Wednesday, October 26, 2011

"Order Without Law" (2000 Election)

Facts/Details

  • Minimalism, from Rhenquist Court was in "full display during the 'Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board' case".
  • In "Bush v. Gore" the vote was not unanimous.
  • Bush argued that Florida court had violated Article II or the Constitution.
  • The recount was voted 4-3 by Florida Supreme Court.
  • Six Justices were unwilling to accept Bush's main submission, that FL Supreme court had produced an unacceptable change in Florida State Law.
  • Many recounts were done neither formally nor correctly.
  • The Court's decision lacked support in precedent or history.
  • The recount was halted because the Court thought it clear that the Florida Supreme Court would interpret Florida Law so as to halt the process.
Questions:
  • Was November 14th far too early of a deadline?
  • Did Florida Supreme Court truly violate Article II of the Constitution?
  • How did "Minimalism" in Rhenquist Court originate?
  • Did the concept of minimalism greatly affect the outcome of this case?
  • How "corrupt" were the recounts?

The Common Good

First of all, I would like to say I agree with Newsweek's Robert J. Samuelson when he said "We face a choice between a society where people accept modest sacrifices for a common good or a more contentious society where group selfishly protect their own benefits". The article defined the 'Common Good' as consisting "primarily of having the social systems, institutions, and environments on which we all depend work in a manner that benefits all people."

Unfortunatley, due to peoples' protection of their own benefits, it is hard to have social systems and institutions that benefit all people.  When everyone has the mentality of "only the strong survive" and "survival of the fittest", it leaves people on a very unbalanced playing field.  Today, people are almost adopting a Machiavellian attitude.  

In order to achieve the common good, the cooperative efforts of people is necessary.  However, such a feat seems unattainable in the state of the world today.  The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.    Values have gone out the window and money has taken priority.  Frankly, if one has money, they are keeping it, if one does not, well good luck.  I, personally do not think that a 'Common Good' will ever be completely attainable.


Mike McIntyre Update

Update: On August 1st of 2011, Congressman Mike McIntyre introduced the bill To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to designate one city in the United States each year as an "American World War II City", and for other purposes. More recently, on September 12th, 2011 it was referred to the house sub-comitee. The current status is that is has been referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs

Monday, October 24, 2011

2000 Election

Facts:
People were denied the right to vote just because of their name.
There are State Supreme Courts.
The Judge which decides the case can impact the outcome significantly.
Bush won the popular vote.
Bush won electoral vote 271-266
Popular vote essentially has no meaning.
Floridas Supreme Court method of recounting was violating Equal Protection Clause.
Katherine Harris was under intense criticism.

Questions:
What was wrong with why Katherine Harris was doing?
What specific errors were made in the actual recounting?
Can you truly define the "intent to vote" for a candidate?
Why were the deadlines so early?
What changes have been made to the voting process?
Why was Florida the crucial state?
Why did Gore not run in '08?
How significant was the numerous people denied a vote?
How much of an impact did this case have on the Supreme Court?

Friday, October 21, 2011

Was Bush vs. Gore correctly Decided?

Pre-reading:
1. who authorized the recount?
2. How considerable was the error?
3. Is there a way to detect "intent to vote" for a candidate?
4. Why was Florida the deciding state?
5. What has been done to fix this problem for future elections?

Reading:
1. Was Bork a dem or rep.?
2. What does it take for something to move up from State-Supreme to Supreme?
3. How long would the process have continued if Bork did not call a halt?
4. Did Gore "Give up"?
5. What exactly was Stevens arguing when he mentioned the courts "misgivings"?

Post Reading:
1. Will Gore run again?
2. Is Florida still a huge state to win?
3. What margin of error was there?
4. How impactful is this case?
5. What has been changed about voting?

ObamaCare destroying Jobs?

Not only are HSA's a big issue with ObamaCare, the threat of unemployment is also evident. When ObamaCare was introduced, Nancy Pelosi  declared there was an, “anvil” around businesses because of the cost of health care and that the bill was, "about jobs" (gop.gov). Pelosi even predicted that it would, “create 400,000 jobs almost immediately.”  However, the effect is opposite. 

On February 11, 2011  Douglas Elmendorf reiterated his statement that the exact opposite is the case.  ObamaCare will destroy around 800,000 jobs.  One reason why the plan will destroy jobs is that in
"Section 1411: increases the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) portion of the payroll tax. This provision will increase the employee’s portion from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent for families making more than $250,000 a year (and for individuals making more than $200,000). Combined with the employer’s portion, the total rate will be 3.8 percent on every dollar of income over $250,000 when the tax hike takes effect in 2013." (heritage.org)  Such a large tax hike is not exactly ideal especially due to the current state of the American Economy.

Healthcare Issues #1 Obama Care

Many would consider President Obama's health care plan, also known as "Obama Care" a complete mess. One issue is the tax on HSAs or Health Savings Accounts.  One Problem is that ObamaCare raises taxes on HSAs and makes them less consumer friendly.  On January 1, 2011,  Over-the-counter drugs and other household health care items cannot be reimbursed tax-free from HSAs without a prescription.  This will increase taxes on American families by $5 billion.  Also,  Penalty for non-qualified withdrawals from HSAs increases from 10 percent to 20 percent.  There is no “hardship” exception.  This will increase taxes on American families by $1.4 billion.

Not only are taxes an issue with ObamaCare, but there are many regulatory concerns.  according to GOP.gov, "Under ObamaCare, health insurance plans are supposed to pay for at least 60 percent of the expected cost of covered benefits, on average (i.e., the “actuarial value”).  The actuarial value takes into account the benefit package, deductible, copayment, and coinsurance differences for each plan.  High-deductible plans typically have lower actuarial values than old-school health insurance plans or HMOs because they are not designed to pay for routine expenses.  However, some high-deductible plans are combined with a health savings account, which is intended to pay for routine medical care.  It is essential that HHS consider both the employer and employee annual HSA contributions when it sets the standards for determining whether these plans meet the minimum 60 percent actuarial value requirement.  Failure to include the annual contributions in the actuarial value or failure to include it properly could determine whether HSAs will survive under ObamaCare."  This explains that it all leads back to the HSA tax.  Basically, ObamaCare is costing too much for little benefits.    

Politicians

Pat Toomey:  Senator Pat Toomey just sponsored the "Veterans Sexual Assault Prevention actof 2011".  The bill was introduced nine days ago on October 12, 2011.  It was referred to the senate committee.  The most recent status is that it has been read twice and referred to the Commitee of Veterans' Affairs.

Mike McIntyre: On August 1st of 2011, Congressman Mike McIntyre introduced the bill To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to designate one city in the United States each year as an "American World War II City", and for other purposes. More recently, on September 12th, 2011 it was referred to the house sub-comitee. The current status is that is has been referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Factions

James Madison, in Federalist No. 10 defines a faction as "A number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."  After reading Federalist No. 10, I realized that there are different types of what Madison refers to as a faction.  To me, factions can be both harmful and proactive in a government system.  For example, a beneficial faction would be a peaceful, political group that works towards a cause in a polite, and professional way.  A harmful faction could also be a group that protests, riots, and endangers Americans.  I think that, although vastly different, the Tea Party, and Al Qaeda can be examples of factions that exist today.

Questions:
  • What are some modern factions in America?
  • How are factions formed?
  • Are factions generally harmful?
  • Is there a way to prevent factions?
  • Are the political parties technically considered factions?
Today, factions are evident throughout our daily lives.  Many Americans are part of factions.  For example, if one is registered with a political party, they are part of a faction.  Also, if one works in a union, that is also considered a faction.  Factions help unite Americans but at the same time, can turn many Americans against each other due to the varying views of each faction.

Monday, October 10, 2011

2 Members of Congress






Sen. Pat Toomey
Republican (PA






Congressman Mike McIntyre
Democrat (NC)

What is Your Political Ideology?

My results came back as Moderate.

YLI Said "You probably identify with some of the views of both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. You may also be interested in the Green Party and the Libertarian Party. Your ideology is shared by the following Members of the House of Representatives":

Mike McIntyre (D - NC, 7th District)
Jim Marshall (D - GA, 8th District)

2 Responses to Questions about the Constitution

Alex R. Said: Does the Constitution today function as the supreme law of the land or do you think that it is just a document that outlines the way our country should be run and all current issues should not be influenced by it?
- I think that this is a question that is asked many times throughout the Government.  In my opinion, I believe the writers of the Constitution almost had the idea of the Constitution being a 'supreme law of the land'.  However aspirations such as that are very unlikely to be attainable.  Our Constitution today serves as more of less outlines of how our country should be run. Although, Alex's question also brings up the ever popular debate on whether the constitution should be interpreted literally or just as guidelines.

Justin Juliano Said: When writing the constitution, who did the founding fathers have in mind as "We the people", when not everyone was infavor of the constitution?
- I think that when writing the Constitution, and specifically writing "We the People", the writers were mostly thinking of the citizens of the country.  However, they were probably thinking of citizens as white, land owning, males and their families.  I think they disregarded slaves, and women for the most part.  Also, although many were not in favor of the Constitution, all that mattered to them was that the higher levels of Government and majority of the population were in favor of it.


Wednesday, October 5, 2011

10 Facts/Questions from the Video 10/5/2011

Facts:
1. Restrictions were put on law enforcement to protect individuals' privacy.
2. The gray wolves have gotten the most attention out of all endangered species.
3. The state of Iowa wanted wolves removed.
4. 40% of deaths on highways are caused by drunk drivers.
5. South Carolina refused to adopt the law in which required the breathalyzer.
6. They adopted the .10 blood alcohol level.
7. National Law wanted to make the Maximum Blood Alcohol Level .08
8. New deal brought Federal Social Welfare program.
9.In the 1990s, the government was convinced welfare was not working.
10. States are now in charge of their own welfare policies.

Questions:
1. Why did the wolves get the most attention of all the endangered species?
2. Why hasn't Iowa taken the US to court?
3. Why did South Carolina want a higher limit?
4. Did South Carolina override National Law for some time?
5. How does the state control welfare?
6. Why was welfare system not working while economy was flourishing?
7. Do people manipulate the welfare system? If so, how does it affect the American Economy?
8. How often does National Law dominate States' Laws?
9. How does the welfare system impact the American Economy?
10. Which state has the best welfare system? Should there be a national model off of that?

Federalist No. 51

Questions:
1. What would happen if all three branches were one?
2. What is the difference between a Compounded Republic and a Pure Republic?
3.How do Checks and balances keep our government in tact?
4. What is the best way to fight tyranny over a minority?
5.What would happen to our government if the system of Checks and Balances was absent?

Quotes:
"It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal."
I chose this quote because it made me think about how dependent each department really should be on each other. Madison says that they should be a little dependent as possible, but at the same time, they are working in the same government.

"In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government"
I chose this quote because here, Madison explains how in a Republic, the power that the people surrender and give up to the representatives is ultimately going towards a single government.

"This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public"
In this quote, Madison explains how power is divided up almost strategically so that each smaller office may rely on the other.

"If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure"
In this quote, Madison is saying that, if a majority of a population shares the same interest, the minority's interest will be insecure because the majority will override anything the minority says.

"There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority"
This quote is the solution to the fourth quote.  If a will, independent of the majority is created in the community, the minority will not be dominated as easily.

Federalist No. 10

Questions:
1. How can factions 'control the Government'?
2. Is corruption more prevalent in a Direct Democracy?
3. What advantages to Representatives present?
4. What is your view of the States' rights both before and after the Constitution?
5. How can you satisfy everyone in the issue of the distribution of land?

Quotes:
"There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests."
I chose this quote because I think it shows how Madison plans to conquer the issue of the factions.  He says, in order to remove the causes of faction, one, destroy liberty, and two, by giving every citizen the same rights or options.

"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union."
In this quote, Madison addresses the United States as a republic.  He compares it to a complete democracy and says that in a republic, representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which the United States is seeking.

"The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended."
In this quote, Madison addresses the two main differences between a democracy and a republic.  He explains how a small number of people representing a larger population is more effective.

"By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."
In this quote, Madison explains what, exactly a faction is.  Factions, he explains, whether small or large, generally disregard other citizens and the interests of the larger community.

"There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects."
I chose this quote because here, Madison tells how to cure the "mischiefs of faction".  First, you need to remove its causes, (explained in quote 1), and second, control its effects.

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Political Cartoon


A very hot topic in the political world to day is whether Chris Christie, the Governor of New Jersey will decide to run for president.  He originally stated that he will not run for President, and is now changing his thoughts and said he has not completely rejected the idea.

1. What political party is this cartoon taking a shot at?
2. Who is reading the paper?
3. Why, at the end, does the reader say, "He's Perfect!"

Simile for American System of Separation and Checks and Balances

The Checks and Balances and America's system of separation is like a tree.  Each branch, the judicial, legislative, and Executive are all branches on the tree.  For all of them to work, they must be in tact with the whole system and work together through the tree trunk.  Also, the entire tree, the government is anchored by the roots which can represent the Constitution.