Classmates bills

Classmates Bills:

S:1108: 10 Million Dollar Solar Roofs Act of 2011: Michael

H.R.3012 - Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act: Matt Tallent

S 1301: Trafficking Victims Protection Re-authorization Act of 2011: Kathleen 

Bill I am going to use:

S. 1067: Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act of 2011

Political Cartoon (Part 5)

Questions

1. Do you believe that Wall Street Bankers are really destroying the economy?

2. If you do think they are destroying our economy, do you think they should be jailed instead of the protestors?

3. How can we fill up the jail if they are destroying our economy?

Terry Gross Interview: Interpreting The Constitution In The Digital Era

Facts:
1. Rosens new book is a collection of essays that imagine new technological developments that stress constitutional laws.
2. None of the Amendments give us clear answers to basic problems we have today.
3. A problem that does not really have an answer is "Can a policeman put a tracking device on someones car and track them?". Many court judges have had mixed answers.
4. The problem I said above has the potential to the most important privacy case in the decade.
5. Brandice took a leap when deciding if wire tapping was a invasion of privacy.
6. You dont need a physical tresspass to create a unreasonable search.
7. Open planet is a system that would allow google and facebook to put on a live feed of people and what they did everyday 24/7.
8. The fourth amendment prohibits the government from unreasonable searches and seizures.
9. Facebook is not regulated by the Constitution so they could theoretically put on the Open planet system.
10. Germany has a greater concern for data collecting than the U.S does.

Questions:
1. How can we protect our privacy from Google and Facebook?
2. If the Constitution wanted, could they regulate Facebook?
3. Why is Europe so strict on privacy laws?
4. What do other countries, beside European ones, think about the open planet system?
5. What defines how much privacy we have and when it is invaded?

Electoral College Reform Article Part 2

Facts:
1. The president is not elected directly by the people, but by the electors.
2. Voting begins the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
3. The electoral college is not a college and never meets as a single entity.
4. The electoral college greatly influences the character of parties, the nominating process, and the outcome of a presidential election.
5. The smallest number of electoral votes in a state is three.
6. There are a total of 538 electoral votes and a candidate need a majority of 270 for election.
7. The electoral college usually undermines third parties, which are unlikely to win electoral votes.
8. Electors are, at best, an anachronism and, at worst, capable of distorting or even altering the result of an election.
9. A straight popular election would encourage minor party candidates.
10. The Electoral College triples the political clout of voters.

Questions:
1. How many people are in the Electoral College?
2. What is anachronism?
3. Why do we have to select electors to vote for us?
4. How come we can't just vote for the president directly?
5. Are there any other things that are similar to the Electoral College?

Opinion:
I believe that the Electoral College should be removed. I find it unuseful and unfair for those who voted for a different candidate but still are represented by a elector who is voting for the majority. I think that the U.S. should just count all of the citizens votes for who they want so it would be more fair. Although the process would probably take a long time I believe it will speed up as we get better machines to count more effieciently.

Issue of the Week: The National Debt

1. How does the nation debt affect everyday citizens?
Many people believe that the nation debt has no affect on them, but it acutally does. As the debt gets higher our interest rates that we pay for loans on morgages is affected. It also affects the tax rate we pay and all of the national services we take for granted. A higher debt could potentially mean less social services and other necessities. It could also affect our Nations economic status leading in more spending cuts.

2.Who do we owe money too?

We owe this money to many people. We owe it to foreign investors, foreign governments, foreign investors. We also owe money to a variety of countries as you can see on the chart below.

3. What is the difference between Debt and Defict?

The national debt is the net accumulated borrowing by the federal government. It's the difference between all the money that our federal government has ever spent and all the revenue that it has ever collected since our nation's inception. The annual federal budget defict is the amount our federal government borrows each year.
It's the difference between what the federal government spends and the revenue it receives during a particular year. So each year's deficit is added to the existing debt. When revenue exceeds spending, it's called a surplus, which subtracts from the debt.

Sources:

http://agonist.org/Learning-Center/mortgage/howdoesnationaldebtaffectyou.html

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article1571.html

http://www.greatreality.com/DebtFAQ.htm#WhoOwe

http://www.afn.org/~concord/coalition/debtdef.htm

President Research

John Quincy Adams

1. Having a healthy relationship with Congress when you enter office.

2. Creating programs that would improve the nation as a whole.

3. Fighting for what you believe in.

4. To stick up for the people not treated right.

5. Being able to create something unforgettable

Sources:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/johnquincyadams

http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnquincyadams.html

http://www.nps.gov/adam/jqabio.htm

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760591.html

New York time budget puzzle

How much did you save?
261 billion

What % came from tax increases?
47%

What % came from spending cuts?
53%

Include a reflection about the decisions you made.
I decided to only cut the things that we really do not need to do in our country. For example foreign aid to other countries. I also decided to cut some military spending to save more money; we do not need more space sending or nuclear arsenal. I decided to remove some troops from Iraq, Asia and Europe. I raised the Medicare and Social Security age to 68 because 3 years is a very little time to wait. People who have high income do not need special benefits if they have money!

Bill examination

Details about bill S. 1067: Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act of 2011:
1. It amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to the Secretary of Energy.
2. It conducts research to lower the cost of nuclear reactor systems.
3. It researches modular and small-scale reactors.
4. It is now placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 146.
5. CBO estimates that it would cost approx. 213 million dollars over the 2010-2016 period if implemented.

Questions:
1. Will this bill really do what it is saying it will?
2. How come it costs 213 million?
3. Will the energy saving be worth the money?

Political Cartoon (Part 4)

Questions

1. Are we really bound by our debt?

2. What is the solution to getting rid of these "shackles"?

3. Will we ever truly be free of debt?

Campaign Ad Analysis

1. I saw repetition of the candidates name.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zB2rqaLXP4
I thought this was a very fun ad to watch and listen too. I think it was some what effective.

2. There is complimenting terms for the candidate and showing off his accomplishments.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1980
I thought this was informative but boring. Not really effective.

3. On some of the campaign ads the candidates would talk about the lows of the other candidate.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008
I thought this was kind of mean and did not give much information about the other candidate. Not very effective.

4. There was also humor in ads.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2004
I thought this was amusing and let me know more about the competing candidate. I think it was pretty effective.

5. Some ads used children to make them look good.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1996
I thought this was pretty effective. It let me know the values of the candidates.

6. Candidates would ask questions then answer them and tell them what they would do in some ads.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008
I thought this was effective and informative.

Conclusion Assertions:
1. Ads do very little to inform people.
2. Ads are very persuasive.
3. Advertising alone will not create a better result for the candidate.

Electoral College Reform

Facts:
1. Undemocratic is one type of criticism of the Electoral College.
2. The electoral college is malapportioned, because each state gets two electoral votes, regardless of the states population.
3. During the presidential election in 2000, about 2% of all the ballots cast were not counted.
4. Gore had 51 million popular votes and Bush had 50.5 million popular votes.
5. Many states have passed laws requiring electors to honor their pledge to the candidate who selected them.
6. Federal judges are not elected at all.
7. The invention of the Electoral College also reflected concerns about the adminstability of a nationwide popular election that have no current validity.
8. If Presidents were elected by popular vote, a nationwide recount might have been unavoidable in 2000.
9. All states now select their Presidential electors by popular vote.
10. No defection by electors has yet swung an election.

Questions:
1. How many people are in the Electoral College?
2. How long do they stay in the Electoral College for?
3. Who selects the people in the Electoral College?
4. What is the point of the popular votes, if becoming a President does not depend on it?
5. What are the requirements to join the Electoral College?

Issue of the Week: The Death Sentence

1. How much does it cost to put someone to death?
The cost varies for each state that has the death penalty. I found out that sometimes to put someone on death row can be even more expensive than putting them in jail for life, which is surprising. In Texas a death penalty case costs an average of 2.3 million dollars, which is 3 times the cost of putting someone in a single cell at highest security for 40 years!

2. What are the methods of execution of a prisoner?
The most commonly used way of executing someone is lethal injection. 1052 people have been put to death this way. Electrocution is another way of executing someone on the death row. 157 people have been put to death this way. There are also gas chambers, hanging and a firing squad.

3. How many people have been killed that were innocent?
I researched this question further and there can not be a exact number to determine how many innocent people have died on the death row. But I also found out that since 1973, over 130 people have been found innocent and released form the death row before acutally being killed. From 1973-1999 there was an average of 3.1 exonerations per year. From 2000-2007 there has been an average of 5 exonerations per year. (An exoneration occurs when a person who has been convicted of a crime is later proved to have been innocent of that crime.)

Sources:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FactSheet.pdf

Two Articles

Despite earmark ban, lawmakers try to give money to hundreds of pet projects (Washington Post):
Facts:
1. Members of the House and the Senate attempted to pack hundreds of special spending provisions into at least 10 bills in the summer and fall.
2.The moratorium is a verbal commitment by the Republican leadership to prohibit lawmakers from directing federal funds to handpicked projects and groups in their districts.
3. Lawmakers have tried to get around the moratorium by promising to allow other groups to compete for the funds.
4. Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) wrote to House leaders asking that some flood-protection earmarks be restored, saying her project has been publicly vetted and her constituents’ safety is put at risk by flood-prone rivers around Sacramento.
5. The Congressional Research Service found that earmark spending nearly tripled over a 15-year period, to $31.9 billion in 2010, the year before the ban.
Source:
http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?action=issues&proj_id=5004&category=&type=Project

Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program: Renewable and Energy Efficiency Loan Guarantees:
Facts:
1. The Department of Energy program that backed Solyndra, a solar panel manufacturer which went bankrupt on August 31.
2. A second taxpayer-backed project, Beacon Power Corporation, has also gone bankrupt.
3. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), better known as the stimulus, created a new program of loan guarantees under the Department of Energy’s Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program, known as 1705.
4. 1705’s loan guarantees, did not require companies applying for a loan guarantee to self-pay the credit subsidy cost but rather had Congress pay it through appropriated funds.
5. The 1705 section of Title XVII is the only section that has any finalized loan guarantees out the door.
Source:
http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?action=issues&proj_id=4998&category=&type=Project

Pending Bills

1. S. 499: Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act

Description:
A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate the development of hydroelectric power on the Diamond Fork System of the Central Utah Project.

Status:
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.

2. S. 1067: Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act of 2011

Description:
A bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to require the Secretary of Energy to carry out a research and development and demonstration program to reduce manufacturing and construction costs relating to nuclear reactors, and for other purposes.

Status:
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.

3. S. 629: Hydropower Improvement Act of 2011

Description:
A bill to improve hydropower, and for other purposes.

Status:
This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.

Political Cartoon (Part 3)

Questions

1. Are all these problems really getting bigger in our country or is this over exaggerating?

2. How can we downsize these "fireworks"?

3. Will we ever be able to remove any of these problems in the future?

PA's Congressional Districts/2008 presidential election

PA Congressional district Facts:

1. PA's first congressional district include primarily central and South Philadelphia.

2. The second congressional district is overwhelmingly a Democratic majority.
3. The third congressional district has a Republican edge and supported George W. Bush and John McCain in the past.
4. The third congressional district is located in the northwestern part of PA.
5. The heart of the fourth congressional district is mostly white and middle class suburbs.
6. PA's fifth congressional district is the largest in area.
7. The fifth congressional district is currently represented by G.T. Thompson.
8. The sixth congressional district has been redrawn in 2002.
9. The sixth congressional district has a dragon like shape to it.
10. The ninth congressional district is a safe seat for Republicans.

2008 presidential elections Facts:

1. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama triumphed Tuesday in Pennsylvania, winning both of the state's urban centers and running strong in key swing regions.

2. Obama won decisively in Philadelphia and did well in its suburbs.
3.  Obama was the overwhelming choice among blacks and Hispanics.
4. Obama had 2,988,473 votes, or 55%.
5. State Attorney General Tom Corbett, a Republican, and Auditor General Jack Wagner, a Democrat, both won second four-year terms.

Death Sentence Questions

I chose these three questions to learn more about.
1.  How much does it cost to put someone to death?
2. What are the methods of execution of a prisoner?
3. How many people have been killed that were innocent?

The Power Game: How Washington Works

Facts:
1. When a brand-new member of Congress comes to Washington, he is fresh from the heady experience of winning public acclaim for his politics and victory for himself.
2. Potomac fever is the incurable addiction of wielding political power or feeling at the political center.
3. New York and Los Angeles have enormous financial muscle.
4. Houston, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Detroit have industrial and commercial might.
5. There are approxiamately 3.5 million people who live in Washington.
6. The city and suburbs of Washington are encircled by a sixty-four-mile freeway loop known as the beltway.
7. The shorthand for the Department of Housing and Urban Development is pronounced "HUD".
8. The nickname for the Department of Transportation is pronounced "D-O-T" never "dot".
9. Many people treat the word "politician" as a synonym for hypocrisy.
10. Washington is a city mercurial in its moods, short in its attention span, and given to fetishes.

Questions:
1. How do you catch Potomac fever is it contagious?
2. Who coined the term "Potomac fever"?
3. Why do people think Washington is disconnected from our country?
4. Do the people in Congress acutally use their time with their constituents?
5. What is Jagon and why is it a vital element to the "Washington game"?
6. What is the difference between constant dollars and current dollars?
7. Why do people treat the word politician as a synonym for hypocrisy?
8. What is a "cocker spaniel"?
9. Will Washington ever blend into our country or will it stay disconnected?
10. How much power does Washington have over the country?

Terry Gross Interview: How Birth Control And Abortion Became Politicized

Facts:
1. Granting a fertilized egg people rights would make abortion a crime.
2. Margaret Sanger founded the first abortion clinic.
3. The first birth control clinic in the United States opened in 1916.
4. Margaret Sanger came from an Irish Catholic family.
5. Margaret Sangers mom died of tuberculosis.
6. Margaret Sanger helped her mom give birth to her siblings, she coined the term birth control.
7. Contraception is illegal, but women asked Margaret about it.
8. Condoms were very expensive and Margaret would recommend it.
9. Child birth was very dangerous, many people died from it.
10. Giving out information about birth control is illegal and Margaret gave out information about it!

Questions:
1. Why was birth control illegal back then?
2. Why was abortion criminalized?
3. Writing and talking about Contraception was illegal...why?
4. Was birth control even effective back then?
5. Why was abortion unwanted back in the 1900's?
6. Margaret Sanger worked hard to help women, why was she so determined?
7. How did Margaret Sanger make allies?

Frontline: Lost in Detention

Facts:
1. Law enforcement works best when the community works with it.
2. Obamas top advisor is Cesila Menos ( I do not know if i spelled her name correctly).
3. Four and a half million U.S. childrens parents' are undocumented.
4. Three million immigrants are detained in the system.
5. Antonios wife was taken away from him.
6. Children and their illegal immigrated parents will be seperated if the parents are caught.
7. Ice is the main immigration enforcement.
8. Ice has offices in all 50 states
9. During Obamas presidentcy the number of illegal immigrants increased.
10. Willisee is a corrupt place!

Questions:
1. Once deported can the deported people ever come back to the U.S. and gain citizenship?
2. What will happen to the children that were born U.S. citizens that have both parents deported?
3. Does ice get a punishment for all of those complaints in Willisee?
4. Is ice efficient in removing illegal immigrants?
5. How do they find illegal immigrants is it just by there look or something else?

Committees

Robert Casey Jr.

Committees he is currently on

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry:
- It's a subcommittee on Nutrition Specialty Crops, Food and Agricultural Research.
- Founded in 1825 the Committee was formed at the request of Senator William Findlay from Pennsylvania.
- They have a subcommittee on Jobs, Rural Economic Growth and Energy Innovation.

Special Committee on Aging:
- Was initially established in 1961 as a temporary committee; it became a permanent Senate committee in 1977.
- Has no legislative authority, but it studies issues related to older Americans, particularly Medicare and Social Security
- The Committee is chaired by Democrat Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, and the Ranking Member is Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee.

Foreign Relations Committee:
- It is a standing committee of the United States Senate. It is charged with leading foreign-policy legislation and debate in the Senate.
- The Foreign Relations Committee is generally responsible for overseeing (but not administering) and funding foreign aid programs as well as funding, arms sales and training for national allies.
- The committee is also responsible for holding confirmation hearings for high-level positions in the Department of State.

Sources:
http://casey.senate.gov/about/committees/

The West Wing: The Stackhouse Filibuster

Facts:
1. When you do a filibuster you keep the floor as long as your still talking.
2. Can't stop talking or filibuster is over.
3. No eating or drinking during a filibuster.
4. No leaning or sitting during a filibuster.
5. There is a required 60 votes to end a debate on a bill.
6. Can talk about any topic during a filibuster, even reading out of a recipe book is acceptable.
7. "Filibuster" comes from a Dutch word that literally means "freebooter".
8. People filibuster because they are against the bill.
9. After a filibuster ends there is a cloture vote.

Questions:
1. Theoretically speaking if someone could filibuster for an infinite of time would the Senate have to wait that long?!
2. What do the people waiting do while the filibuster is in session?
3. Are the Senators allowed to leave during the filibuster? For example to go to the bathroom or go eat?
4. Will they ever change how a filibuster works or will they keep it the same?
5. Is a filibuster just a huge waste of time if the bill passes?

Issue of the Week: Illegal Immigration

1. What happens if illegal immigrants have children that were born in the U.S.? Are they also considered illegal?
I've learned that the children who are born under illegal immigrants are born as U.S. citizens. What happens to them varies as I read in a article. Some children live with other family members, other unlucky children are placed in foster care. Some move with their parents to their parents' country of origin. I find it important to know if these children are properly sheltered and raised correctly after losing there parents. My only question raised is, Do some parents get to stay to take care of their children? Because the Urban Institute says that immigration laws should take parental status into account and argue hardship to American-born children before immigration judges. So perhaps they have a chance to stay.

2. Would there be a case in which illegal immigrants are allowed to stay in the U.S.?
This is similar to the question I raised in my response to question one. I found out that there are cases in which an illegal immigrant may stay. An  immigrant can apply for waivers from deportation if they can prove that deporting them would pose an undue hardship to his or her spouse, children, or parents. They could also apply to not only to remain in the United States but also obtain LPR (Lawful Permanant Resident) status. But family ties, good moral character, and the threat of hardship are important in deicding if they can stay or not. Only a few number can pull these off and I believe if they have been here for a long time I think they should be allowed to stay.

3. Are illegal immigrants that great of a threat to our country?
I found an article online stating that illegal immigration is not just a border issue, its a national issue affecting every large city and almost every small town in the country. I found out that it was a $300 billion a year industry, combining the interests of multinational corporations with those of drug cartels and Latino street gangs. Caught inbetween are American communities and the American way of life. So I believe that illegal immigrants do have some what of a threat to our country.

Sources:
http://washingtonindependent.com/103597/what-happens-to-children-when-their-parents-are-detained-or-deported

http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/deportation

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom94.htm

PA electoral college votes

Facts:
1. Last week Governor Tom Corbett and Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi raised Pennsylvania's profile in the 2012 presidential race.
2. President Obama took all 21 electoral votes from John McCain.
3. Charlie Dent (R-15), Jim Gerlach (R-6), Mike Fitzpatrick (R-8) and Pat Meehan (R-7)--have all opposed the new plan which is, the Republican nominee could lose the popular vote but still win a majority of the electoral votes.
4. The Democratic campaign strategy in Pennsylvania is to try to maximize turnout in Philadelphia and blue-trending southeastern counties.
5. The Republican-controlled state legislature that would change the apportionment of Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes for President from winner-take-all statewide to winner-take-all by congressional district.
6. 52% to 40%, voters prefer the present winner-take-all Electoral College system rather than the winner-by-congressional district proposal.
7. someone or a group of someones has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund an effort to change the rules of the 2012 presidential election to make it very difficult for President Barack Obama to win reelection.
8. In two states, Pennsylvani and Wisconsin, GOP legislators have introduced bills that would change how electoral votes—a candidate needs 270 of the 538 to win the presidency—are awarded in a presidential election.
9. In Pennsylvania, a secretive nonprofit group called All Votes Matter has been pushing the electoral vote scheme since May.
10. Between April and June, the group spent $77,700 to lobby state officials to support legislation to implement this scheme.

Questions:
1. Why are people spending so much on this scheme? Will it be worth it?
2. Why the sudden change?
3. Will Obama have a disadvantage?
4. Will other states be winner takes all?

5. How long will this go on for?

John Boehner Article

Facts:
1. House Speaker John Boehner’s mantra is that the House should “work its will".
2. He doesn’t have the backing to pull the trigger on a deal.

3. Boehner was forced back to the drawing board on his first package of spending cuts.
4. Boehner failed to cut a multitrillion-dollar deficit-reduction deal with President Barack Obama after the mere perception that he might give ground on taxes filtered back to his troop.

5. Boehner had to pull his debt-limit bill from the floor at the eleventh hour before reviving it with concessions to conservatives.
6. Boehner’s Republicans have used the leverage of controlling a single chamber of Congress to slash $1 trillion or so from the budget over the next decade.

7. Boehner has historically claimed that he supports the will of the House working its way.

8. Boehner thinks being Speaker of House is difficult.

Questions:

1. Why does it seem like Boehner is incompetent?

2. Is Boehner doing more good or bad?

3. How did he fail to cut a multitrillion-dollar deficit-reduction deal with President Barack Obama?

4. When do new Speaker of the House's get elected?

5. Can Boehner improve what he is doing now?

Immigration Questions

I chose these three questions to learn more about.
1. What happens if illegal immigrants have children that were born in the U.S.? Are they also considered illegal?
2. Would there be a case in which illegal immigrants are allowed to stay in the U.S.?
3. Are illegal immigrants that great of a threat to our country?

Is the House too small?

Facts:
1. The average U.S. congressional district now contains roughly 640,000 citizens, as opposed to about 200,000 in 1911.
2.In 1998 the U.S. population was roughly 275 million.
3. The U.S. population is 12.8 percent black and 14.4 percent Latino, but 9.4 percent and 5.1 percent in the U.S. House, respectively.
4. The German Bundestad has 613 members.
5. The British House of Commons has 646 members and is slated to grow to 650 by the next election.

Questions:
1. Why does it matter if we have a bigger House or not?
2. What would happen if the House got bigger or smaller would it effect our nation significantly?
3. Would it be more efficient if we had a bigger House?
4. Would the pay still be the same for everyone if it became bigger?
5. If the House gets bigger should the Senate get bigger also?

I believe that the current size is good. If there are too many people, like the article said, there would be a problem with trust. 435 people is a pretty big number already and I think they are doing a fine job. Wouldn't it create more conflict within the House if there were more opinions and ideas? The people who work in the House only serve for 2 years, it would be harder to replace more people. 435 to me is a fairly good number and if we were to increase it, I think we should increase it just to 500.

Open Secrets Assignment

My representative Robert Casey has a net worth of $160,020 to $578,000 in 2009. He is ranked 84th in the Senate. Not bad he is in top 100! He has 14 assets totaling from $160,020 to $578,000. He has no liabilities and has 3 transactions that total from $45,003 to $150,000.

My representative Corrine Brown has a net worth of $-12,998 to $20,000 in 2009. She is ranked 408th in House. Shes not up to par with Casey net worth wise or rank wise! She has 2 assets totaling from $2,002 to $30,000. She has 1liability totaling from $10,000 to $15,000.

I agree with the "Why does this matter?" page. I find it important to know if our representatives are using their money correctly and efficiently. If they don't then we will know that they are doing an inadequate job and that we need a new and better representative who will use the money correctly. It tells a lot about some who spends their money. It can show if they are greedy or generous.

Due Process-"Last Resort"

Facts/Details:
1. Kevin was convicted and charged in 1991.
2. Kevin Rojas was put in jail because the police thought he was the killer because of his orange jacket.
3. Kevin Rojas spent four and a half years in jail, until he was released and found innocent.
4. DNA can make all the difference if you are guilty or not.
5. Eyewitnesses falsely accused Kevin of being the murderer.
6. Lesley Risinger and her mother decided to help Kevin get out of jail before ever seeing or ever meeting him.
7. A teacher named Lenny Farinola tried vouching for Kevin saying it was impossible for him to do something like that and decided to join the defence team.
8. They had to grind through details to help release Kevin, there was no DNA evidence to turn on.
9. Only 5% of criminal cases, at best, have biological evidence.
10. Lesley now leads the The Last Resort Exoneration Project.

Questions:
1. Are eyewitnesses enough to put someone in jail?
2. Has our system mended its ways since the Kevin Rojas ordeal?
3. How many innocent people are still in jail today?
4. Do they ever catch the real criminal?
5. Do the people who are innocent and released, get any sort of sorry or pay back for the lost time they spent in jail?

Justice John Paul Stevens Rasul v. Bush (2004) Case

Facts:
1. Four British and Australian citizens were captured by the American military in Pakistan or Afghanistan during the United States' War on Terror.
2. The four men were transported to the American military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
3. America has a military base in Cuba to keep people there.
4. When the families learned of there arrest they filed suits in federal district court seeking a writ of habeas corpus that would declare the detention unconstitutional.
5. The Center for Constitutional Rights began this case in February 2002, shortly after the first detainees were sent to Guantánamo.
6. The district court agreed with the government, dismissing the case because it found that it did not have jurisdiction.

Questions:
1. Why did they capture them in the first place?
2. Why did they deny the right to an attorney?
3. Why  Guantanamo Bay, Cuba? Why not some where else?
4. Was they dealt with correctly or could it have been better?

Sources:
http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/past-cases/rasul-bush
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2003/2003_03_334

Biographies of Supreme Court

Facts/Details/Questions:
1. John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States, was born in Buffalo, New York, January 27, 1955.
2. Antonin Scalia married Maureen McCarthy and has nine children.
3. Anthony M. Kennedy received his B.A. from Stanford University and the London School of Economics, and his LL.B. from Harvard Law School.
4. Clarence Thomas was admitted to law practice in Missouri in 1974, and served as an Assistant Attorney General of Missouri from 1974–1977, an attorney with the Monsanto Company from 1977–1979, and Legislative Assistant to Senator John Danforth from 1979–1981.
5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was instrumental in launching the Women’s Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, and served as the ACLU’s General Counsel from 1973–1980, and on the National Board of Directors from 1974–1980.
6. Are women on the supreme court as a justice more common now?
7. Is it unfair for a new presdient to enter office and not have any of his own justices he wants on the court?
8. Is the seat really for life, or is it until pressured to leave?
9. What requirements are to be met to sustain the seat of a justice?
10. How long does it take to fill in a seat?

Court Cases I am interested in

The United States v. Alvarez case interests me. The term is to last from 2010 to 2019. I am interested in this one because the issue is about lying and deceiving, something that everybody does. The question is, is lying a violation of the Free speech clause of the First Amendment and should he be protected under the Free speech clause? I believe that that it does violate it and that he should be punished. He is taking someones hard work and medals that they earned for himself, although he has done nothing.

My second court case that interested me was the Alaska v. United States. The arguement lasted from Jan. 10, 2005 until June 06, 2005. It interested me because I would have not thought there would be a conflict with Alaska and the United States about land. Alaska and the United States argued about who should have ownership of the two submerged lands three miles away from the United States. The court ruled that it belongs to the federal government because they were not inland waters.

The last court case that interested me was the Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson. This lasted from April 30, 2003 until June 02, 2003. This interested me because it reminded me of McCullough v. Maryland about how the bank was complaining about excessive tax. Customers said the bank was charging excessive interest and that it was in violation of Alabama State law. The bank wanted to be heard under Federal Court instead of a State court because the issues were covered under the National Bank Act, a federal act. The court case was ruled under a Federal Court and held that the National Bank Act preempted the state-law claim and provided the exclusive cause of action for usury claims against national banks.

Roe v. Wade

Facts/Details:
1. The woman's privacy is no longer sole and any right of privacy she possesses must be measured accordingly. 
2. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.
3. A State does have an important and legitimate intrest in preserving and protecting the health of the pregnant woman, whether she be a resident of the State or a nonresident who seeks medical consultation and treatment here, and that it has still another important and legitimate intrest intrest in protecting the potentiality of human life.
4. If the State is intrested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.
5. The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions, however, going back to perhaps as far as (1891), the Court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution.
6. On the basis of elements such as these, appellant and some amici argue that the woman's right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses.
7. Mortality rates for women undergoing early abortions, where the procedure is legal, appear to be as low as or lower than the rates for normal childbirth.
8. Modern abortion techniques have significantly reduced the likelihood of a woman's death during the procedure. This eliminates the claim that abortion is primarily a health issue. Now, it is more of a moral concern.
9. The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate.
10. The State's interest and general obligation to protect life then extends, it is argues to prenatal life.

Questions:
1. How can a pregnant women intrest a State enough to stop an abortion?
2. Do the unborn babies have rights?
3. Is it the states or women's decision to stop an abortion or not?
4. Why do the States feel a duty to protect the unborn babies life?
5. Should the women have absolute control over the babies life?

The West Wing

Connections/Ideas:
1. President chose someone from their party to fill in a seat for the Supreme Court.
2. Using different methods to get more seats open.
3. Interviews to see who is right for the seat in the Supreme Court
4. Compromising with other party to get a greater good for themselves.
5. Competition between people for the seat in the Supreme Court.
6. Woman replacing a woman in the Supreme Court.
7. Senate must approve the candidate.
8. Abortion was made legal.

Questions:
1. What is a shorelist?
2. Do they really interview the candidate?
3. Was there ever a woman as a Chief Justice before?
4. How long does it take to find a replacement in real life?
5. When is the right age to resign from the Supreme Court?

The Federalist No. 78

Questions:
1. Why did you presume that the Judiciary Branch was the weakest of all branches?
2. Did you think that the Judiciary Branch was going to be weak forever or did you think that it would eventually get stronger?
3. How do you know that the Judiciary Branch would have no effect on the U.S. economy.
4. If the Judiciary Branch was weak, why did it not get overpowered by the others?
5. If you could come to present day, what would you think about the Judiciary Branch now?

Quotes:
1. According to the plan of the convention, all judges who may be appointed by the United States are to hold their offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR; which is conformable to the most approved of the State constitutions and among the rest, to that of this State.
I thought this quote was important because this shows that only "good" judges may hold their position. We would not want a "bad" one making judgements.

2.The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.
I thought this quote was important because Hamilton really makes it seem as if the Judiciary Branch were useless. He says he has no influence in our economy and that it must depend on the executive arm, but it does not seem like that today.

3. And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments.
I thought this quote was imporatant because Hamilton makes it sound like the judiciary branch is useless without the other two. But it is quite the opposite today the judiciary branch can now declare any of the Legislative or Executive Branch actions unconstitutional, the judiciary branch has more power today.

4. Some perplexity respecting the rights of the courts to pronounce legislative acts void, because contrary to the Constitution, has arisen from an imagination that the doctrine would imply a superiority of the judiciary to the legislative power. It is urged that the authority which can declare the acts of another void, must necessarily be superior to the one whose acts may be declared void.
I thought this quote was important because it contains the ideas of the Checks and Balances and says that is is needed the Separation of Powers.

5. Hence it is, that there can be but few men in the society who will have sufficient skill in the laws to qualify them for the stations of judges.
I thought this quote was important because it shows that not everyone can take the job of a judge. It says that being a judge actually takes skill that some do not have.

2000 Election Reading Part 2

Facts/Details:
1. The Supreme court voted and ended up as a 5-4 vote with the majority consisting of the courts most conserative justices.
2. The courts rationale was ambitious and weak.
3. On November 21, the Florida Supreme Court interpreted state law to require the Secretary of State to extend the statutory deadline for a manual recount.
4. In seeking certiorari, Bush raised three federal challenges to the decision of the Florida Supreme Court.
5. On December 8, the Florida Supreme Court ruled, by a vote of 4 to 3, that a manual recount was required by state law, and it thus accepted Gore's contest.
6. On December 9, the Supreme Court issued a stay of the decision of the Florida Supreme Court.
7. Ballots differ from county to county. Some countries use a version of the controverial "butterfly ballot".
8. Citizens in Alabama use different machinery from that used by citizens in New York.
9. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was an effort to use the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses to try to ensure more rule-bound decisions.

Post reading questions:
1. Do the machines still miss some votes or is it 100% accurate now?
2. Was it bad if the majority of the Supreme Court were mostly conserative judges?
3. The Supreme Court had no precedent, did this make it harder or easier to make a decision?
4. Why doesn't the United States just make it so all the voting cards/booths were all the same?
5. How much of an effect did minimalism have in the election?

What my Politician has been up too part 2.

My other politician I chose to follow was Robert Casey Jr. He is a U.S. Senator that represents Pennsylvania for about 4 years now. Robert Casey has sponsored 174 bills since Jan 4, 2007. 170 haven't made it out of committee and unfortunately none were successfully enacted. Casey has co-sponsored 736 bills during the same time period. Some of his recently sponsered bills include the  Fallen Heroes of 9/11 Act,  Children's Hospital GME Support Reauthorization Act of 2011, Extensions for emergency relief for  morgages and other payments, Computer Science Education Act of 2011, and the National Opportunity/Community Renewal Act. Casey sounds like a caring guy who shares my same views, I hope he can get some of his bills he wants enacted to get enacted.

The Common Good

A common good in our society sounds like a big fantasy that we are trying to reach. The essay says we should have cooperation with one another to achieve a common goal, but I find that impossible in our nation. If we had common good in our world, it would be perfect; everyone would have money to spend, cheap health care to pay, participation from everyone in the community. Sounds like a perfect world to live in, but unfortunately  nothing in our world is perfect; we are far from perfect. This essay reminds me about Federalist no. 10 that Madison wrote, I find it these two papers similar because Madison says if everyone had the same thoughts and ideas we wouldn't have problems with factions, which is impossible he said. Its the same for the common good if everyone had the same thoughts and ideas we could achieve the common good easily. If we didn't have individualism there would be no selfishness in our world, we would be able to achieve anything. Unfortunately there are selfish people who always want more and more in life. I'm not saying individualism is bad, we all want to express ourselves right? But we could benefit a whole lot more if we focused on the bigger idea to benefit everyone instead of just ourselves. Common good does not exist in our world, everyone is too greedy there are people who do try their best, but it does not make up for those who don't try at all.

2000 Election Film

Facts:
1. Florida is worth 25 electoral votes.
2. Punching out chads was the method of voting for Florida citizens.
3. They recounted 1% of Floridas votes and based it off of that.
4. They only recounted in specific counties of Florida.
5. The  U.S. Supreme Court concluded to end the recount.
6. There were a lot of protesters who felt strongly for a recount in Florida.
7. The machine could make the mistake of not counting a vote because the chad could cover up the hole again.
                                                                                     8. Bush won the election in the end.

Questions:
1. The film said different numbers could come out of  a recount, why is that?
2. Why didn't they let the state of Florida do a revote?; I don't think it would it would have taken too long if given some more time.
3. How could they improve the current voting method in Florida?
4. Why couldn't they just finish the recount if they were so close instead of suspending it?
5. Why did the police let the protesters in the building?
6. If they did extend the recount time limit, who would be the president in the mean time?
7. Who would have really won if they finished the recount process?
8. Were the citizens of Florida being treated fairly? Many of them did want a recount.

2000 Election Reading

Prereading questions:
1. Why did they make the voting cards so confusing?
2. Why did they use chads, why not fill in a circle, or circle the letter for the person you want to vote for?
3. Has this been a one of a kind thing or has it happened already in the past?
4. How long does a recount usually take if they were not pressured on the time limit?
5. Was it fair of them to stop the recount?

Facts/Details:
1. The election was finally decided on a 5-4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court.
2. Democrats demanded a vote recount in several Florida counties.
3. The Florida votes were cast by punching out a chad.
4. Winning the state of Florida for the candidates is worth 25 electoral votes for them.
5. Bush won in the end of the election.

Post reading questions:
1. Will we ever find out who really won the election?
2. Are chads still used or are they discontinued because of the 2000 election incident?
3. Why did they not extend the time limit for the recount? Is this unfair or is it ok in your opinion?
4. How could they have done this more efficiently and less chaotic then they did during the time?
5. Were the older citizens just saying they thought they voted for the wrong person or did they just take advantage of the confusion and demanded recounts to help Gore?

Health Care Blog 2

Health care is something I believe everyone needs in our nation. I did some research and found out that the United States does not spend health care money efficiently. My source says that an estimated one-third of 2006 health care expenditures, about $700 billion or nearly 5% of GDP, did not improve health outcomes. 700 billion dollars is alot of money, yet it does not improve how our health care system works. Think if we had 700 billion dollars put into something else such as helping 3rd world countries. I wonder what the United States could blow 700 billion dollars on and still not improve our health care system. The price only keeps going up for the people who pay for it, yet they get no improvements.

What I want to know is how can the US make it so our health care is affordable and effective for our people. I think too many people are uninsured and the US isn't doing all they can to lower the number of uninsured. I feel like our government is too busy playing politics and not focusing on what really matters. If our government was more cooperative with one another I'm sure that we wouldn't be in the health care crises we are in now. We are a one of the leading nations in the world, yet we can't take care of the increasing number of uninsured and underinsured in our country.

What my Politician has been up too.

I chose to follow Corrine Brown. She has represented Florida's 3rd congressional district for about 18 years nows (wow! longer then I have been living.). She has sponsored 53 bills since Jan 5, 1993. 40 of the bills have not made it out of committee, but  5 were successfully enacted. Brown has co-sponsored 2,852 bills during the same time period. Some of her recently sponsered bills include improving and providing increased acess to the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing program, the Easy Voting Act of 2011, Supporting the goals and ideals of National Train Day, and To grant the congressional gold medal to the Montford Point Marines. It sounds like she really likes trains and anything train related. I hope she is successful in what ever she pursues.

Health Care Blog 1

I don't know too much about health care, but I know it will be something major later in my life time. I know that a lot of people in the United States today are uninsured because its rising prices. I did a little research and found out that the price of health care from 2001 to 2005 increased 30% while income only increased 3%. I find it difficult to understand why the price jumps up so quickly and why it costs so much, but I do understand why alot of people do not have it now. I also learned about the underinsured people in health care. These are people who have health care, but stuggle to pay for it. A lot of them are faced with rising health care premiums, deductibles, and copayments, as well as limits on coverage for various services or other limits and excluded services that can increase out-of-pocket expenses. One of my sources says that the number of underinsured has grown 60% over the past four years. This surprises me because that is a fairly large number to reach in a short amount of time.

I get worried when I think about how I'm suppose to afford health care for myself later in the future. I will probably have school loans to pay for, car insurance, gasoline, food, perhaps rent for an apartment, and on top of all of that health care for myself and possibly for a family I have to support. I learned that approximately 50 percent of personal bankruptcies are due to medical expenses and that 28% of middle income families haver serious problems trying to pay for health care. I heard that the United States is fast becoming one of the worst health care systems in the world and that not only are they the only industrialized nation that does not provide some form of universal health care to it’s citizens, they have one of the highest rates for health care expenditures.  I can only hope the price decreases by the time I have to take care of those kinds of things myself.

Madison definition of Faction

Madison says a faction is like a group of citizens who unite together because they have a common impulse of passion, interests, and ideas. He says factions have bad effects on the nations and he seems to not like them at all. He says that the only way to stop big factions from causing problems is to create more so their would be no homogenous faction. Madison wanted to get rid of factions, but he said it would be very difficult to do so.

Questions:
1. What would happen if a faction had too much power in our country?
2. Are factions really that bad? Was Madison just overreacting? They just unite people together to achieve a common goal.
3. What would be considered a faction in our modern era?
4. How are factions created and how long can they last for?
5. If a faction has bad points, then what are its good points?

I define a faction as a group of people that join together because of same ideas or interests. Like a club at school. They group of together after school and do things they all like. Another example could be a team sport such as football. They all work together to achieve victory together. From how Madison states it a faction sounds a lot like clubs and possibly our politcal parties today.

Two members of Congress I would follow

I would follow Corrine Brown because according to the political ideology survey it said we are similar. She represents the 3rd district of Florida and is a Democrat in the state of Florida.

I would follow Robert Casey Jr. because the ideology survey said I would agree with the Democratic views and since Robert Casey is the only democrat I chose him. Robert Casey Jr. is the first Democrat elected to a full term in the U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania.

Political Ideology Results

Based on my responses to the questions on the political ideology survey, I am a moderate liberal. It said I would most likely agree with the views of the Democratic Party and that I would also be interested in the Green Party. The survery said my ideology is shared by Corrine Brown (D- FL, 3rd District) and Shelley Berkley (D-NV, 1st District), who are members of the House of Respresentatives.

US Constitution Question Opinions

Stephanie May's question:
Would the founding fathers be pleased with how the constitution works now?

I found this question intresting because the constitution now has changed a little since back when it was first created. I believe that the founding fathers would be some what pleased with the constitution today and how it lasted so long. It is much more stronger and stable then it was back then. I don't think they would like how the political groups don't cooperate together. I think they would like how the US protects the people and how we grew from a small nation to one of the greatest nations in the world. But it is hard to say what they would think without actually being them.

Aaron Mazer's question
It has been such a long time since the constituion was written, why has there only been a few changes? Why hasnt it been fully re-written at this point?

Aarons question brings up a good point. How has the constitution lasted so long? I believe it hasn't been through many changes and re-writes because of how well written it was back when the founding fathers were alive. It states important things like protecting the people and doing whats best for them. I don't think there would be any other way to put it better then the constitution did when it was first written. Maybe our government is just a little lazy and decided it was good enough. But it has been working for us over 200 years, so why change something that has been going well for so long?

Democracy in America Video

Questions:
1.Why is Idaho so against wolves coming in?
2. Is the government abusing their power by forcing Idaho to take responsibility for the wolves?
3. Why can't the citizens of Idaho coexist with the wolves?
4.How many wolves are in Idaho now? Did it increase or decrease?
5.Why can't South Carolina accept the new standard for detecting drunk driving?
6. Is the government threatening states by saying they would take away their high way funds?
7. Was the New Deal effective for the people in the 1930's?
8. Why is the government pushing off welfare to the states if they know some states can't use it to its full potential?
9.Why is Mississippi a poor state?
10. How can we improve the welfare of poorer states?

Facts:
1. You must follow the endangered species act.
2. Federalism has evolved into complex relationships.
3. Wolves were reintroduced into the wilderness of Idaho.
4. South Carolina did not have the machines to detect drunk drivers before.
5. Each state wanted a different standard for being drunk so it was set to .08 for the whole nation.
6. The United States was in Depression in the 1930's.
7. The number of single parents were increasing in the 1990's.
8. Welfare standards differ for each state.
9. Mississippi is a poorer state that provides minimal support for people who need welfare.
10. Mississippi only supports one third of the people who acutally needs welfare.

The Federalist No. 10

Questions:
1. Is it bad to take too quick of an action when citizens complain?
2. Can't they just eliminate factions all together instead of just its negative effects?
3. How would Madison destroy liberty to stop a faction if it is essential to political life?
4. How could we distribute the properties more evenly?
5. Is having a variety of different opinions bad?

Quotes:
1. It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that is worse than the disease.
I liked this quote because it states that taking away liberty would be worse then getting rid of factions.

2. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired.....
I chose this quotes because it says how we improved our constitution so much but we shouldn't get too full of ourselves.

3. ....conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an intrested and overbearing majority.
It makes me think, why does the majority get to do what they want and not consider the others?

4. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished.
This quote popped up to me because it says that factions have made other governments perish, shouldn't the US get rid of this as soon as possible?

5. No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.
I chose this quote because it say's we shouldn't judge our own work or we'll just cheat ourselves, It shows that we do need some other people to help us out.

The Federalist No. 51

Questions:
1. Was Federalist No. 51 effective in completing its purpose?
2. Why is it so important to split up the power of the people into 3?
3. How does government reflect human nature?
4. How would ambition counteract ambition?
5. Does the government really protect all of society against injustice of the other part?

Quotes:
1.In order to lay a foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own...
I like how this quote stated that each branch should be able to decide for themselves instead of letting other people deicde for them.

2.It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices.
I like this part of the quote because that the branches should be less dependent on other memebers and be more independent.

3.Ambition must be made to couteract ambition.
This caught my eye because it's saying how we should use ambition against ambition which is ironic to me.

4. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?
I chose this quote because it's stating how government itself is the greatest reflection of human nature. It makes me think about how this is true.

5.If a majority be united by a common intrest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.
I chose this quote because I agree with it.  The majority always get what they want we forget about the minority. What may be good for the majority could have dire effects on the minority.

Political Cartoon (Part 2)

Questions

Is the middle class really dropping down to low numbers or is this an exaggeration?



How do you think we can increase the number of people, in the United States, to the status of  "middle class"?

How can we tell what class we are in, is there a distinct way to tell? Does it feel different in a way?

Simile/Metaphor for Seperation of Powers and Checks and Balances

The Checks and Balances is like three separate branches on a tree. They each balance the tree out and make sure that one branch doesn't get more nutrients than the others.

I compared the Checks and Balances to a tree branch because it is essentially the same. Tree branches get nutrients distrubited evenly among each other, so that no one branch can get overly large or have more power over one another.

The Separation of Powers is like soccer. There are three different things that keep the game together. First is the coaches they tell the players what to do like the president. Second is the referee that makes judgements to see if something is right or wrong. Third is the rules they are made up and must be followed if passed.

I compared to the Separation of Powers to soccer because I found it similar to one another. If our government wasn't split into three then somone would be taking advantage of the power. Like in soccer how if we didn't have referees players would be taking advantage of foul plays and keep doing bad things.

PBS:Frontline 10 Facts and Questions

Questions:
1. Why does the US have to work on the "dark side"?
2.Why is the CIA doing things in secret?
3.How were the CIA so successful in Afghanistan?
4.Why did the CIA make their own prisons?
5. How would the NSA know which phone call to tap in?
6.How did the NSA manage to spend so much money?
7.Why are all the secrets being told on the internet now?
8.Are the police effective in detecting terrorists with their new technology?
9.How much does Top Secret America spend?
10. How can someone join Top Secret America?

Facts:
1.President Bush signed a document for the CIA to go into Afghanistan.
2. CIA landed in Afghanistan on September 26, 2002.
3.CIA used harsh techniques to get information from captured terrorists, much like torture.
4.CIA was infront og the military.
5.Spring of 2003 the US attacked Iraq.
6.NSA used public buildings as secret bases.
7.Greystone still continued during President Obama's presidentcy.
8.Nearly 3000 innocent people died on September 11, 2001.
9.CIA bought 480 private companies to help with man power.
10.The White House approved the building of International prisons for the CIA.

Interview on Themes Unit 1

I decided to interview one of my buddies from marple, Paul Lee, to get a feel of what he knew about the government. So I asked him what the word government meant to him, surprisingly, he gave me a well-rounded response he said, "Government to me is an institution that is meant to protect people's rights while giving the majority of people what they want and what they need". This was a very close definition to the one we learned in class which surprised me because I would'nt have thought he would get so close to it. He must have a government class also. Next I decided to see if he knew any political issues and see which one's he cared about. He says he is most concerned with the debt crises. He says this is one of the key reasons that make the upcoming election so important, he says who ever is elected will have a different plan to solve the situation. The knowledge he has about our country stuns me. I thought he would be somewhere along my knowledge level because I barely know anything about the government and our country.

After that I decided to ask him what he thought about diversity in our country. He responded by saying, "Our diversity is what makes america unique and special. Without diversity, we are not different than any other country in the world". I agreed with him and didn't think he would give such a optimistic answer. Next I asked him if compromise was necessary in a government. He gave me a very quick answer saying that compromise is fundamental in government, its what makes democracy great and nothing would get accomplished without compromise. Then I asked him how government affected his daily life. He answered by saying without the government he would be able to function freely and securely like he does now, he says although there are rules and regulations he must abide to he says hes happy that the government protects him and gives him rights. After that I continued my interview with him and he gave me some great responses. My friend surprised me tonight with all of his smart answers and he acutally wanted more questions to answer which made me laugh. This interview showed me that some people acutally do know alot about the government I never thought he would be one of those people though.

A People's History of the United States

The packet starts off by saying how the rich control the government for their own intrests, but I believe it was for the benefit for everyone. If the constitution was just for the creators intrests then we wouldn't be the nation we are today. I liked how Jefferson said rebellion is good for the government. It shows that he does care for the government and the people. He says it shows the flaws that goverment has and helps them fix what they were doing wrong. I did not like how slaves, indentured servants, women, and men without property were not of intreset in the Constitution. I think everyone should have a say, and yet they were just excluded out. Slaves were counted part of the state, but had no say in what acutally went into the documents. I find the government to be contradicting to itself, the first amendment says we have the freedom of speech yet they made the Sedition Act. Is the government scared of a little bit of criticism? Overall the systme seems to be alive and well today. We are a great nation and we must not forget where it all stemmed from.

Questions:

Why does it have to be the "rich" people controling the government? Why not poor or normal people?

If rebellions never happened and everyone listened to the goverment, paying taxes etc..., what do you think our government would be like today?

Would the government be as powerful as it is today if it was run by poor people?

Political Cartoon

Questions:

How do you think the artist came up with a drawing like this? Do you agree with it or disagree with it?

Do you think the second amendment is ineffective in our constitution or starting to become ineffective?

If you could, would you change the second amendment or keep it the same?