more important to know whether or not you support abortion, stricter immigration laws, your opinions on gun laws, etc. Just because someone is a democrat does not mean that they will agree with everything democrats stand for. However, it was probably more important to identify yourself with a party in the past. Today, it is not as important because the country is not only more modern but has a wider range of issues to deal with.
3. Do you feel that you opinion of politics is more influenced by economic issues or by social issues? Why?
My opinion of politics is probably more influenced by economic issues. This is probably because a lot of social issues do not directly effect me. Issues such as abortion, homosexual marriage,immigration, etc have not had any direct impact on me. However, economic issues, seems to affect me more. It affects me more as a student trying to pay her way through college. Or when I see people who have lost their job due to outsourcing, a company in financial crisis, etc. Therefore my opinion of politics are going to be more influenced by economic issues.
I do not think the media is too dependent on polls. Polls are a good way to predict outcomes, general beliefs, etc. I do think its fine for a news agency to create polls and report on them as long as they are being honest and fair when making and tallying the results. The results can be educational and interesting to viewers or readers.
2.How important is political party identification to you (e.g. as a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc.)? Was it more or less important to your parents & grandparents? Does it seem more or less important to your friends? Why or why not?
To me, political part identification is not that important. Instead, it is more important to know what your views and opinions are on issues. In other words, it is more important to know whether or not you support abortion, stricter immigration laws, your opinions on gun laws, etc. Just because someone is a democrat does not mean that they will agree with everything democrats stand for. However, it was probably more important to identify yourself with a party in the past. Today, it is not as important because the country is not only more modern but has a wider range of issues to deal with.
3. Do you feel that you opinion of politics is more influenced by economic issues or by social issues? Why?
My opinion of politics is probably more influenced by economic issues. This is probably because a lot of social issues do not directly effect me. Issues such as abortion, homosexual marriage,immigration, etc have not had any direct impact on me. However, economic issues, seems to affect me more. It affects me more as a student trying to pay her way through college. Or when I see people who have lost their job due to outsourcing, a company in financial crisis, etc. Therefore my opinion of politics are going to be more influenced by economic issues.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Chapter 5
1. The issue of race - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of racial discrimination? Why or how so?
Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, the government did not do enough to protect victims of racial discrimination or to prevent it. The government allowed segregations of blacks and whites, it allowed businesses to refuse customers based the color of their skin, it did not always protect the rights of African Americans to vote, and much more. However, since the Movement, the government has improved in that area. Due to pressure from citizens and organizations like NAACP, the government has made many changes that still protect people from racial discrimination today. Examples would be, but not limited to, the case of Brown vs. Board of Education, Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, etc.
2.The issue of gender - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of gender discrimination? Why or how so?
Just like racial discrimination, the government did not always do its part in discouraging gender discrimination as it should have. However, over the last century, many improvements have been made. While there is still occasionally some gender discrimination, the government can not prevent all of it from occurring. Although there are still two things I would like to see happen-1. women get paid equally as men and 2. more women serving in the military. Despite the Equal Pay Act, I still believe that female workers often do not receive their fair amount of pay compared to males who do the same amount/quality of work.
3. The issue of sexual orientation - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of discrimination? Why or how so?
On this issue, I have mixed feelings. Although I have my own personal beliefs on this, I still think that the government, to some extent, should offer more protection. While I do not know whether I would support homosexual marriage, I do not believe that they should be discriminated upon. The government should at least take more notice of the discrimination and do its best to stop it.
Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, the government did not do enough to protect victims of racial discrimination or to prevent it. The government allowed segregations of blacks and whites, it allowed businesses to refuse customers based the color of their skin, it did not always protect the rights of African Americans to vote, and much more. However, since the Movement, the government has improved in that area. Due to pressure from citizens and organizations like NAACP, the government has made many changes that still protect people from racial discrimination today. Examples would be, but not limited to, the case of Brown vs. Board of Education, Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, etc.
2.The issue of gender - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of gender discrimination? Why or how so?
Just like racial discrimination, the government did not always do its part in discouraging gender discrimination as it should have. However, over the last century, many improvements have been made. While there is still occasionally some gender discrimination, the government can not prevent all of it from occurring. Although there are still two things I would like to see happen-1. women get paid equally as men and 2. more women serving in the military. Despite the Equal Pay Act, I still believe that female workers often do not receive their fair amount of pay compared to males who do the same amount/quality of work.
3. The issue of sexual orientation - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of discrimination? Why or how so?
On this issue, I have mixed feelings. Although I have my own personal beliefs on this, I still think that the government, to some extent, should offer more protection. While I do not know whether I would support homosexual marriage, I do not believe that they should be discriminated upon. The government should at least take more notice of the discrimination and do its best to stop it.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Chapter 4
1. Freedom of Speech: How important is it? Does the freedom go "too far"? What areas of speech should not be protected?
To me, Freedom of Speech is very important. People should have the right to openly voice their opinions without fear of punishment. However, like everything, too much of a good thing can be bad. People should not be allowed to create needless chaos. As Oliver Wendell Holmes pointed out, "freedom of speech does not mean that an individual has the right to falsely shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater, and cause a panic." Making false allegations about someone to purposely hurt their reputation would be an example. There should be some limits placed on freedom of speech.
2. Freedom of Religion: Is separation of church and state necessary? Why or why not?
In America, I do believe that separation of church and state are necessary. I believe this simply because there are so many practicing religions today that it would be impossible for them not to clash. Keeping church and state seperated allows for more peace.
3.Criminal Procedure: Are defendant's rights crucial to our system of government? Why or why not? Many argue that defendants have too many rights - do you agree? Why or why not?
Defendants rights are very important. It is crucial that they recieve the best trial possible. Not everyone who goes to trial is guilty and therefore they should be given certain rights until proven otherwise. For the most part, I would disagree that they have too many rights. However, I can see how this would be true in some cases like murders or even terrorism.
To me, Freedom of Speech is very important. People should have the right to openly voice their opinions without fear of punishment. However, like everything, too much of a good thing can be bad. People should not be allowed to create needless chaos. As Oliver Wendell Holmes pointed out, "freedom of speech does not mean that an individual has the right to falsely shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater, and cause a panic." Making false allegations about someone to purposely hurt their reputation would be an example. There should be some limits placed on freedom of speech.
2. Freedom of Religion: Is separation of church and state necessary? Why or why not?
In America, I do believe that separation of church and state are necessary. I believe this simply because there are so many practicing religions today that it would be impossible for them not to clash. Keeping church and state seperated allows for more peace.
3.Criminal Procedure: Are defendant's rights crucial to our system of government? Why or why not? Many argue that defendants have too many rights - do you agree? Why or why not?
Defendants rights are very important. It is crucial that they recieve the best trial possible. Not everyone who goes to trial is guilty and therefore they should be given certain rights until proven otherwise. For the most part, I would disagree that they have too many rights. However, I can see how this would be true in some cases like murders or even terrorism.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Chapter 3
Is a strong national government necessary or should the state governments have an equal share of power? Why?
I believe, for the most part, that states should have an equal share of power. People who have too much power tend to abuse it and take advantage of others. With an equal amount of power this can not happen as they will keep each other in check. Also, if the states do no have much power then I believe that the citizens in general will not have as much voice in political matters. Besides that, the national government can not possibly know what is best for every state. Each individual state knows what is best for it when making most political decisions.
National power increased during the Great Depression but then power began to shift back to the states (somewhat) during the Reagan administration. Why did that happen and is that shift appropriate?
To help the economy in the Depression, the government begin to take on more responsibilities that originally were left up to the states. People in general began to believe that the national government had too much power over the states. At the time it was needed but once the economy recovered, those powers/responsibilities could and should have been given back.
Education stirs much discussion relating to the issue of federalism. Should the national government regulate education or is it a matter best left to state and local governments? Why?
In my opinion, the national government should do more to regulate education. It would ensure that students across America are more equally educated. State and local governments do not always have enough funds to properly educate their students and should receive more help. The national government tends to put a strong emphasis on education and therefore, should help ensure that anyone willing to receive an education can get one. They can better montor that the education they are recieving are up to standard with not only other states but also with other nations around the world.
I believe, for the most part, that states should have an equal share of power. People who have too much power tend to abuse it and take advantage of others. With an equal amount of power this can not happen as they will keep each other in check. Also, if the states do no have much power then I believe that the citizens in general will not have as much voice in political matters. Besides that, the national government can not possibly know what is best for every state. Each individual state knows what is best for it when making most political decisions.
National power increased during the Great Depression but then power began to shift back to the states (somewhat) during the Reagan administration. Why did that happen and is that shift appropriate?
To help the economy in the Depression, the government begin to take on more responsibilities that originally were left up to the states. People in general began to believe that the national government had too much power over the states. At the time it was needed but once the economy recovered, those powers/responsibilities could and should have been given back.
Education stirs much discussion relating to the issue of federalism. Should the national government regulate education or is it a matter best left to state and local governments? Why?
In my opinion, the national government should do more to regulate education. It would ensure that students across America are more equally educated. State and local governments do not always have enough funds to properly educate their students and should receive more help. The national government tends to put a strong emphasis on education and therefore, should help ensure that anyone willing to receive an education can get one. They can better montor that the education they are recieving are up to standard with not only other states but also with other nations around the world.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Blog 2
1. How important was the switch from the Articles to the Constitution?
This is a crucial part of history. Government was too weak, there was too much freedom, and not enough order. I believe that eventually USA would have dissolved. The Constitution made the country stronger.
2. How important are the Bill of Rights?
Without it, the possibility that government could take away certain freedoms would exist. Because of it, there are many freedoms that can never be taken. Without it, Congress could find ways to pass laws that restrict those freedoms. Its also important because citizens can know exactly which freedoms are protected.
3. Is Capital Punishment constitutional?
I believe one could argue that it doesn’t violate the constitution even if you don’t believe in it. The Fourteenth Amendment says that life can not be taken without due process-suggesting that it can be allowed with correct proceedings.
This is a crucial part of history. Government was too weak, there was too much freedom, and not enough order. I believe that eventually USA would have dissolved. The Constitution made the country stronger.
2. How important are the Bill of Rights?
Without it, the possibility that government could take away certain freedoms would exist. Because of it, there are many freedoms that can never be taken. Without it, Congress could find ways to pass laws that restrict those freedoms. Its also important because citizens can know exactly which freedoms are protected.
3. Is Capital Punishment constitutional?
I believe one could argue that it doesn’t violate the constitution even if you don’t believe in it. The Fourteenth Amendment says that life can not be taken without due process-suggesting that it can be allowed with correct proceedings.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Blog 1
1. Do Americans take democracy for granted? Why?
Today, many Americans are so accustomed to living in a democracy that they take it for granted. The citizens who have grown up in America and never lived anywhere else have never experienced any other form of government. Therefore, they often do not consider how millions of people around the world have no say in their countries’ political matters. They do not consider or maybe fully understand that in other countries citizens have no say in how their own country, sometimes their own lives, are run. I think this would not be as a big of a problem or issue if they were more educated on other countries/governments. If children and teens were more educated on the governments of other countries(and how their citizens are treated) and were able to compare them to democracy, I believe they would be more likely to appreciate it fully.
Today, many Americans are so accustomed to living in a democracy that they take it for granted. The citizens who have grown up in America and never lived anywhere else have never experienced any other form of government. Therefore, they often do not consider how millions of people around the world have no say in their countries’ political matters. They do not consider or maybe fully understand that in other countries citizens have no say in how their own country, sometimes their own lives, are run. I think this would not be as a big of a problem or issue if they were more educated on other countries/governments. If children and teens were more educated on the governments of other countries(and how their citizens are treated) and were able to compare them to democracy, I believe they would be more likely to appreciate it fully.
2. Why is separation of powers so crucial to the government?
If any of the three branches had more power than the other two, then there would be a greater chance or opportunity that they would abuse that power. Because they each have separate powers over one other, they keep each other in check. This, overall, is a benefit to the American citizens. It keeps the government from forcing their will on its citizens.
If any of the three branches had more power than the other two, then there would be a greater chance or opportunity that they would abuse that power. Because they each have separate powers over one other, they keep each other in check. This, overall, is a benefit to the American citizens. It keeps the government from forcing their will on its citizens.
3. Which of the ideologies make the most sense to you and why?
I would probably consider myself a moderate. There are many liberal and conservative views I agree and some that I disagree. Like the Liberals, I agree with higher taxes on the wealthy, programs to support the poor, etc. But on the other hand, like conservatives, I agree that if a government is too active it could do more harm than good.
I would probably consider myself a moderate. There are many liberal and conservative views I agree and some that I disagree. Like the Liberals, I agree with higher taxes on the wealthy, programs to support the poor, etc. But on the other hand, like conservatives, I agree that if a government is too active it could do more harm than good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)