Political Parties

Link: Gay Rights, Same Sex Marriage Cause Political Strife In U.S.

Summary: The same sex, gay rights battle has been being fought between conservatives and liberals for at least 30 years. John Boehner, The Speaker of the House, issued a statement that he is trying to find legal ways to maintain DOMA (The defense of marriage act), which specifies that a legal union can only be between a man and a woman and no same sex couples. President Obama has agreed that DOMA is not constitutional because it violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment. 

Relevance: We learned that political ideologies differ from person to person. Conservative ideologies are typically part of the republican party, who believe in small government and strong traditional morals. Liberal ideologies are typically part of the democratic parties. Liberals believe that the government should be able to handle most public services, and have think equality for everyone is essential. Typically republicans are against gay rights, and democrats are not. However, recently people are straying away from political parties and becoming more moderate, thus supporting parts of both ideologies. Some republicans support gay rights, while some democrats don't. It's all just a matter of preference. We learned that ideology typically gets embedded into one through their early family life. If one grows up in a conservative family, they most likely go to church, and have strong family values. In a liberal family, the child often is allowed to experiment with their ideologies and figure out what they think for themselves, still influenced by their family. 

Opinion: I think that gay rights should be available to everyone. There is no problem with it. People have different things that make them happy, and equality is supposed to be guaranteed to everyone in the United States. I believe we should live up to the constitution and make unions of every type available to anyone who wants them. Personally, I'm not gay, but I do not believe that it will cause any harm to the moral fabric that some claim it will. People should be able to do whatever makes them happy.

Military Spending

Link: Cut Military Spending To Make Us Stronger

Summary: Current military spending in the United States is almost $489 bl dollars. The total proposed budget for the fiscal year is $3.5 trillion dollars. 1/7th of the total budget goes to military spending. Some propose cutting military spending to fund other things like education and healthcare.

Relevance: Again we talked about the federal budget, and how military and Department of Defense spending are both discretionary. They also account for a substantial part of the entire federal budget. We also did that activity with poker chips where we created a budget, and balanced it. For my group, military spending lost about 10%. There is no good solution when times are tight, but the government needs to make the decisions that will keep the country in success for the long term.

Opinion: I believe that military spending should be cut. The money could be placed elsewhere, perhaps paying off debt or education, which will be suffering extreme cuts. I believe education is what keeps the country successful in the long term. However, many claim that military is more important even thought it can be extremely wasteful. There needs to be a balance.

Environment

Link: Fewer Americans Worry About Climate Change: Poll

Summary: The American population is less worried about global warming than they have been since 1998. About 51% of the population was greatly concerned in 1998. In 2008 after Al Gore won the Noble Peace Prize for his efforts, around 67% were greatly concerned with global warming. Gallup, who conducted the poll believes things like the economy and global affairs take precedent to global warming.

Relevance: The American government has it's part to play to keeping global warming and the environment in check. To do this, they enlist the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which serves to protect human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by congress. Examples of these could be the emission levels of cars and factories, the dumping of toxic waste, and the cleaning of environmental damage. This agency is funded by discretionary spending in the federal budget, and we spent lots of time talking about different agencies.

Opinion: Global warming is still an issue that the United States should be combating through alternative energy and less dependance on oil. The environment is something that cannot be fixed when it is destroyed, but the damage on the environment is also something that can be exaggerated.

Foreign Policy

Link: U.S. Hamstrung In Policy On Libya

Summary: The United States rarely intervenes in other nations unless it's keeping peace, or protecting it's own vital interests. One of the most ruthless dictators of the modern time, Moammar Gadhafi, continuously treats people horribly, and the people want it to stop. The U.S. is struggling in their effort to decide what action to take. We are in a situation is "damned if we do, and damned if we don't." However if we don't intervene, we send the message that a dictator who is anti-western, anti-democratic, and who kills his own people can hold power regardless of their actions.

Relevance: Although we have not heavily covered foreign policy, we will before then end of the year. The president is the chief initiator of foreign policy in the U.S.. We have three different instruments of foreign policy: Military, Economic, and Diplomacy. American tries to stray away from full fledged war, but continues to use military in limited ways, most notably in the Middle East against Saddam Hussain's regime in Iraq and the Taliban's regime in Afghanistan. Economic instruments are almost as powerful of war. Especially the control of oil, which is another possible motivation for the entering of the Middle East. A nations economy is important to the nations long term survival. Diplomacy is the relations of nations with each other. This can cover things from economic deals to the rescuing of stranded tourists.

Opinion: I feel like the United States could help the situation in Libya, but I also feel that if we continue to help other nations, it will set a precedent that we will always step in to the rescue. Hopefully something like Obama urging Honsai Mubarak, the Egyptian president, to step down would have the same effect on Gadhafi.

Federal Budget

Link: GOP Calls for Spending Cuts to Federal Budget

Summary: The House is expected to vote to keep the federal government funded until April 8th. As of now, the government only has spending authority until Friday, March 18th. Many believe letting the government shutdown would cause Congress to think more seriously about the budget and the enormous debt this country owns.

Relevance: We learned early in the year how the federal budget for the next fiscal year comes to be. First the president submits his proposed budget for the White House to Congress in February. Congress reviews the Presidents budget, and proposes the Congressional Budget Resolution including estimated revenue, surplus or deficit (most likely deficit), and the resulting estimated public deficit. Mandatory spending (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security)  is automatically included in the budget, while discretionary spending (Military, Education, NASA funding, Infrastructure) that accounts for about a third of the budget must be approved by Congress. Simply put, the budget is then finalized by Congress, and then signed by the President. If not completed by October 1, the government runs the risk of being shut down if a continuing resolution is not passed.

Opinion: For the 2011 fiscal year, we have gone for six months without a budget. That is irresponsible. The next continuing resolution expires on March 18th. I believe that if the government was to "shutdown" then it would encourage Congress to finally agree on a budget. Maybe they will be able to agree on something that resolves debt, but doesn't take away many programs American people use and want.

Campaign Finance

Link: Rory Reid Queried In Possible Scheme To Circumvent Campaign Finance Laws
          Supreme Court Blocks Ban on Corporate Political Spending

Summary: Rory Reid, son of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and a failed bid for the elections to senate representing Nevada, is being investigated for opening multiple contribution accounts to circumvent the campaign finance laws.

Relevance: Early in the year we covered elections to Congress and for the Presidency. More specifically about the limitations to the campaigns candidates can run. Campaigns have finance laws that prevent certain candidates from "buying" an election at the whim of large corporations or wealthy interest groups. The McCain-Feingold act specifically limited how much a candidate can receive from certain groups such as corporations, PACs, interest groups, 527 groups, and individuals. Although there are loopholes, elections need to be run in a fair manner, and in the United States, the people with the money win. We discussed how Social class, wealth, and the people you know can all give you upper hands against a middle class "average joe." However, recently after learning about the McCain-Feingold act, the Court overrule a major part of the bill. They blocked the ban on spending from corporations. Because of the First Amendment, companies can now spend as much as they please.

Opinion: Cheating your way into office is horrible. We elect candidates based on trust, and when ones scheme gets uncovered, it makes the public lose faith in the entire system. Campaign finance laws are in place for a reason, to protect the offices of the United States from corruption. When people try to circumvent these laws, they should never be allowed to run again, or should be removed from office if caught. Also, with the McCain-Feingold overruling, the democracy can now be bought. Although the Constitution guarantees free speech, this could really hurt elections as they can now effectively be bought. Candidates can be bought and used as puppets for the big corporations. It will most definitely be interesting to see how this places out in the next elections and the results from this ruling.

Economy

Link: U.S. Better Prepared for Surging Gas Prices

Summary: Fear of Middle East supply disruption has driven oil prices to over $100 a barrel for the first time in over two years. Economists believe that US consumers are better prepared for the raise in oil prices than they were in 2008 because of more fuel efficient vehicles and industries that rely on oil like trucking and aviation pass the cost directly on to the consumer immediately instead of down the road when profits fall.

Relevance: While talking a lot about the federal budget, taxes, and deficits, it's hard to imagine how with so much money being spent, the economy can be in such bad shape. People just do not buy as much as they used to anymore. But money is still being spent in different places, and taxes are still being collected from those purchases. For example, the federal tax on gasoline is $0.184 per gallon. On average, the United States uses an estimated 388 million gallons of oil per day.  That is $69m per day in taxes collected. The government has a lot to balance on it's plate, and everything we are learning is constantly making it look like a tougher and tougher job. The budget is very complex and extremely vast, but money management must be more well cared for. This is a nation fueled by the desire for money, run on capitalism. When the economy is in ruins, it is not a very nice place to live.

Opinion: Although the government does have a very tough job managing the federal budget, I feel like they could do better. With large amounts of money flowing into the government through taxes everyday, it seems like it shouldn't be difficult to keep the nation out of the red. Maybe we should stop giving tax breaks to those making HUGE sums of money, and tax them according to their income bracket just like everyone else. I feel like the government budget should be run like a perfect household: Little to no debt, except a mortgage, and car payments, and where they don't go after more they can afford. Although this perfect household must sometimes borrow funds for when the car breaks down, or the furnace breaks in the middle of winter, they pay back the debt as soon as possible. The government should follow this model, and the finances of the government could be brilliant.

Interest Groups

Link: Supreme Court Preserves Tabacco Settlement

Summary: In 1998, the attorney generals of thirty states filled suit against tobacco companies because of the large public health costs with smoking and tobacco use. Big Tobacco companies agreed to pay $205 bn over the course of 25 years. Now an interest group, Competitive Enterprise Institute, is fighting it because it  violates Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution.

Relevance: In the last couples weeks we have been covering the Supreme Court, issues with Constitutionality, settled cases, and historical cases in the Supreme Court. This case has been being fought by the CEI for the last five years, but the Supreme Court would not hear the case. The Supreme Court typically only hears appellate cases, and very seldom deals with original jurisdiction cases. The CEI claims that this agreement violates the Constitution because it reads no state may "enter into an agreement or compact with any other state or foreign power," without the consent of Congress. The Supreme Court has every right to pick and choose what cases it hears, this just didn't happen to be one of them. They must decide on the Constitutionality of specific things through activism or restraint.

Opinion: Big Tobacco companies are not states of foreign powers, although it could be argued because "foreign powers" is not explicitly defined in the Constitution. However, I don't think they should be penalized because of people smoking or using their products regardless of the negative impacts it has. In a country of freedom, smoking is a choice, and every person has the choice to smoke or not to smoke. The government should not be able to penalize companies because of the products they sell. But it happens and there is nothing that will be able to change that.

Social Security

Link: Safeguarding The Promise and of Social Security
         Et tu, Jack Lew?

Summary: According to federal law, Social Security must be invested to on a daily basis. These "trusts" grow with interest and are backed by the full faith and credit of the government. According to the Obama administration, there is no problem. Jack Lew, the Office Management and Budget Director, says that at the rate social security is being taken now, at earlier ages, will only last until 2037. Where does this leave the young people paying into the system now? The system is already in the red, but who knows how it will turn out in the future.

Relevance: Early in the year, we learned that Social Security is a program that is mandated by the federal government as a program that they MUST fund because it is mandatory spending. The government must spend a certain amount of the federal budget on it, and currently spends about 20.8% of the budget on it. The amount can increase of decrease, but the government must spend the money. This is also relevant to when we studied the federal budget. If the budget is not approved we could face a government shutdown. Congress must approve the budget, which includes mandatory and discretionary spending.

Opinion: I feel that if it is predicted that the Social Security program will be bankrupt by the time I am eligible to take benefits that it is worthless to pay into. It would be much better to an investment account that I would not be able to get into until retirement. Social Security is pretty much worthless to people who can save millions before they can retire. It seems that if you make and save above a certain amount of money by the time you retire, at least $1.5m, then social security does nothing for you. I believe that it wastes the money of those who do not use it later. I pay into Social Security now, 6.2% of every check, and I fear I may never see that money again.

Gun Control

Link: Obama Extends Olive Branch In Gun Control Debate

Summary: After the Tucson, Arizona shooting rampage, President Obama is looking into enacting tougher gun-control laws while not starting a lobbying war with the NRA. He invited the NRA to a sit down meeting. It's thought that the NRA will not want any new gun control laws enacted (and have the power to make sure there are none), so the Obama administration wants to find ways to toughen the system without creating new laws.

Relevance: We spent a couple weeks talking about the influence lobbying can have on Legislative decisions. The article claims that anything that the Obama administration tries to enact, the NRA will have enough power to stop it. The power of lobbying is all dependent on the funding of the interest group. The NRA has lots of members who will do anything to protect their second amendment rights, even if it means shooting rampages could and do happen.

Opinion: Considering myself moderate, gun control is an issue that I don't know for sure where I stand. I have no problem with guns as long as they are registered to one person, and never change hands without the registration being changed, and as long as when they are not in use, they are locked away safely. However that would only happen in a perfect world. It would seem the only solution to stop gun violence would be to ban all guns, but that would surely be unconstitutional because of the Second Amendment. I do not want to see people harmed again, so the only thing that I think may help would be stricter reporting when guns are purchased at guns shows particularly where no background check is required. More precautions can be taken to ensure people owning guns are responsible citizens.

Health Care

Link: New Waiver Rules Announced For Federal Health Care Law

Summary: In order to give states better freedom and choice over their implementation of the Health Care Law, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed to the Senate new waiver rules. They say "states are not the same," and they are right. Different states have different needs.

Relevance: We learned about different departments and agencies of the federal government and the difference between them. We learned about the different roles they play, and what they do to help the people of the United States. The Department of Health and Human Services serves the role of protecting the Health of all citizens of the United States.

Opinion: I believe this could help settle the problems that Republicans have had with the Health Care Bill as they now continue to attempt to repeal it. If can pass through congress, it will give states the option to individualize the bill to fit their budgets and the needs of their people. I believe the Health Care bill is brilliant and should have been done long ago, it has the potential to make life a lot easier for those not fortunate enough to have health insurance. It just needs to be implemented in a way that the states agree with.

Taxes

Link: Push To Tax Online Sales Gains Strength

Summary: When one purchases something online, they normally do not pay tax on their purchase thanks to the Supreme Court decision in 1992 that said only purchases from "brick and mortar" stores or physical locations can be taxed. States however need the extra income that could come from the internet sales, so they are considering passing laws taxing online purchases.

Relevance: When we talked about the Federal budget, we talked about how they must budget all of the incoming money, to be spent in different areas. The States are in the same boat, they all have deficits because most are spending more than they are taking in, and it's causing things to happen that the people do not like. Also, we are talking about the Supreme Court, and their power to rule whether legislation is constitutional or not. Because the Supreme Court decided that stores can only be taxed in the state where they have a physical presence, many states are taking matters into their own hands, because congress cannot change anything because of the ruling. This shows how the Judicial Branch can be a check on the Legislative Branch.

Opinion: I don't feel like online retailers should be taxed, especially if it's from small businesses that sell through Amazon.com or eBay.com. When they get taxed, it takes away from their profits and gives the people less buying power. Why not take away tax breaks from large corporations? Just a thought.

Elections

Link: Donors Told Obama in Weaker Position

Summary: As Obama plans for reelection in 2012, his advisors are telling donors that winning this election will be tougher than it was in 2008. They are currently discussing the amount of money needed, angles to run the campaign on, and how to defeat certain opponents should they run. 

Relevance: Early in the year, we covered information pertaining to elections, and how it can be a full time job on top of the job of actually being the President of the United States. He has many advantages because he is already in office, like franking, and support of his previous supporters. However he must always keep on top of both of his jobs if he expects to win. As we learned this means keeping his party and his people happy, while trying to convince other voters that he is the correct choice. 

Opinion: Some have predicted that Obama will be a one-term president. I believe that he has done great things in terms of health-care and assisting the people of Egypt with their dictator Mubarak. Although many are trying to undo what he will be remembered for, the health care bill, I believe it can work as long as it is modified to fit the likings of most people. Either way, he will be remembered forever since he is the first person of color as a president. I know that when I vote in 2012, he will get my vote.