The employment act of 1946…

One of the four monetary policy goals of the Fed chair is high employment. Which is stated in the act as “responsibly of the Federal government…to foster and promote…conditions under which there will be afforded useful employment, for those able, willing and seeking to work, and to promote maximum employment, production, and purchasing power. “ Which translates into more aggressive expansionary monetary policy. On the other hand, are we more realistically in the grips of stagflation, in regards to the still lower GDP and bump in inflation? Outside of the creation of any artificial market for which the demand for labor would be needed, government intervention is inevitable if we are to move forward. But we can’t ignore the fact that the government is not a cash machine. Big B must take responsibility and act in a more utilitarian fashion, or run the risk of losing their customer base forever or for the next twenty years. Cutting interest rates and adding money through the money market system isn’t enough. More aggressive are needed to shock the hearts and minds of consumers. The predictions of the PCE and other indicators offer no crystal ball vision into the next six months. The number of dynamics at play here are staggering, we are not the only players in our own back yard. One move in the right direction is a hard look at current policy reform. Banking, credit cards, houses, car loans and taxes. Next on the table would be government spending and net exports, it’s time we leveled the playing field on imports and exports into and out of the U.S. Along with real authority over those who choose to ignore the rules. We hang on ever word from the chair, waiting for some good news…will it come soon?

Obama’s confessed drug use without Reprisal

Drugs are nothing new to the white from the days of the royal family of Kennedy today. In fairness, all the attention Bill Clinton receives over “not inhaling “  seems to be out of proportion to that of the standing president. In a Foxnews piece, Obama  confessed using drugs at least one time in his life. Bush also admitted to a drinking problem, and many occasions preached about the evils of drinking. It would seem the media once again is picking and choosing its battles on what they find acceptable and what they do not. Could it be that Obama’s influence over the mainstream media is what has kept this issue at bay? Can we ever be able to see a fair and balance discussion about any of the present, future, or past behaviors of this young president? Should one man have the control over what is up for discussion about him and what is not? (foxnews)

We would hope that regardless of which side which party you stand for, that maybe we learned a thing or two after the Clinton circus. The waste of time and money his drug use became, just to manufacture advantage of control.

The question boils down to this, is there accountability still in the white? To move beyond the drug use into other areas that would have a greater impact on America. Because we choose to follow and trust that, we often don’t understand doesn’t mean its trust worthy.

This one got by us, we must remember that Obama is a man accountable, now to the country. Not to those who help put him there, not to his own hidden agenda, but to the people. Never in so many years has the country faced such despair or division. In these times we need a president that conveys hope and solidarity to those he serves, not …with a broad stroke of a brush or pen worship, blinded trust or obedience. The next months will put him to the test and then some; will he rise to become one of the greatest presidents in our history?  On the other hand will he, regards of the fulfillment of his duties be reelected because of the power he now controls?

Works Cited

foxnews. 21 nov 2007. 10 may 2009 <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312352,00.html>.

Vicodan the undiscovered country

In this day and age it would seem that everyone from the mail man to your grandmother is on something for one disorder or another. For all those little aches and pains, everyone gets from time to time. However, your truly has had to pleasure of experiencing the V drug this week, do to some tooth pain. I have been taking a drug called Darvocet. This little pain killer is like Vicodan’s little sister. How easy it would be to start taking this drug not just for pain, but to feel “better” all the time. On this and other types of painkillers, it is possible to function.
Are we all becoming the undiscovered addicts thanks to our doctors? I have not mentioned drugs for depression. With the drugs out now who wouldn’t want to be depressed. Now they are working on a pill to erase bad memories, how nice is that?
Drugged out, numbs out, and checked out. Don’t misunderstand me, of course there those who could not get through the day without them. That’s not whom I speak of, drugs can’t replace parenting or bad relationships.
But wait, now you can cut out the middle man and buy your drugs from over sea suppliers with a prescription. Now we all can dose and dose. All a kid has to do is use him mom’s or dad’s credit card, and presto he’s a dealer of scrip drugs. Don’t need dope or cocaine when there’ s Vicodan. According to www.drugabusehelp.com, Vicodin is a semisynthetic narcotic analgesic and antitussive with multiple actions qualitatively similar to those of codeine. Most of these involve the central nervous system and smooth muscle.
The precise mechanism of action of hydrocodone and other opiates is not known, although it is believed to relate to the existence of opiate receptors in the central nervous system. In addition to analgesia, narcotics may produce euphoria; drowsiness; lethargy; relaxation; difficulty in concentrating; decreased physical activity in some users and increased physical activity in others; mild anxiety or fear, and pupillary constriction.
This was the good, fun part, this is the bad part. Vicodin may make you drowsy. Do not drive a car, operate machinery, or perform any other potentially dangerous activities until you know how this drug affects you. Narcotics such as Vicodin may interfere with the diagnosis and treatment of abdominal conditions. Vicodin suppresses the cough reflex; therefore, be careful using Vicodin after an operation or if you have a lung disease. High doses of Vicodin may produce slowed breathing; if you are sensitive to this drug, you are more likely to experience this effect. Vicodin slows the nervous system. Alcohol can intensify this effect.
This website went on to discuss other symptoms. For regular Vicodin user abruptly stops taking Vicodin, withdrawal should begin within six to twelve hours. The intensity of withdrawal depends on the degree of the addiction, and symptoms are usually not life threatening. Typically,Vicodin withdrawal symptoms may intensify for twenty-four to seventy-two hours and then gradually decline over a period of seven to fourteen days. The symptoms of Vicodin withdrawal include but are not limited to:
restlessness, muscle pain, bone pain, insomnia, diarrhea, vomiting, cold flashes, goose bumps, involuntary leg movements, watery eyes, runny nose loss of appetite, irritability, panic, nausea, chills, and sweating.
In preparing this piece, I was unable to get a real number of how many people are addicted to vics in the U.S, but I can tell you it’s a lot. The recovery of drugged out America is we all of us.

The Morning after Pill or MAP Ethical consequences of a solution

The idea of a female contraceptive is nothing new. For decades, women and doctors have been trying to come up with the ideal solution to planned parenting from the introduction of “birth control pills” to female prophylactics to injections. With abortion being the most controversial of them all, and ultimately sparking, the debate of a women’s right to choose what goes on with her own body. The morning after pill or emergency contraceptive is yet another offered solution to women and men wishing not to become parents at every engagement of intercourse. The moral questions raised with this newest pharmaceutical contraceptive are some of the same questions that have been asked about all the rest of the present birth control methods available. Because of how quickly MAP works and its potential for reckless abuse, people are concerned about its dangers to women and the repercussions of the additional moral questions raised by it.
Before we can measure the moral and ethical implications of using this drug, we need to take a closer look to be sure we fully understand what it is we are holding in moral contempt. From a scientific perspective, this contraceptive is a high dosage of the conventional birth control pill used by thousands of women every day. However, unlike “the pill” which is used on a regimented schedule of the calendar, MAP is taken right after sexual intercourse and performs its function over 72 hours (which is the time it takes to work) to prevent or end a pregnancy. The morning-after pill has three possible ways to prevent pregnancy. First ovulation is inhibited. Second, normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation. Lastly, it irritates the lining of the uterus in case the first two ways don’t work. The fetus cannot attach to the lining of the uterus, where it needs to be in order to grow. (all)
The manufacture of this wonder contraceptive explicitly confirms in a statement released to the public: “that Morning-After Pills are not the same as mifepristone (Mifeprex), the so-called abortion pill.” Emergency contraceptive pills such as Plan B prevent pregnancy. (Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc) The abortion pill terminates an established pregnancy, one in which the fertilized egg has attached to the uterine wall and has already begun to develop. (Pruthi) Some would say this argument of differences is of the same church, but different pew, which leads us to the first moral measurement of this drug, the lightning rod for the views of all contraceptives by the highly potaonated and highly structured religious sector, holding the Divine Command theory above all other moral measuring machines.
From a religious perspective, all life is precious and no one has the right to play God. Not even in the cases of rape, incest, or at the expense of the mother’s life. The Catholic Church has not moved an inch on their position. Those religious supporters that believe in the Divine Command theory would justify their position by saying that the Morning After Pill is still murder at the very initial step of life. Maybe not as dramatic as late term abortions, still it is the conscious prevention of life that a higher being has created. In addition, this higher being has his or her way of terminating a pregnancy when things do not go right. However, this point could be argued as nature’s natural selection of survival of the fittest. Although this idea is, an entirely separate ethical debate unto itself. Once again, through the rules and teachings of some religions, women do not have presumed control of their own bodies. In which case when a women breaks one of the rules set forth by her chruch there are punishments to face. Such as Eternal damnation, which awaits those accused of the sin of killing of Humanae Vitae (Latin, “Human Life”). “Contraceptives are wrong because it is a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race.” (Bernadeane Carr) Of course, the church does have its own underlying motives for disapproving of the use of birth control, which is to insure the perpetuation of the religion.
In regards to prolife supporters, who have at times taken a more aggressive roll in their efforts to have their point of view heard, sometimes with deadly consequences. The burning of abortion clinics and shooting abortion doctors are some of the ruthless tactics used by some pro-life supporters. The paradox of this situation is, if only referenced to the Kant theory that by doing these things they are in fact breaking the very ethical code they are trying to uphold. Killing and burning abortion clinics all the time by some of the people, does not sound like a code for the betterment of society.
The less extreme pro-life supporters would seem to be the most unlikely of allies in supporting the church’s position, but for different reasons. Like football fans on opposite sides of the field supporting the same team. Pro-lifers, although there are many factions with a semi-religious moral base, others have taken a more utilitarian view. To put contraceptives to the utilitarian test we have to ask, “Is it useful in bringing about a desirable end?” That would depend on your perspective of the action, from the point of view of the patient, yes; from the perspective of right to chose supporters, yes; from the view of the doctor’s prescribing contraceptives, yes. However, the larger statement of utilitarianism states, “everyone should perform the act or follow the moral rule that will bring about the greatest good for everyone concerned.” Is the use of contraceptives bringing the greatest good for all? This question cannot be answered by one to stand for all. Because in a situation-by-situation basis, what would seem morally wrong when measured by utilitarian ethical standards, however it may still be a necessity of fact. For example, we could say that the use of contraceptives would seriously reduce our population; on the other hand, we do not want more under age teenagers having babies.
Nevertheless, are women using contraceptives doing the morally right thing? This question can be addressed by applying the ethical theory of Ethical Egoism which in it three forms states; individual ethical egoism, everyone ought to act in my own best interest. Moreover, Personnel ethical egoism, I ought to act in my own self-interest, but don’t say what others should do. Finally, universal ethical egoism, what says everyone should always act in his or her own best interest, regardless of the interests of others, unless their interests help me. From a purely practical standpoint, it may be in a women’s own best interest not to get pregnant at the drop of a hate. For example if a woman has other medical problems that would automatically put her or her baby’s life at risk. Some could argue she needs to act in her own best interest Not to mention by not putting her own best interest first she would be in moral conflict with the a another moral measurement machine. The Kant duty ethics machine ( The Categorical imperative) Which says the statement cannot be contradicting of its self and must be able to be applied as a rule for all. By saying, “Some women with serious conditions should put themselves at risk of death all the time by never using contraceptives.” Is clearly an immoral statement, there for cannot be used as the rule. Which leads me to another question; should women who have the intentions to use a baby as the means to an end be forced to use contraceptives? In the eyes of some courts yes, as they have ordered some low-income women with a criminal background to seek preventions to becoming pregnant as a stipulation of conditions set by the court. (LibertySuger)

What about the moral standing of the doctors? Are physicians offering the drug along with pharmacists willing to fill the prescriptions doing the right thing? In regards to an ethical measurement of the acts of the doctors the virtue ethics theory perhaps is the best machine for this question. There are opponents that argue that doctors are tools of the giant drug companies, pushing sales. Other argue doctors have no moral standard because they prescribe contraceptives. In fact, it would seem some doctors out there are not acting completely immoral. Although it is not completely clear where all doctors stand on the moral position on the issue. These is what some doctors had to say about it as reported on the Concerned Women for America web site, “If scientific study should validate that a hormonal contraceptive agent is partly abortifacient in its action, we would oppose that agent just as we oppose elective medical and surgical abortions.”
Two other doctors, who researched the post-fertilization effects of hormonal contraceptives who have published the findings in the American Medical Association’s Archives of Family Medicine, said that the evidence suggested that there are post-fertilization effects at least some of the time. However, both doctors observed that very few patients were aware of the possibility. They firmly believe that women should be given enough information to make an informed decision about whether they wish to use the morning-after pill. (Bossom) Although this is a postion, it may not be a virtuous one. The virtue ethic theory states that moral excellence, righteousness and responsibly, good and virtuous character. Are these doctors upholding to this standard of ethical code? No, dishing out chemical contraceptives to under informed women and teenagers is not a demonstration of the vitreous ethics. There is no moral high ground in condoning, which at least in part, reckless behavior. Deep down both the doctors and women will either choose to listen to their own intuition about what is good and bad for them or not. However as intuition is the most abstract of all the ethical disciplines. It becomes hard to measure the level of intuition used in the decision to use contraceptives. One thing is true, at any point after using the contraceptive a person can choose to listen to their institution and stop.
There are many views, opions, and judgments on the subject of abortion and contraceptives. Some well meaning and some that are not. As with everything, people’s passions about a subject or act can be carried too far, until they themselves become an immoral act. Betraying unconsciously by the same passions and wills having a moral compass is supposed to help direct. We have seen the religious point of view, the pro-life point of view, touched a pone the views of a women’s right to choose, and the medical point of view. To address the last ethical theory in regards to the distribution and use of contraceptives, we turn to the Ross Prima Facis Duties , that certain duties apply to all humans, obeying in a general way before other considerations which are Fidelity, Reparation, Gratitude, Justice, Beneficence, and Nonmaleficence. Again a lot if not all of these duties are abstract in the sense they cannot be concretely proven to be taking place or not. However, the sliver bullet to this argument is that, each man must decide for himself with trust in his intuition if in fact he is abiding by these duties. Being abstract makes it hard to see there application to our subject, Once again it is souly based on point of view. From the point of view of the doctor, Fidelity will only hold if he or she is perfectly clear with the patient about the risks associated with this drug and a moral discussion has taken place about all the choices a woman has. However, in the same token the women must not only be trueful with her lover and doctor but with herself. One overlooked aspect of duties theory is how it would apply to one’s self. Not just, how one uses duties to make moral judgments in regards to others. Reparation; Once again, one can only make reparation in one feels they have done a wrong thing in the first place. The doctor may feel righteous in his cause to help women and a woman may feel she owes no reparation to anyone about her choices about her own body, unless of course she has feeling of guilt as her decision causes a moral religious conflict.
Gratitude maybe what a women may feel for the services of the doctors for their help, or perhaps a doctor may feel gratitude for women taking responsibility for themselves and for an unwanted pregnancy. Justice is certainly, what a liberal woman would feel if finally they have a say over themselves, Doctors in their support of a women right to choose. Only those whose cause is prevailing can have a sense of justice. Although some would take morality and the law into their own hands, dishing out justice in their own way. Which is an undermining of the concept of justice for all, vigilantism is not a duty of a society. Beneficence, the helping to improve the condition of others in intelligence and happiness. Certainly, some doctors supporting this drug must feel they are helping those wishing for this kind of help. The church must feel they are helping those in need of guidance, even if they don’t know they need it. It’s safe to say everyone in support of their own cause believes they can help someone, even if it’s only themselves. People do service to others for selfish reasons. This doesn’t mean that anyone of these virtues are being upheld in the manner they were intended. Nonmaleficence; this concept or virtue rings home for many people on the firing lines of this debate. Because there are so many ways to inflict injury. With words, actions, non-action and rocks and bullets. A doctor withholding information that would influence a women’s decision to use the drug is injury. One can say the demonstration of any of these virtues alone doesn’t deem a person morally fit. The theory of Ross is reduced to food for thought for the common man to reflect on. To do a moral inventory and work to apply wisdom in our judgment of others and ourselves. The discovery of this piece has been that there is a moral question at the heart of this debate and there are no easy answers. However, the beauty of all of the ethical theories is that they demand investigation and thought of who we are and how we look at the world.

Bibliography
11 march 2009 .
all. 5 oct 2005. 10 march 2009 .
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004. 10 august 2004. 10 march 2009 .
Bossom, Elizabeth. CWA. 8 march 2206. 11 march 2009 .
Krupnick, Joseph C. Flakemagazine.com. 2007. 5 feb 2009 .
LibertySuger. Citizen suger. 25 9 2008. 11 march 2009 .
Pruthi, Sandhya. MayoClinic.com. 24 may 2008. 5 feb 2009 .
Wright, Wendy. Concerned Women for America . 25 aug 2206. 5 feb 2009 .

AIG; thieves in suits

AIG, I have always understood that bonuses were based on performance and profits, neither which AIG has. The money they are so freely handing out is not profit. So how can AIG treat it as such, the money is a negative not to be treated as profit or even windfall. Contract or no contract, AIG has no respect or moral compass or responsibly to where the money came from. The American Tax payer money is not a bonus, it was given in good faith that it would be used wisely and responsibly. To that end, AIG should be punished for their action. What they did was break the contract with the government and the American people. AIG first priority is to those how gave it to save the company, not to reward those who raped it. At the least, with all their so-called problems, giving bonuses was the first thing they could think of to do with our money? Big business corruption abound, it’s time to say the American people will no longer flip the bill for the government’s affair with big business and big business greed and moral misconduct. SHAME ON AIG FOR SLAPPING US IN THE FACE AND SHAME ON UNCLE SAM FOR LETTING THEM.

Why I hate Wal-Mart…

The other day I watched an eye opening news broadcast on the PBS.org website called “Is Wal-mart good for America?” It went on to say how from an economic point of view how Wal-mart holds a supply advantage over everyone else. Do to the labor supply in China, .50 cents a day for workers and they live at the factories. No one can compete with that. Not only is there an 80% mark up on Wal-Mart products, but they are pressuring other domestic companies to follow their lead. It’s hard to say how many companies to date Wal-mart has put out of business. What we do know is that Wal-mart is helping to create the $100billion trade deficit we have with China. The free trade agreement we made with China was suppose to open them up to American goods. It has not; I can’t help but think there have been anti-trust laws broken here. If something is not done to even the playing field soon, there will not be any market for Wal-mart to sell to. China has the labor and the goods, but no market and we have the market, but no money. I am I the only one that see the irreversible damage Wal-mart is doing, not only to companies in their own market but also to the economy as a whole.

The news piece went on to say how a small Kentucky TV making company took on China and Wal-Mart over the issue of Dumping cheap TVs onto the American market. Not surprisingly, Wal-mart sided with China. The small company won the right to stay alive, however long that is. Let’s be clear, the low waged workers of China are not the problem, Wal-mart and the China government is. The china government gives money to the companies to help of set costs in order to let them sell products to Wal-mart at prices no one can. Let’s also be clear that the American worker are not fighting to be rich, only to have a chance to survive in a country where milk is $4.00 and cereal is $5.oo a box. Our economy demands we make a level of income with all the other trappings of being a citizen here. When ATT had the monopoly on the phones, anti-trust violations were filed. Is Wal-mart any different? By exploiting the slave labor of CHINA, the get goods made for nothing, driving American companies out, buy up their land for pennies on the dollar and rehire their workers for have of what they were making. What a great model, too bad we all don’t have access to this slave labor of China, oh we done. No everything from newspaper pieces to x-rays is now exported. With an army of slave labor, what incentive would any company have to produce anything here? You decide, post how you feel about what is going on here for others to read.

Sales rise on inferior goods

To understand the rise in the sales of inferior goods is a lesson in economic 101. Plainly stated, inferior goods are lesser-priced goods that can take the place of something else. Like Hamburg for t-bones. Which gives you more for your money, which is good. The problem hanging out there is what if they raise the price of the inferior good?
In this economy, there has been a major shift in consumer buying to these types of products, and shopping for name brand items at discount stores. Does it pay to buy cheap priced products in bulk? That depends, if let’s say you buy 20 rolls of paper towels because there on sale. At two dollars a roll, that adds up to $40.00. Good deal right? However if you had only bought 2 rolls for four dollars you would an extra 38.00 dollars to buy something else on sale.
There is always a trade off when buying things, you like, but to sustain yourself in this time maybe learning to with less or without is better for you bottom line. Maybe you just like the taste of the cheaper peanut butter, Okay then maybe you can do without the magazine on sports saving you ten bucks. It’s much easier to manage your money when there’s a cash flow. But when the flow slows down or stops it gets harder to retrain your buying habits.
I ‘m sure you can come up with more ideas to save money, in the mean time understand that inferior products doesn’t mean lesser quality just lesser price.

Is Afghanistan our desert Vietnam?

According to recent story by the Ap posted on the USATODAY.com website a top U.S. military officer said Saturday that the Pentagon wants double the number of American troops in Afghanistan by next summer to 60,000. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that between 20,000 and 30,000 additional U.S. troops could be sent to Afghanistan to bolster the 31,000 already there. Mullen goes on to say how the Afghanistan government has been less than expected as far as having the ability to stand on its own. In addition, “the Taliban and extremists are more sophisticated and effective”. In order to support this move and continue to truck men and supplies into the region the U.S depends on certain routes of travel. That is under the control of the remaining power of the Soviet Union. The current proposal is if we want to continue to use the routes, we’ll have to pay, a little taste of good old fashion black male by the Russians. They offer no additional help in the fighting they just want our money. In light of this and the failing economy in the states, one has to wonder what the long-term price tag this war and the other one will cost. With every passing day, it becomes clearer that we will never be able to leave the region with any hope of the Afghanistan’s being able to take care of themselves. To make matters worse our friends to the north said they would not answer the president’s call to aid us in the fight with additional troops Canada has had enough. As had nearly all the other supporting countries that stood with us in the beginning. In addition, with our mounting money problems, job loss and the wars, what is compromise to our own national security? If the government’s money problems are so bad that there is talk floating around about cutting postal service, what condition does the empty bank account leave home land security in? The motto has always been, take the fight to the enemy so we don’t have to fight him here. Only time will tell if in our weaken state how susceptible we are to not only a terrorist attack, that some are says like the former VP will be worse than 911. But a economic attack as well.

Tax dodging Daschle Withdraws Nomination for Health & Human Services Secretary

I
In a recent news piece by foxnews.com, Senator Daschle tries to explain his way out of his tax mess. With unsuccessful damage control over the fact, he tried to get away with not paying his taxes the senator withdrew his nomination appointed to him by the president. (Major Garrett, 2009)
Interestingly enough just days before the senator was optimistic about being able to have his cake and eat it too. Thinking paying his bill along with a heartfelt apology would do the trick and all his hopes and dreams would come true.
More to the fact, he was only sorry that he got caught. He didn’t release he didn’t pay his taxes the day they discovered the bill. He was aware of it and choose not to act. Feeling his power and position somehow put him above answering to the IRS. Then in a sudden burst of conscious, he decided it was in the nation’s best interest to step down. If he were concerned about the best interest of the nation, he would have paid his taxes, like the rest of us.
No, I believe the insincere senator was more interested in salvaging his credibly and career. However, the senator is not alone in the tax line or the line for turning down nominations by the president because of tax fraud. White House’s first performance officer, Nancy Killefer, also withdrew her nomination because of her own tax liabilities. What message are these publicly elected officials sending? That it’s okay to dodge the fed’s if no one is watching? This could possibly be the tip of the iceberg of dishonest politicians with a total disregard for the laws they sworn to uphold. With seeming no one left in Washington left untouched by the hand of dishonesty, whom will we turn to clean up the mess that continues to be made by these so-called public servants’? Will the president be the one to stand up and take the flak from both sided of the isle for slapping the hands of those deepest in the cookie jar?
Works Cited
Major Garrett, T. T. (2009, Feb 3). FoxNews.com/politics. Retrieved Feb 3, 2009, from FoxNws.com: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/03/daschle-withdraws-nomination-health-human-services-secretary/

Gun Control

          Reasonable Gun Control

 

 

 

Hello, my name is Chris Wager. The focus of this discussion is to explore the issue of what is meant by reasonable gun control. I am sure you our all familiar with the old saying, “Those who don’t learn from history are bound to repeat it”. With that said, we must look at the first formal act of gun regulation of the United States.

 

The second amendment of the constitution, ratified in 1791, which states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of the free states, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

 

Powerful words embedded in a document that is the very foundation of our democracy. However, according to the about.com website reporting a gun control time line some forty (about.com) –six years after the second amendment‘s ratification in 1837. The state of Georgia passes a law banning hand guns altogether, almightily being thrown out being labeled unconstitutional. Now some 217 years later, states, local authorities, and gun supporters still argue intentions of the second amendment in a modern world. 

 

One side argues guns are bad, guns kill kids. On the other side, people say guns don’t kill people, people kill people. However, allow me to draw you a dangerous parallel in history. Before you, hastily draw your own conclusions of who is right and who is wrong and what part our government must play. Again, according to the about.com gun control time line, in 1938 the Firearms Act goes into effect placing the first limitations on selling ordinary firearms. Requiring people selling guns to hold a federal license and, maintain records of names and addresses of those who they sold guns to. That same year as stated in a New York Times newspaper, November 9, 1938 page 24, (Times) which reported Adolph Hitler enacted his own gun control called the Nazi Weapons Act which stated anyone wishing to own a gun had to register with Nazi officials and have a background check. However, the gun control act went a step further to say no Jew could own a firearm of any kind. In addition, those who already did own a gun would have to turn them in. Those who didn’t would be imprisoned. Registration lists created through the enacting of this law was used by Hitler’s Nazi’s to confiscate weapons, and track movements of the new gun owners. Once the citizenry had been disarmed, Hitler was free to carry out whatever plans he wished. This reveals one motive behind the reason the American people and Congress has rejected the registration of honest firearm owners.

 

In 1941, according to the Library of Congress records (87 cong rec., 77th cong.,) August 5, 1941, U.S. Attorney General Robert Jackson called Congress to enact national registration of all firearms. Congress recoiled by enacting measures to protect the second amendment.

 

Since then there have been eighteen laws or acts involving guns. As reported on the about.com website control timeline. In addition, the government quietly watches until December 1, 1998, when their attempt to gain access to information on gun purchases and their owners was blocked by a suit filed by the National Rifle Association.

 

All the government’s attempts at disarming its citizenry have been done under the shroud of safety and a sense of protection. That somehow we are no longer able to decide or be trusted to have guns. Only the government and law enforcement are reasonable enough to own and regulate guns in this country.

 

I have had friends and relatives killed with hand guns, and I support those who wish to own one. Why, then would I support guns? If a person is killed with a shovel, should we ban shovels? No, of course not. This is not a matter of safety or security, but rather a matter of preserving freedom and liberty. Moreover, not let the power of our rights to be diluted by the language of a bill aimed to diminish what we can do as citizens, to close the back door politics attempting to rewrite the constitution. Reasonable gun control is just that, background checks, waiting periods, no cop killer bullets, and trigger locks. Do not punish honest gun owners for the acts of criminals. The last attempt of a controlling government to disarm Americans led to the Revolutionary War. The wisdom of our forefathers is not to be questioned by those only wishing to serve there own agendas.

 

300,000 children involved in forced child prostitution.

It may shock you to learn that According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children there are to date over 300,000 children involved in forced child prostitution. The average age of these children is only 14 years old with some of the children as young as 9 years old. These child victims are trafficked everyday by sophisticated and violent prostitution rings across state lines. Peddled and discarded in what is being called, “The slavery of the 21^st Century”. (NCMEC)

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in cooperation with the FBI are working countless hours to find and bring home our missing children. However, there is still more to be done in this fight to rescue and protect our children.

What if I could show you that you could have the power to save a child’s life in the palm of your hand? What if I could show you how something as common as a cell phone can give you the chance to do much more than check your e-mail or get a call from your office? Are you one of thousands of people still riding the fence about buying a cell phone? Feeling perhaps, you are not important enough or maybe you just don’t have a need for one. You may be asking yourself what do cell phones have to do with missing children. Ernie Allen President and CEO of the NCMEC said it best in his recent letter posted on the NCMEC website announcing that the Amber Alert system that we all have become familiar with is going wireless. This being done in the attempt to make everyone apart of the rescue team to report a child abduction. Those wishing to make a difference can now receive these alerts over a cell phone. Minutes make all the difference in the world in a child’s abduction. You could be the one that saves a child’s life.

Not only does a cell phone become a weapon against child abductions for you, but it also can become a tool of survival and protection for your child as well. As reported in a recent article, posted on the pcworld.com website by Carolyn Duffy Marsan announcing a new service from eAgency Systems available for your child’s cell phone. This is the first cell phone monitoring service designed specifically for parents. (Marson)

In addition, a survey conducted by the communications software company Aricent, written by Thomson Reutors the world’s largest international multimedia news agency reported of 339 parents polled that 78 percent were considering getting a cell phone for their child. For one reason, so they could be in contact with them in case of an emergency. Of that 78% a third indicated that they were considering buying one this year. (Reuters)

Chapter 1, Health Issues and Painting

H.H 1 Health and allergy considerations.

Question: What are the health risks involved in painting?

Health risk considerations before starting a house-painting project are the dust and contaminates you could be exposed to during the process. On exterior surfaces, especially wood siding you’ll find a variety of molds, mildew, and dirt. These alone are enough to drive your hay fever crazy. In addition, you haven’t even started to get the house ready yet. When that begins, there’s airborne mildew, mold, dust, paint chips, and wood fiber. If you’re working on an older home, there’s a possibility of lead paint exposure as well. All these contaminates can become airborne by hand scraping. If power sanding is going to be done, the exposure to dust is greater. I know what your thinking, yes there are dust masks and goggles that can be worn while you work. Nevertheless, remember there still may be exposed skin in which these contaminants can get into. One contaminate alone can be irritating. When you start mixing them all together, this could be a recipe for a long miserable experience trying to paint your home. It is always wise to wear the proper dust or breathing masks whenever working around airborne substances.

If Wishing Made It So

How many times have you wished you could go back and change something if you could? Some moment out of time. This got me wondering maybe instead of wishing I could change the past, I paid a little more attention to the future.

As I think about it, changeable behaviors start to come to mind rather easily. Like think be opening my big mouth, don’t be so self centered, count to ten before blowing up at some one. All theses things could make my future a little better. Use fewer modifiers when I write. That would at least make the reading easier. Although there are moments in time I truly wish I could change, but can’t and I am left with the remorse of failing to act or acting too late. Some once said, “The world wouldn’t be a bad place if it weren’t for the people.” I don’t know about that, but the future and time are not completely out of our hands, we can control our selves to a point. We can step out of time and right a wrong, fix a broken heart or even mend a few fences. It all comes down to one thing, if we have the desire. Just don’t spend too much time in the past and forget to live the future. One simple lesson about the future I have learned is , in the passion and hast of the moment I choose not to act on impulse and leave the door open to use in the future, to put it another way it’s hard to put the bullets back in the gun once fired. However, if I choose not to fire, I can always fire it tomorrow.

The Federalist Papers;Merits of the Constitution

Coming soon a series on the the 85 essays of the Federalist papers and the men who wrote them.Alexander Hamilton,James Madison and John Jay.

Liberation of America

Liberation, America’s past is all about liberation. Liberation of women’s rights, black civil rights and the liberation of other countries. In 2008 America is facing a different kind of liberation , one we have never faced before. Not like this, not quickly.

Not even during the Civil War did we here such a cry for liberation from the government and big Business. In 2008 with the staggering job lose, high fuel prices, immigration and record number of America’s losing their homes the cry grows louder every day. A storm is brewing and when it comes no one will be ready for it.

Sound like “The sky is falling” maybe so, but just talk to anyone around you and ask them the last time any American was happy about anything that is going on. No longer is this country the land where a hard working family can gain any ground . Today families are holding on by their finger tips.

Who do we blame for this mess? The government?  big companies ? Our self’s? In the end it won’t matter, in the end we will all pay for the actions of the few.

Have we been taken down so  low, that all we are is a bunch of lazy screw the next guy before he screws you society?

Are we not the sons of our father? Are we not our own keepers? Things have been set in motion beyond our control, our future is not in our own hands. It’s in the hands of others that mean us harm. Who don’t understand the collator damage the will cause. To countless numbers of Americans. For no other reason than they were born here.

We Americans do not war as a rule for the sack of it. We have always taken the fight to the enemy, now is no different. Will it be enough to stop those who are a clear and present danger to America? Or will we implode on our self’s in yet another civil war. to free our country of the tyranny of our oppressors?

A storm is coming .    

Clear and Present Danger

In 1919 Oliver Wendell Holmes was the first to coin the term in the majority opinion for the case  schenck v.The United States involving an appeal of the general secretary of the American Socialist Party, who had been convicted for distributing 15,000 leaflets to young men of draft age critical of the war effort and, especially, the draft. The leaflet urged readers to “Assert your rights–Do not submit to intimidation.” (exsploring Constitutional Conflicts)

 

“The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent.”

 

As it read from Holmes speech. Later the term became a metaphor for the First Amendment. (Wikipedia)

 

 

To put into a clearer prospective Holmes explained the point by arguing that no one has a constitutional right to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater when no fire is present, for such action would pose a “clear and present danger” to public safety. (Answers.com)

 

Following Schenck v. United States case, “clear and present danger” became a standard test in cases where a United States law limits a citizen’s First Amendment rights; the law is found to be constitutional if it can be shown that the language it prohibits is language that poses a “clear and present danger”. However, it should said the “clear and present danger” criterion of the Schenck decision was later modified by Brandenburg v. Ohio, and the test refined to determining whether the speech would provoke an imminent lawless action. (Answers.com)

Today the term lives on in current debate over Iraq and if it is clear and present danger to the United States. Where this term has be mentioned on average 600 times in the debate. (Eastland) To deiced if the term has not been mutated to apply to it’s new standard is hard to say. What is clear is that chairs seemed to favor the term and the test. Who is qualified to judge the test results is another paper.

Works Cited

Answers.com. 6 May 2008 <http://www.answers.com/topic/clear-and-present-danger?cat=biz-fin>.

exsploring Constitutional Conflicts. 6 May 2008 <http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/clear&pdanger.htm>.

Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 1 April 2008. 7 may 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_and_present_danger>.

State of Unemployment

 

As unemployment numbers rise along with fuel prices and everything else. I wanted to know the hard numbers of what the government’s definition of unemployment. Perhaps what they are including in their monthly numbers and what their leaving out. I felt a good place to start, in understanding of the jargon splashed over the evening news every night would by the bureau of Labor  Statistics. A branch of the United States Department of Labor.

 

The site is a one-stop-show for all information related to labor. Although I found the langue a little misleading in favor of making the administration look better. They weren’t able to hind the true we have all been feeling. According to The (Labor)Bureau, the unemployment situation as of April 2008 is good. 

 

The total number of unemployed workers was at a staggering 7.6 million. Up .8 percent over April 2008. The Bureau also reported job loss for the first three moths of the year 2008 totaled 240,000. (Labor)

 

Is there a silver lining to all this doom and gloom forecast? No really, unless you happen to be in the market for a lower paying part time job. As the Bureau went on to report in April part time jobs rose from 306,000 to 5.2 million. Which could be understood  as good news for a high school kid looking to off set his allowance , but for anyone trying make their bills or pay for their kids collage maybe not so much.

 

Works Cited

Labor, U.S Department of. Bureau of Labor Statics. April 2008. April 2008 <http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm#overview>.

 

 

Are the best days behind us?

A simple question, with a not so simple answer. Are the best days of America behind us? Are we slowly witnessing the decline of a once great nation? Or is there still hope, hope for new jobs and industry.New hope for better education, decline in crime or teen suicide. New hope for a justice system that seems to only care about dollars over justice. Or any other of the many seeming un-repairable problems facing all of us today. I dare anyone one to convince me of any solid hope, that America is not in a bottomless pit with no hope of return. I look forward to reading your argument , if anyone can make one.

Home Schooling ; is it for everyone?

Home schooling; providing a child’s main education program at home. Home schooling takes the place of full-time public education.

The argument over the best methods for teaching has raged for a long time. With each new generation come new arguments and ideas of what is best for our children. This is a complicated subject with valid points to be made by both sides of the education aisle.
Home schooling vs. Public schooling, it sounds like two heavyweight boxing champs squaring off for a big fight and that is exactly what it is. In one corner we have years of teaching experience with the public school teachers and faculty and some of the best resources for our children that money can buy. To the tune of six-thousand dollars on average per-student.

In the other corner we have dedicated parents that have for whatever reason found fault and dissatisfaction with the public school system and are fed up with what they feel to be a catalyzed approach to addressing their concerns about what is going on in the schools. To get a true picture of these two champions of education we must consider all the facts. Take into account the way we are dealing with the future of these children. We can’t lose sight of this fact, once we do and the politics of education and money takeover we’ve reduced the children to nothing more than pawns in a bad divorce.

adparams.getadspec(‘c_billboard1′);

In fact, dissatisfaction with academic instruction makes up sixteen percent of home schooled students (N. C. Statistics). While others for religious reasons have chosen to avoid the system altogether and teach their children in a setting that supports their beliefs without ridicule. Religious reasons making up thirty percent of home schooled students. (N. C. Statistics, 1.1 Million Home schooled Students in the United States in 2003)
With others cited being concerns about the environment of the schools, thirty one percent. Physical and mental health problems at seven percent. Other reasons at nine percent and special needs children at seven percent. I must note that home schooling is legal in all fifty states, not attempting to educate your children is not. Keeping children home for the sake of having available labor on the farm is illegal without a foundation of education. In some cases, parents under the suspicion of neglect pull their children out of public schools under the falsehood of home schooling. Away from the prying eyes of the school authorities without ever intending to educate their children. Knowing or having suspicions about a person’s dishonest intentions is one thing, but proving it is another. The hardest thing to do is second guess a person’s sincerity and motives about their children. Just because a person’s ideals may not be inline with the “norm” doesn’t by it’s self constitute neglect. There is a fine line between action and intention.

While the public educators haven’t made it easy for families to home school with many obstacles in place. Such as in California, teachers of home-instruction programs must meet state certification requirements. State or local permission is required annually for home study. Home study must be monitored by local school administrative personnel knowledgeable about excellence in a learning environment. Students participate in state or locally mandated testing programs in suitable settings and in other assessments conducted by the school district.

Students have the option of attending public school for part-time instruction. Which allows the school district to claim full per-pupil funding with minimal attendance and overhead. (Education)

School policies and state laws overseeing truancy are getting stiffer along these lines. In addition, with the crack down by state authorities on schools lacking in their absenteeism are putting local schools at the mercy of a state medical excuse audit. Motivating school authorities to get more aggressive on unexcused abuses and hooky players. But public educators don’t always resort to intimidation tactics to defuse the rising home schooling movement, in some incidences they bribe families to return to the public schools with cash incentives. (Education)

However, this doesn’t tell the whole story, according to NHES, not all home schooled children are entirely home schooled. In 2003 eighteen percent of home schooled children were enrolled in a school part time. Twelve and half percent of the children were enrolled less than nine hours a week. Five percent were enrolled nine to twenty hours a week. The report did not state whether or not home schooled children were being taught exclusively by their parents or guardians or if a tutor was involved.

The evidence that home schooling works for some families (H. Statistics) are in the numbers. The average home schooled 8th grade student performs four grade levels above the national average. One in four home schooled students (24.5%) are enrolled one or more grades above age level. Students who have been home schooled their entire lives have the highest scholastic achievement. In every subject and at every grade level of the ITBS and TAP batteries, home schooled students scored significantly higher than their counterparts in public and private schools.

However, as home schooling becomes more popular with the availability of free online tutors, free computer equipment, and free educational material there are some things to consider before making a decision that may have an impact on your child for the rest of their life.

The first point to consider is a complete lifestyle change. Home schooling is a time consuming task. Remember, unless you can afford to hire a full-time tutor to help. You the parent accept the entire responsibility and work load for educating. If both parents work, that makes things even harder especially if your children are young. If you’re planning on leaving your job, be prepared for the financial sacrifice that comes with it. Home schooling will leave little personal time for yourself. Between homework, field trips and housework. Tutoring your child at home becomes your “new” full-time job. (Hernandez)
A well organized schedule is a good place to start, before you become overwhelmed with it all. Another important point is that both parents are in agreement with this decision. If parents are in disagreement, the problems caused by this friction only stands in the way of the child’s progress. If both parents are excited about home schooling the next question is: Will your child be as excited about it as you are? A willing student is helpful and avoids having to nail him or her to their desk and taking drastic measures to get the child to do their work. (Hernandez)

Time and time again people argue about the negative effect home schooling has on a child’s social development and learning social skills with other children their own age. These kids are not “shut off” from the rest of the world. Home schooled children and parents can stay active by joining associations of other home schooled parents. This is the ideal way to set up field trips and other social events with your children. Remembering to take it one day at a time and that home schooling isn’t a life time permanent commitment. Another point to consider is your own abilities, having the confidence that you can do well at teaching.

If after all the considerations, time, money and sacrifice you still would like to have a chance to make a difference in your child’s life there are plenty of resources out there to help you get started, stay out of trouble and to make your child’s home schooling the best it can be. There is even a legal website established for defending the rights of students and parents.

In the author’s experience with home schooling , there have been mailings sent out to Ohio residents about and encouraging parents to enroll their kids in the state program. I personally know a few families that have enrolled in home schooling. I have mixed feelings about this. In one case a single mother enrolled her teenage daughter, the mother worked all day and didn’t pay enough attention to her daughters activities. Soon the daughter hadn’t done any of the work and now will be returning to public school to redo the year. The second case involves another teenage girl who’s parents work all day. They too are having a hard time getting their daughter to do her work. And this family plans on having their thirteen year old son enroll in home schooling next year. Their son has a hard time in school and may even have certain learning disabilities.

In the final case of home schooled children I’ve seen personally involves a pair of brothers who are being taught by their mother. After spending some time in their home, it was plain to see that the boys were depressed. By their situation of home schooling or by something else it was unclear. What I did see was that there was no clear instructor for learning. The mother barked orders to the boys to do their work all through the day. Leaving no lines for the boys between work time and non work time. It all blended together.
The pro’s and con’s of public schools and home schools alike must be weighed carefully by the parents with their children’s best interest in mind. For my wife and I, we did consider home schooling for our son after a very bad year in elementary school. My son being only twelve
is a little young to be leaving him at home by himself. And we couldn’t afford to pay a babysitter/ tutor. But just ten miles down the road was a public school that was a breath of fresh air. With open enrollment in our area we moved my son there and couldn’t be happier.

Works Cited
Education, Foundation for Economic. Foundation for Economic Education. March 1998. 29 Nov 2007 .
Hernandez, Beverly. About.com. 3 Dec 2007 .
Statistics, Homeschooling. Homeschooling Statistics. 29 Nov 2007 .
Statistics, National Center for Education. 1.1 Million Home schooled Students in the United States in 2003. July 2004. 29 Nov 2007 .
. “1.1 Million Home schooled Students in the United States in 2003.” 2007.

The Presidency and Congress

The Presidency and Congress“The Powers That Be”   

The Presidency of The United States of America encompasses one of the broadest abstract concepts of a division of power, responsibility, and separation of the individual from the Office of the President.

 

In other words, the presidency is a sought after, admired, impossible job of the government. The man who would be president must be all things to all people, not just of the United States but of the world. There is no clear line between responsibility and accountability of the office. In times of good fortune, the president has a high approval rating from his people. In times of trouble, he is also held responsible if he had anything to do with it or not.

 

The president must be able to divide his attention between many sides of many issues, understand the complexity of the workings of the federal government, and address the nation with a confidence and compassion expected of the leader of the free world. All with little or no sleep.

 

Among some of the duties and responsibilities of the presidency which are too many and complex to cover in a thousand word essay. I will attempt to touch on some of the most important and fundamental.

 

Such duties and powers include; national security powers where the president fills the roll of Commander in Chief of the armed forces. Which means the president can send troops in force anywhere in the world in various capacities with declaring war. (Patterson)  An official declaration of war cannot be declared by the president, but must be met with the approval of Congress, which we will touch on later in this paper. (Gpo)

 

Other powers possessed by the president is the making of treaties with other nations, again the senate must have the final word over the treaty. The president can also nominate ambassadors to foreign counties, and again with the majority approval of the Senate.

 

Which with all the needed approval by Congress, demonstrates the power of the check and balance system of the government. Which the framers concluded would be needed to maintain a balance of power among the different branches of government. Although this system sometimes gets in the way of expedient government and adds the bureaucratic paperwork that goes along with it, it is a “necessary evil”.

 

As the Congress is bestowed with powers to make laws it is the executive’s job to see the laws are faithfully executed (Article II, Section 3 of the US Constitution). The president has the power to appoint heads of each of the executive branch departments as chiefs of the government, along with Supreme Court justices of course with the agreement of the majority of Congress. Among the president’s judicial powers are that he can grant reprieves and pardons for federal crimes.

 

As Congress holds great power over the decisions of the president, the president himself holds great power over the decisions of Congress with his power to veto. Which is the power to say no to a piece of legislation put in front of him for approval before it can be made law. The veto comes in many forms such as the “pocket veto” and “put it in a drawer veto”.

 

Of course, the Congress can override a presidential veto, but it is not easy and almost never happens. The president being the head of the executive branch of the government lends him many freedoms to express the ideas he feels would make good policies for the country. Where Congress, House and Senate leaders, must be at the mercy of their party majority to meet with any success, not to mention trying to get a bill out of committee.

 

However, a president that must face down a hostile congress, which has direct control over the money he spends on paperclips, has a tough job ahead of him. This would be why it is so important that the president’s party hold on to every seat they can. Even then, not all the president’s ideas will be met with great support from his own party.

 

As we turn, our attention to the powers and duties of the congress besides the ones mentioned above the congressman and women have said to be better at narrow decision than making the broad ones. A member of either house has a tough job now more than ever before faced with an increase of work. A growing population and split loyalties between the party, the people back home they swear to serve, and the pressures from lobbyists of big business. The congressman of today must answer to all without showing any favoritism to any. So how do our elected officials survive?

 

As a mix of people with different backgrounds and different ideas and loyalties come together to form the congress, there is often times partisan arguing and bickering, and accusatory statements that are asking the same questions that you and I are? What many benefit one minority group may not be the greatest for another.

 

With that being said how does congress ever get anything done? Through, and some use this word loosely bi-partisan cooperation. Which means they must give and take to get some of what they want even if it means a logroll vote. The art of compromise is a skill that is needed if anyone is to survive the freshman year in congress. (Gpo)

            To be clear the U.S. Congress is made up of two parts, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Congress’s primary duty is to write, debate, and pass bills, which are then passed on to the President for approval or veto. Other powers of Congress include making laws; controlling trade between states and between the United States and other countries, making laws about taxes and borrowing money, most importantly congress approves the making of money. (Gpo)Each Congress lasts for two years where as the president is elected for four years. When the two years are over, new members of Congress are elected or current members are re-elected. We are currently in the 110th Congress. Congress meets once every year and usually lasts from January 3rd to July 31st, but in special cases, it can last longer. (Gpo)The states are represented in the House and the Senate differently. When the framers drafted the Constitution, there were debates over how states would be represented. States with larger populations wanted more representation than states with smaller populations. Meanwhile, states with smaller populations favored equal representation. A compromise was made. Representation in the Senate would be equal, while representation in the House would be based on population. (Tastey) Congress is made up of 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 members of the Senate. Congress also possesses the power to remove federal officials from office by impeachment. The biggest being the president. Another important duty of the Congress is to administer the District of Colombia (D.C), which is the home of the federal government, which is not a state, and which has drew attention lately over the district’s voting rights. (Tastey)Some duties and powers of congress cannot be performed jointly, that is (Tastey), only the House of Representatives may initiate bills concerning taxes, and tolls, and only the Senate may confirm presidential appointments to federal offices try impeachments or confirm treaties with other nations. (Tastey)The complexities of our government are not fully understood by the masses, although most of all the average citizens have a working knowledge of what the president and congress do. They might not understand the everyday difficulties of each of the perspective jobs. Many Americans like being arm chair critics of the government but they themselves would not care to muster the courage to face a congressional hearing or have to make the decision that would put thousands of young men and women in harms way in order to preserve democracy in the world. The fact that America in spite of itself has maintained the same form of government and Constitution for over two hundred years is a testament to the spirit, courage, and united cause.    

Works Cited

Gpo. Ben’s guide to government. Jan 2007 <http://bensguide.gpo.gov/3-5/government/national/congress.html>.Patterson, Thomas E. The American Democracy. New York : Mcgraw – Hill, 1990. 39-49.Tastey, Tony. Everthing2. Tues Oct 2001. Jan 2007 <http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Congress>.

Principles of Government

Principles of Government

 

            In our government the three paramount principles of government are; the separations of powers, the system of checks and balances, and the protection of the rights of citizens through the Bill of Rights. 

 

            The first, the separation of powers meaning that no one branch of government shall be more powerful than the others. This principle stands as one of the most important ideals still enforced and respected in government. With each branch of the government wheeling tremendous power and influence and the elected parties trying to enforce their own ideas of the “perfect” form of this government it is more important than ever that no one branch become too powerful, if this were to happen tyranny would soon follow.

 

            The second important principle in government is the system of checks and balances. Which means the system of divided authority provided by the constitution as a means of controlling the power of government. No one-branch institution can act decisively without the support of the others. The Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches are built with an overlap of power. This overlap of power allows each branch to check the powers of the others and balance these powers against its own. In principle, the right hand always knows what the left hand is doing.

 

            Lastly, the principles spelled out in the Bill of Rights in which all of our liberties hinge. The Bill of Rights is the written protection from infringement by the government with probable cause. Every citizen of the country falls under its protection. Some of these principles are spelled out clearly and others are under debate to their exact meaning still today. For example, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. These are among two that have fallen under great scrutiny over the last five years. With the government arguing that restriction to these freedoms falls under the heading of national security. And, that gives them the right to place limits on them. On the other hand, should the news have and be able to broadcast troop movements and battle plans in a time of war? Possibly, putting hundreds of lives at stake? Is that what the framers had in mind? Should this principle of freedom be reconstructed to take in account 21st century problems the original created?

 

            These same arguments can be applied to the freedom of the press with a few more added. With the induction of the internet, is the freedom of the press taking it too far? Do people really have the right to put bomb recipes and porn in the hands of a child protected under the constitution?

 

When this freedom no longer remains exclusively in the hands of the press? In a time when everyone is a desktop publisher, can this freedom be abused to spread propaganda and undermine a nation from within? Some would argue that these freedoms are at the core of what makes America great without ever taking into account the inherited risks in living in a free society. Will these principles of freedom some day be our undoing? 

United States Constitution

United States Constitution“Charter of the people for the people”

Introduction: This essay will address three points starting with what compromise was necessary to secure the ratification[1] of the U.S Constitution, how granting powers by the constitution[2] supports federalism and how over time the Constitution has been altered to grant more authority to the people.

On May 14, 1787, The Federal Convention convened. The official order of business as ordered by congress at the time was revising the standing document of law called The Articles of Confederation.

In the State House in Philadelphia, the birth of a new nation and new government would take place. Fifty-five out of the 74 invited delegates of the convention did so with intent to completely ignore the orders of the weak congress, which at the time had very little power over anything. Forge a new constitution of law if this young country was to survive. With members in attendance such as the reluctant George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison the convention showed promise of accomplishing this great task. (Archives)

On Tuesday morning May 29 the unification was suddenly put at risk with what would spark a serious of some of the passionate debates of the convention. With the introduction of the Virginia Plan soon followed by The New Jersey Plan followed by the Hamilton Plan.

Each plan bringing to the table an air of suspicion and self interest. The delegates debated for weeks over the proposed plans before reaching what is now known as The Great Compromise. Which stated that a two Chamber Congress would be created: The House of Representatives and the Senate. (Patterson)

This milestone satisfied the smaller states by offering equal representation. With the rough frame worked out and the debate over slavery concluded. More work lied ahead for the ratification of the constitution if it were to become a living document. With the problem of not being authorized to draw up the document in the first place, the constitution stood a real chance of being defeated. With the current law stated first any amendments would have to be approved in Congress and by all thirteen states. In a brave move, the delegates wrote their own ratification plan. They ordered Congress to send the document directly to the states where it could become law if approved by only nine of the thirteen.

Nevertheless, the Constitution faced stiff opposition by a group called anti-federalists whose strongest argument was the document had no Bill of Rights. By January 9, 1788, five of the nine states needed, approved the draft. However, with the addition of the amendment set forth by the state convention the Constitution met with victory on April 28. (Archives)

Wager2

Through the induction of the new Constitution, the framers set up an elaborate mechanism of the distribution of power of the new government. By granting the much needed authority of power, they were able to create what we know today as the Federal Government. The word federal meaning; a form of government in which a union of states recognize a central authority. (Publishing) By the definition, the constitution is written approval of authority granting powers specifically, in Article I, Section 8. The granting of all seventeen powers came by means of granted and inherited powers. These powers granted by the Constitution would allow the Federal Government to coin money, establish a post office and raise an Army and Navy just to name a few. With these powers came additional inherited powers such as being able to decide who may join the Army. (Mount)

Other levels of powers included cooperation with the states. In fact, reserved powers lied completely with the states, such as powers to provide fire and police protection to its citizens. Thirdly concurrent powers held by both the Federal Government and the states. For example, both are empowered to tax, construct, and maintain roads and spending for general welfare. (Mount)

The framers of the Constitution also saw fit to include language specific to the denial of powers. The denial of power was to be a built in safe guard to prevent the Federal Government from becoming too powerful and to prevent the destruction of liberty.

The Constitution of The United States of America stands as a pillar to the world as a supreme democracy. In the years since its ratification, the Constitution has gone through many changes. With a total of 27 amendments to date aimed at granting or insuring the rights and additional powers of its citizens. Among them, Amendment XXVI, which states a citizen eighteen years old or older, shall not be denied the right to vote because of age. The XIX Amendment states the right to vote shall not be denied based on sex. Which lead the way for the women’s vote and one giant step in fulfilling the dreams of the framers of the Constitution for liberty, equality, and the pursuit of happiness.

Works Cited

Archives, The National. The National Archives Experince. 23 Dec 2007 <http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/charters_of_freedom_8.html>.Mount, Steve. “The U.S Constitution Online.” The U.S Constitution Online. 23 Dec 2007 <http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_fedr.html>.Patterson, Thomas E. The American Democracy. New York : Mcgraw – Hill, 1990. 39-49.Publishing, Dell. The American Heritage Dictionary Thrid edition. New York: Dell Publishing, 1994.

---

1To approve of.

2The system of laws and principles that prescribe the function and limits of a government.

Cited: The American Heritage Dictionary Third Edition, Dell Publishing 1994

Public Opinion & Voter Turn Out

Public Opinion & Voter Turn OutOpposite sides of different coins Public Opinion and voter turn out. Does one influence the other? In the study of political science, it has been taught that although public officials certainly have the opportunity to listen to the voice of the people that they don’t always choose to. On the other hand, public officials are not totally without their wits and do weigh public opinion against other forces that come to bear when the time comes to cast their yea or nay. Forces such as lobbying influences, re-election issues and their own personal feelings on a particular issue.  As we turn the corner into the new century, it has become evident that sampling of what pollsters believe to an accurate sample of public majority opinion is playing a larger and larger role in today’s politics. Rather than the single or many voice trying to be heard. We have (by this I mean the media has become survey and poll happy).  From public opinions on which candidate has the best hair to looking forward to what exit polls might protect in November. But what does this mean? Are the candidates really building their platforms on public opinion polls? Early in their presidential campaign lunches, candidates from both parties were reported to have a reaction of surprise when confronted with the issue of illegal immigration. Many of them had made comments of how they had not realized that this issue was at the fore front of many voters’ minds. Is it possible that such heavy weight contenders for the presidency could be so far out of touch with public opinion or is that simply is a political defense against facing down such a hot issue so early in a campaign? Many of us grow up through an older political machine. Where you watched the primaries and conventions on a black and white TV. Where most of the parties were still controlled by party biases. Never would the candidates of today have stood a chance of even making it to a ticket. We listen to our families debates around the kitchen table, parents, grandparents, friends, all would have strong feelings and passions about who they felt was the best “man” for the job. Even only, the fact that a certain candidate happened to be from our home state influenced the way we perceived politics. Most likely depending on whether your father’s collar was blue or white dictated which of the parties had the greater influences. Today other factors come in to play as an attempt to influence our thinking about a certain candidate or party.
Although after a life long love affair with a party prevents or diminishes party “jumping” it doesn’t stop the opposing parties from trying to cast their influence. Sometimes with a backfire effect. According to a report put out by The Virginia News Letter from The University of Virginia, public opinion regarding campaign advertising does affect voter turnout. Moreover, the affects of positive and negative ads to degrees have a greater or less than impact on the voter turnout. (By Paul Freedman). The behavior of the candidates with regards on how they treat each other, does affect how the voters will react when it comes time to vote. Heavy personal attacks score negatively with voters across most of the age groups. To take the debate one step further another report released by Christopher B. Mann of Yale University Department of Political Science and Institution for Social and Policy Studies titled Unintentional Voter Mobilization: Does Participation in Pre-election Surveys Increase Voter Turnout? In which a study was conducted to find out to what degree conducting public surveys had on voter turnout. Their findings concluded that when voters were contacted by letter in advance of a person to person question or survey; voter turnout did increase by 1.2% allowing for a .05% error. However, those not contacted by letter had little or no affect on voter turnout. The questions used in the survey did not contain any language pertaining to voting directly. Only language dealing with current affairs and political topics in general. Some skeptics of similar past attempts at gathering such information criticized it because of its possible influence in the outcome of an election. (Mann)  To address to consciences that U.S voter turnout falls behind many other democratic countries due to the fact voting requires a small amount of participation by the citizens, where as in other countries voter registration is automatic. In the U.S., voters must do this themselves. Another reason is the U.S. does not put great effort in encouraging voting or impose fines for those who do not. (Patterson) However, to contradict these findings Dr. Michael McDonald of the Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University has offered an opposing argument.  “Statistics on voter turnout shows that the much-lamented decline in voter participation is an artifact of the way in which it is measured. The most typical way to calculate the turnout rate is to divide the number of votes by what is called the “voting-age population” which consists of everyone age 18 and older residing in the United States. This includes persons ineligible to vote, mainly non-citizens and ineligible felons, and excludes overseas eligible voters. When turnout rates are calculated for those eligible to vote, a new picture of turnout emerges, which exhibits no decline since 1972.” (McDonald)         Presidential Turnout Rates for Voting-Age Population (VAP) and Eligible Population (VEP)

In conclusion, opinion will continue to play an ever growing roll in the future out come of our democracy. With the help and encouragement of our elected officials, the citizenry must police itself in the area of voter participation on all levels. One cannot sit back and rest on the false security that their best interests are being looked after.    

Works Cited

By Paul Freedman, L. Dale Lawton. “The Virginia News Letter.” may 2000. The Virginia News Letter. Jan 2007 <http://www.coopercenter.org/publications/sitefiles/vanl/vanl0500.pdf>.Mann, Christopher B. “Yale University Department of Political Science.” Yale University Institution for Social and Policy Studies. Jan 2007 <http://research.yale.edu/karlan/fieldexperiments/pdf/Mann_Unintentional%20Voter%20Mobilization_Does%20Participation%20in%20Pre-election%20Surveys%20Increase%20Voter%20Turnout.pdf>.McDonald, Dr. Michael. “United States Election Project.” United States Election Project. Jan 2007 <http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm>.Patterson, Thomas E. “The American Democracy.” Patterson, Thomas E. The American Democracy. McGraw-Hill, 1990. 556. 

Witness to destruction; The American way of live.

With the New Year fast approaching, looking back on 2007. What do we see? Do we see the American dream being  preserved for future generation? Do we see advancements in medicine that is available to all Americans? Have we finally abolished racism forever? Have we balanced education or seen to it that no children go hungry? As we embrace the new century, we are forced to face the reality that we are no further head in these issues then are parents were. In stead of working together to solve these problems, (and problems isn’t a big enough word) the country stands more dived than ever. America is living in a perpetual state of anger and frustration. Topping the list of frustrations is illegal immigration. Americans are anger over the governments lack of action in slowing the onslaught of illegal immigrates flooding our boarders. Illegal immigration of all colors, races, and political agendas are seeping into ever crevice of the country. Has big business finally succeeded in taking over the powers that be? Free to dictate policy for the sack of cheap labor? Ever group in favor of giving away the store is perching the same line. “Americans don’t want to do theses jobs anymore”; this is simply not true. The true is Americans can’t pay a mortgage, put food on the table and send their children to collage for seven dollars an hour. With gas prices rising and the cost of a gal of milk almost four dollars. What do they expect working Americans to do? They expect us to keep paying and paying and paying. Not to object or complain when we stand by and watch our jobs go to foreign competition. In this new century, we have had a record negative for establishing and maintaining a family savings. Not since the Great Depression has saving money been so hard. In this new century, we have seen a record set in families losing their homes. All the while, we are being asked to fund foreign Commitments with question.  Have Americans suddenly lost the ability to understand and handle their money? Are we spending too much on things like sports cars and vacations? There’s an old saying “It’s easy to mange money when you have it.” I would like to let the U.S government in on something; Americans don’t have it. The tone of Americans can be felt everywhere, in the schools at the supermarket and in the check out lines. Americans are tired of watching jobs dry up and disappear while being told that it is no longer popular to be a proud American; a patriot of the flag . With the suspicions of corruption and “fixed “elections Americans are feed up with the lies and misrepresentation coming out of Washington. Washington has made the mistake in thinking that Americans are stupid. Is this the land of the brave and home of the free”? Has the pressure of political correctness finally worn Americans down to the point they no long have the will to stand up for what they feel is right?I say not even close, what Washington should doing is preparing for a fight.History has taught us that the American spirit can’t be extinguished so easily. The more repressors have tried to beat us down the stronger our resolve. The few do not have the right to make decisions for the many. We once stood united with one voice. The voice that shouted to the heavens for freedom, equality, and democracy. At this time in writing the future history of Americana, we are once again called a pond to stand up and be counted to do the right thing. Not to preserve the American way of live , or to prove once gain to the world this country sets the standard as being a super power. But to remind our self’s what this country was built on. That some principles come without compromise, with out regret. These principles that as Americans we hold dearest to our heart. Principles that are not open to discussion, are not to be questioned or judged. Because of a minority groups dislikes what they represent. We shall not debate the burning of the American flag. The American flag is a sacred symbol of ever American that has lost their lives protecting this country from the tyranny of the world. Our citizenship is not a barging chip used for political gain. The American citizenship should be respected and hard earned.  There are no easy answers to all the issues that we faces as Americans .A good place to start is to stand together, united as did all the Americans before us that succeeded in making this country great. Be proud to an American; be proud of what America stands for. America is still the greatest country on earth. Remember the power is still with the people. Only we can change the course of history, today. Be kind to each other, respect each other and respect your self’s. God Bless America!