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?