Comments

I commented on Gabby Miller, Tim Tunkel, and Albert Munoz.

Chapter 13- Bureaucracies

1. Research federal agencies and explain which one you feel is the most important one and why?

I researched the National Security Council. The NSC is the President’s principal forum for considering national security and foreign policy matters with his senior national security advisors and cabinet officials. The function of the council is to advise and assist the President on national security and foreign policies. The NSC is chaired by the President and attended regularly by the Vice President, Secretary of State, Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Other federal officials such as the Attorney General are invited to attend when the meetings pertain to their responsibilities. This agency is important because it is necessary for our government to do all it can to keep its citizens safe while promoting good relationships with foreign countries.

 

2. Which federal agency could be terminated with the least impact (if any) and why?

After researching the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, I believe it would have little impact if it was terminated. The FMCS was created in 1947 and is an independent agency whose mission is to preserve and promote labor-management peace and cooperation. It proves mediation and conflict resolution serves to industry, government agencies, and communities. It concentrates its efforts on assisting employers and employees in coping with the demands of a rapidly changing workplace. I believe these issues could be solved on a closer and more local level, without having to contact federal agencies while helping to reduce government spending and tax dollars at the same time.

 

3. Are any new agencies needed?  In other words, if you were president would you create new agencies?  If so, in what area(s)?

I do not feel like we need any new federal agencies. If anything, there are a lot of agencies that need to be done away with. When I was going through the list of federal agencies, I couldn’t believe how many there were! A lot of them seem to overlap one another and could definitely be combined to save money. Some others are outdated yet are still active and wasting money. And then again, there are those that should have never been created to begin with. I believe the president should take some time to go through and combine and eliminate agencies that are no longer serving their full purposes. Any way that our country can eliminate spending without negative impact should be taken advantage of, instead of just creating new agencies to clean up the mess others have created.

Chapter 12

1. What makes a great President (not which Presidents have been great) . . . what qualities are essential to greatness?  Why?
An article I read on CNN noted that presidential greatness is determined by being in the White House at the right time, or the wrong time. Americans expect a lot from the leader of our country. They want the President to take quick action on problems facing the nation. A good President should be able to respond quickly in pressured situations while being strong and caring. Author Michael Siegel identified four leadership qualities that define excellence in the White House. First, the president should have a compelling vision for his presidency. Second, the president has to have the wherewithal to implement his vision.  Third, he has to focus on a few major goals at a time. Finally, the president must understand the process and implications of decision making.

2. Other than Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, which two Presidents have been the greatest and why?
Franklin Roosevelt is considered one of the greatest presidents in history, largely because he was good at communicating with the public. He knew what people wanted, which was action, words, and optimism. He took large action against the Great Depression and many believe he was the reason the Depression ended. His words and actions regarding the Pearl Harbor attacks are still quoted today and still left him as a role model to presidents after him. Roosevelt’s successor Harry Truman was also considered to be one of the best presidents. He ordered the use of atomic bombs to end World War II, which was called one of the boldest presidential decisions in history.

3. Research a President that you're previously unfamiliar with - list at least three things you learned.  Was this President effective?  Why or why not?
I chose to research President John F. Kennedy because even though I have heard about his assassination, I have not heard about anything he accomplished during his presidency. President Kennedy was sworn in as the 35^th president on January 20, 1961. He gained a lot of fame in his inaugural address, speaking the now famous phrase “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country”. Kennedy wanted to organize his presidency like the structure of a wheel, with all the spokes leading to the president. On April 17^th, 1961, Kennedy ordered the Bay of Pigs Invasion in Cuba. The intention was to invade Cuba and cause an uprising among Cuban people in hopes of removing Castro from power. His approval rating increased after the Cuban Missile Crisis because it was believed to have improved the image of American willpower and the president’s credibility.

Chapter 11: Congress

1. Who are your Senators and your Congressman?

The two senators who represent Tennessee are Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker. They are both republican. There are nine congressional districts in Tennessee. The first district is represented by republican David Roe. The second district is represented by John “Jimmy” Duncan Jr. who is also a republican. Republican Charles “Chuck” Fleischmann represents Tennessee’s third district. The fourth district is represented by republican Scott Desjarlais. One of Tennessee’s two democratic representatives, Jim Cooper, represents the fifth district. The sixth, seventh, and eighth districts are all represented by republicans who include Diane Black, Marsha Blackburn, and Stephen Fincher. The second of Tennessee’s two democratic representatives is Steve Cohen, who represents the ninth district of the state.

2. Research the areas they champion and find one you support. What is it and why do you also support it?

I researched Senator Lamar Alexander’s role in the PREEMIE Reauthorization Act. It was introduced on February 7, 2013 and is a bill to reduce preterm labor and delivery and the risk of pregnancy-related deaths and complications due to pregnancy, and to reduce infant mortality caused by prematurity. The bill seeks to increase studies on the clinical, biological, social, environmental, genetic, and behavioral factors relating to prematurity, as well as tracking the advances and findings of these studies. The goal is to greatly reduce the amount of preterm births first and foremost to ensure healthy births, but also to reduce the costs of extended hospital stays. I feel that it is extremely important to continue studies on this subject so that the number of babies born prematurely could possibly be reduced. This bill requires that a plan of action be reported to congressional committees, followed by progress reports every two years.

3. Find an issue one of your Senators or Congressman champions that you disagree with. Why do you disagree?

      

I disagree with republican representative Diane Black’s efforts to terminate the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to provide assistance under the Tenant Resource Network Program through H.R. 224: Stop Tenant Organizing Promotion Act. The Tenant Resource Network Program reaches out to people in need of housing assistance. Its purpose is to award grants to qualified applicant organizations to assist, inform, educate, and engage tenants of eligible assisted properties regarding their rights, responsibilities and options. Representative Black does not want the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to be able to provide assistance to this program, which doesn’t seem like it should be an issue. The program is trying to help people in need and I don’t see why a person shouldn’t be able to help, no matter what position he or she holds.

Chapter 10

1. Read Bush v. Gore in the text. Do you agree with the majority or the dissenting opinion? Why?
I think I agree with the dissenting opinion. From what I understand, the Constitution gives the right to the states to control their election. If the election was so close that officials were unable to determine a winner, I think the only fair way would be to recount the votes. It seems strange that the Supreme Court happened to make their decision only a couple hours before what they said was Florida’s intended deadline. The state should have made a more standardized way to recount votes so that it didn’t come down to a matter of opinion, but I think they should have been recounted either way just to be fair to both candidates.

2. Is the ability to fundraise too important in elections? In other words, are good candidates prevented from running because they cannot raise the needed funds? Can/should something be done to correct this if it is a problem?
I definitely believe fundraising is too important in elections. Money becomes an issue on many different platforms. A candidate who has more resources has more opportunity to reach voters, which could be unfair to an amazing candidate who just doesn’t have as much financial flexibility. More money means more advertising as well. It’s like at a kids Christmas party. Teachers put limits on how much gifts should cost so that one child doesn’t get a gift that is so much better than the other children. More money is more power. I think there should be stricter limits placed on how much can be spent on a campaign so that it is more fair.


3. Why is there such voter apathy - in other words, why is there often such low voter turnout for elections? Is there a way to rectify this problem?
Demographics such as race, sex, age, income, and education all play a role in who shows up to the polls. Voter turnout peaks at 45 years old and continues at that rate until advanced age sets in (about 80 years or older). If more young adults were educated on politics and how important elections are, maybe more people would care to vote. Income also plays a big part, because the more a person makes the more likely they are to vote because they have more at stake. They are also more likely to have a way to get there. Transportation could be provided to those less fortunate. Education has the most to do with elections in my opinion, because those who have been taught about what is important are more inclined to vote as well as teach others.

Chapter 9: Political Parties

1. Which political party do you most identify with? Why? Are there things in the party platform with which you disagree?

         This is probably the most confusing question anyone could ever ask me. I am so on the fence about this topic that it is too difficult for me to choose. Religious issues sway me one way, while economical reasons sway me another, and to be honest I really haven’t figured it all out for myself yet. There are things that I agree with and disagree with in all party platforms. I am still young, and living under the wings of my family my entire life mostly just left me in the dark on political issues. I am still learning, and because I AM still learning, I do not see myself fit to blindly associate myself with a certain party. I actually picked this class over other humanities so that I could understand our government better. Maybe by the end I’ll have it all figured out!!!

2. Does America need political parties? The founders originally hoped that American politics would operate without need of parties. Would that work out today? Why?

Because America is so diverse, I do believe we need political parties. Political parties help to hold our government accountable, promote public debate about policy options, and get citizens involved in the public sphere. Some political scientists believe that parties are in decline and that the decline is causing a major problem. Other scientists believe that the parties aren’t declining, but merely changing, and that they are just as strong as they used to be. While researching, I found a lot of articles that dealt with the possibility of the creation of a new party. The idea is that after highly charged elections or in a string of such elections, big and lasting shifts occurred in how voters behaved. Because of this, some political scientist believe we are on the edge of a political revolution. Because people need that influence and back up of people who believe in the same things, I do not believe that America could ever go without parties. There are too many different opinions, with strong supporters behind all of them.

3. Please research lesser known political parties. Which one do you identify with? Why?

I was surprised at the length of the list of political parties. Most were serious, but there were some (such as the United States Pirate Party) that I was shocked actually made the list. I believe I identified the most with the America First Party.  The party is pro-life, opposes all gun control, seeks to end affirmative action, racial quotas, and illegal and unlimited immigration. The party opposes the idea that the Constitution bars expressions of religious faith in the public square. It supports allowing organized prayer in public places, especially in public schools, as well as allowing displays of religious icons (such as tablets of the Ten Commandments) by the government on public property. I agree with most of the beliefs of this party, but would have to deeper research them.

Chapter 8 Blog Comments

I commented on Kristy Jones, Ashley Pelfrey, and Amanda Strange.

Chapter 8: Interest Groups

1. From figure 8.1 in the text, select one of the interest groups and do some research on their issues and beliefs.  What did you learn?  What did you find interesting?  Do you agree/disagree with their positions on issues? Why?

I chose to research the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). Some current campaigns that the group is pursuing include: Learning is More (restoring balance to public education), Making a Difference Every Day (highlighting the vital work of AFT members), Building Minds, Minding Buildings (promoting green schools), and AFT FACE (reversing the staffing crisis in higher education. One thing I found interesting is that the AFT is putting forth the effort to restore balance to public education. They believe that the growing fixation on high-stakes testing is damaging the effort to improve schools. I am so glad they are attempting to bring more attention to this issue because I agree that focusing nearly every part of the curriculum around a standardized test takes a lot of important factors out of education. This group does not only focus on teachers but others, such as healthcare workers, in the school system, which I think is awesome because they often go unrecognized even though they make a big difference.

 

2. Find an interest group with which you associate (positively).  What is the name of the group and what do you find persuasive about their position on issues?

I chose the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) because both my father and my grandfather worked in mines. UMWA has a diverse membership including coal miners, clean coal technicians, health care workers, truck drivers, manufacturing workers, and public employees throughout the United States and Canada. The UMWA is achieving significant success in providing workers with a voice on the job and financial security at home. They are also continuing their fight for safe workplaces, good wages and benefits and fair representation in workplaces throughout North America. The UMWA provides Health and Retirement funds, pensions and medical care to 100,000 retired miners, widows and dependents. I think it is so good that these companies provide funds and healthcare to these workers because the mines not only a dangerous place to be in, but health problems contracted in the mines follow workers for the rest of their lives.

 

3. Do interest groups have enough/too much/the right amount of power in the political system?  Most believe it's a fine-line balance between freedom of speech for the groups and keeping unfair persuasion out of government.  Where is that line and when is it crossed?

Interest groups provide information to their members, the media, government officials, and the general public. Interest groups are a lot like the different types of media that were discussed in chapter 7, because they help to serve as a watchdog over our government. Most of the time I believe groups stay within their means and do a great job at expressing their opinions without going overboard. There are, however, groups who go beyond the barrier and get out of control. As long as a group can state and fight for their beliefs in a civilized way, I believe it is okay.

Chapter 7 Blog Comments

I commented on Melissa Ray, Jessica Armes, and Albert Munoz.

Chapter 7: The News Media and the Internet

1.       Does objectivity still exist in the media's coverage of politics?  Of the major news outlets (CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, NPR, NBC, etc.), which are the most objective and which seem to have the most bias?

The press claims to be objective, but even when selecting what stories to cover the press influences public opinion and bias may be inevitable. Washington Post columnist David Broder admits that “the process of selecting what the reader reads involves not just objective facts, but subjective judgments, personal values, and yes, prejudices”. A Gallup Poll measuring public’s belief about ideological bias in the news media indicates that about half the public believes the news media have liberal bias. Bias is evident, for example, in what news stations decide to cover. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican nominee John McCain was giving a speech, and in the middle of it Barack Obama secured the delegates that gave him the official Democratic nomination. While MSNBC broke away from McCain’s speech to announce this development, Fox News flashed the information on the lower part of the screen, but continued to cover McCain’s speech. As mentioned in Chapter 7, it is fair to conclude that individually, news outlets are biased, but collectively, the media provide a full range of ideological viewpoints.

 

2.       How does talk radio (Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann, etc.) affect your view of politics?  Why?

In 2008, most of the 50 million Americans who listened to talk radio listened to conservative programs. In 2007, conservatives hosted 91 percent of programming hours, while liberals hosted just 9 percent. Over 90 percent of stations do not even broadcast progressive, or liberal, talk radio. I do not listen to talk radio, merely because of the fear of falling asleep at the wheel, but considering these statistics it appears that a person who did may lean toward the conservative side of the fence. It seems that by listening to talk radio a person may be persuaded to think more conservatively, since that opinion is what dominates the radio media. If the station allows for listener participation, such as taking calls on air, they take a chance on allowing their audience to be misinformed by a person who may not know what they are talking about or who speaks merely on opinion instead of facts. With this in mind, talk radio seems a little “iffy” to me.

 

3.       Is media objectivity important?  Why or why not?

In my opinion, media objectivity is extremely important. When any type of media, whether it is the internet, television, radio, etc., publishes a story, it is seen by hundreds and thousands of people. If that story contained opinions or loaded statements that could persuade the reader to take one side over the other, it isn’t fair. I believe the media should take as much of a neutral and fact-based view as possible and let the readers or listeners form their own judgment. If the public is misinformed it could lead to misguided votes, and misguided votes could lead to destruction.

Chapter 6 Blog Comments

I commented on Ian Price, Chelsea Dunn, and Melissa Ray.

Chapter 6: Public Opinion

1.      Is American news media too dependent upon polls? Is it appropriate for news agencies to create polls and then report on them? Why or why not?

I think it is important for news agencies to create polls because it gives politicians and their agencies more insight on public opinion. I didn’t realize, however, just how many polls there are. After looking at the CNN link, I was amazed on how many specific questions were being asked. It seems like even though polling is a good thing and it allows the public to express their opinion, there are a lot of questions that seem irrevelent. Also, because most of these polls are conducted on the internet, most of the time people aren’t going to take the time to do them unless the topic is something they either feel extremely strongly or extremely negatively about. Another issue with news agencies reporting on their own polls lies in how they word their questions. Networks that reach out to people with specific views will word their surveys in ways that could sway a person to answer a certain way, which could offset results.

2. How important is political party identification to you (e.g. as a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc.)? Was it more or less important to your parents & grandparents? Does it seem more or less important to your friends? Why or why not?

I know this is going to sound ridiculous, but party identification is not very important to me whatsoever. After reading this chapter and thinking about it, it makes sense to me though. I read that children are two-thirds more likely to identify as the same political party as their parents. Throughout my life, neither my parents nor my grandparents have shown very much interest in politics. I haven’t grown up in a family with very much money, so when I was growing up my parents were more interested in what was going on in their jobs and in our little town than what was happening on a state or national level. My friends seem to be a LOT more interested in politics than I am, but most of my friends come from families that have a lot more money than mine does. Also, most of their parents have college-level educations, where both of my parents stopped at high school. Based solely on my own life, I would say that income and education play major roles in political party identification.



 3. Do you feel that you opinion of politics is more influenced by economic issues or by social issues? Why?

My opinion of politics is definitely more influenced by economic issues. Growing up in a family where the biggest issue was money and wondering how bills were going to get paid, it is important to me that our economy prospers. For example I only work about 25 hours a week, but the little money I do make goes to help support my family. If the economy is doing badly and people are cutting what they are spending in the store I work at, then because of that my hours may be pushed back to 15 or 20. To some people that wouldn’t be a big deal, but for myself and my family that could mean a lot. Social issues are not as prominent in my life because they don’t affect me nearly as much as they do some. To me, most social issues are more based on beliefs rather than what is going on in my actual life so even though they are important, they are kind of just background noise in my life.

Chapter 5 Blog Comments

I commented on Melissa Ray, Brandi Lively, and Ashley Pelfrey.

Chapter 5: Civil Rights

1. The issue of race - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of racial discrimination?  Why or how so?

Following the civil war, slavery was ended but it still did little to reduce discrimination. People in southern states found ways to go around the law and still discriminate. Blacks still could not vote, own land, or sometimes could not even leave plantations. The government did step in with the Civil Rights Act of 1866, but discrimination was still a problem. Organizations such as the Ku Klux Clan killed black people and were convicted, but their cases were later overturned. I don’t think the issue was necessarily that the government wasn’t trying, but that they weren’t doing enough by allowing loop holes in the law. Since then, the government has been doing more and more to try to make our country equal by breaking down voting barriers, public discrimination, and private discrimination. Though discrimination will always exist, I believe the government has made great progress in trying to eliminate it as much as possible.

2. The issue of gender - same question as #1.

In the earliest days of America, women had no rights independent of their husbands. They couldn’t own property, sign contracts, or keep their own wages. Women were only allowed to vote if they lived in New Jersey and met property requirements, but even that privilege was eventually taken away. Women such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton lobbied for the right for women to vote. Still, it wasn’t until the elections of 1920 were women all over the country allowed to exercise the right. Still, there are many other areas that women were treated differently in. Congress passed the Equal Pay Act in 1963, prohibiting employers from paying different wages on the account of gender. Even now, there are hot button issues such as women in the frontlines of battle. Though it isn’t something I would ever want to do, I’m sure there are women who are very capable and willing to fight for our country. Keeping that in mind, gender discrimination is on the downfall, but our government still has a way to go.

3. The issue of sexual orientation - same question as #1 and #2.

Of the three issues discussed in this blog, sexual orientation is definitely relevant to the current times and is ongoing. Up until 2003, many states banned any type of homosexual activity. Homosexuals in the military have also been an extremely controversial issue. Prior to the Clinton administration, simply having homosexual tendencies was enough to be discharged. Congress enacted the don’t ask, don’t tell policy, which changed the policy to only discharging for engaging in homosexual relationships or discussing sexual orientation. Current U.S. President Obama has asked Congress to change the policy so that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals can serve openly in the military. With those issues somewhat moving forward, gay marriage is still a big controversy. Without being legally married, the ban causes gay couples to be ineligible for rights that come along with being a married couple such as visitation rights, the right to make health-care decisions for a spouse, inheritance rights, and tax benefits. Many people look at the issue based on religious beliefs, which is understandable, but in a country that has taken so many steps toward equality, it seems unfair to prevent homosexuals to have the same rights as anyone else. Based on the idea of equality, I believe the government is trying to take steps in the right direction, but at the moment there is so much controversy that it is hard to do so without also creating violence.

Chapter 4 Blog Comments

I commented on Amber Waters, Brad Richardson, and Albert Munoz.

Chapter 4: Civil Liberties

1. Freedom of Speech: How important is it? Does the freedom go "too far"? What areas of speech should not be protected?

The First Amendment declares that “Congress shall pass no law abridging the freedom of speech”. Even though this statement seems pretty straight forward, it is important for congress to allow individual freedoms, while still protecting our country and its citizens. In some ways, I do believe the freedom goes too far, because there are people out there who would purposely abuse the freedom. A person could be collaborating with terrorists or giving out confidential information and claim that they have the freedom to say whatever they want to. Because of those types of situations, it is important that the government adopt policies such as the clear and present danger test, the fighting words doctrine, laws against hate speech, etc. While we should be able to communicate and express our opinions, we should not have the liberty to cause harm to others by doing so.

2. Freedom of Religion: Is separation of church and state necessary? Why or why not?

In 1802, Thomas Jefferson called for a “wall of seperation” between church and state. At the time it was an extrememly hot issue because Britain had put an order in place that declared the Anglican Church the “official” church. This was very controversial and lead to much rebellion. I think the seperation of church and state is very necessary in order to keep peace. There are so many people with so many different ideas and opinions in America that it would be impossible to keep everyone happy. Even if the majority of people in an area practiced the same religion, there would likely still be at least some people who do not believe the same and it wouldn’t be fair to force it upon them. Keeping church and state seperated is necessary in order to be fair and keep everyone peaceful.

3. Criminal Procedure: Are defendant's rights crucial to our system of government? Why or why not? Many argue that defendants have too many rights - do you agree? Why or why not?

Defendant’s rights are extremely crucial to our system of government. In our society, there are a lot of people who do wrong and deserve to be punished but at the same time there are a lot of people who are accused of doing wrong and really haven’t. Because of this, it is imparative that we have established laws that protect the innocent and that keep the guilty from being abused by the system. This may just be because I am kind hearted, but I do not think defendants have too many rights. With so much going on in our society today, I think it is important that everyone who is accused of a crime have the ability to stand up for themselves. There are a lot of cases that are more serious than others, but it is only fair to extend the same rights to everyone.

Chapter 3 Comments

I commented on Gabrielle Miller, Amber Waters, and Jessica Armes.

Chaper 3: Federalism

1. Is a strong national government necessary or should the state governments have an equal share of power?  Why?

A strong national government is necessary, but the Framers feared a national government with too much power could lead to tyranny. Because of this, a system was established that divides governmental powers, rather than concentrating them in a central government. The Framers decided that Federalism was the best choice for America. The national government and state governments split power so that no one system has too much power over the other. The states derive their authority from the people and reserve powers not outlined to the national government in the Constitution. Both the state and national governments have their own authorities, but in areas that authority is shared, the national government reigns supreme. This system works out because it creates a mostly even distribution of power and keeps conflict to a minimum.

 

2. National power increased during the Great Depression but then power began to shift back to the states (somewhat) during the Reagan administration?  Why did that happen and is that shift appropriate?

During the Great Depression, the people of America wanted the national government to step in and get the economy back in shape. Federal intervention in manufacturing, farming, and many other areas that were normally run by state governments, helped stimulate the economy. This continued beyond World War II with aid to public schools and health care coverage to the poor and elderly. The opposition to national power began with the onset of the civil rights movement. Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the idea of New Federalism, the shifting of power back to the states. He famously said that “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem”. Block grants set fewer restrictions on spending. In 1994, the Contract with America limited powers of the federal government. After September 11, 2001, national power expanded once again, including the No Child Left Behind Act, prescription drug plans, and national standards for driver’s licenses. The shift in power really has a lot to do with whatever trials are going on in the nation at the time. Sometimes states need help financially and sometimes the national government gets too powerful. The shift is appropriate because it goes along with the needs of the country at the time.

 

3. Education stirs much discussion relating to the issue of federalism.  Should the national government regulate education or is it a matter best left to state and local governments?  Why?

The Founders considered educated citizens essential to the survival of the democracy, and they were correct. Educated people are more able to hold leaders accountable and pay attention to the overall responsiveness of the government. Seeing this to be true, it is extremely important to take every step possible to increase the availability and quality of education. Education is included in the reserve powers left to state and local governments. Funding for elementary and secondary education is mostly based on local property taxes, with some assistance from state governments. The federal government only funds about eight percent of all elementary and secondary spending. Because of the disparities in the wealth of communities, the quality of education that is afforded also varies a lot across different areas. I believe the national government should provide more for those areas so that all children have equal opportunities. There are issues with some federal programs, such as No Child Left Behind, because the government sets higher standards for schools across the nation, yet does not provide the funds to do so.  This causes a lot of confusion and controversy. If the national government wants to step in and make our nation more educated they should also take steps to make it happen.

Chapter 2 Blog Comments

I commented on the Chapter 2 blogs of Ashley Pelfrey, Albert Munoz, and Mackenzie King.

Chapter 2- The Constitution

1. Why is the United States Constitution stronger than the Articles of Confederation? How would the history of the United States have been different if the country still operated under the Articles?
         

The Articles of Confederation were the original governing authority of the United States. Because of the way the colonists were treated by Great Britain, they were still weary of the thought of being controlled by a nation. The Articles of Confederation emphasized freedom from any kind of national authority, which made governing the nation very difficult. Congress could not place taxes on citizens or products directly; it could only request revenues from the states. Because of this, the nation had no way to pay its debts and economic growth was coming to a standstill. The Constitution helped solve these problems by establishing judicial and executive branches, outlining a system of checks and balances, finding a way to represent the states proportionally and all in all put a stronger structure behind the country. If the country still operated under the Articles, it would be much harder for the states to negotiate with one another and I believe there would be a lot more disagreement between citizens concerning major issues.

 

2.  The first three articles of the Constitution establish/define the three branches of government - read these articles. What did you learn that you didn't already know about our government?

Congress, or the legislative branch, is established in article I of the Constitution. Congress is divided into two groups: the Senate and the House of Representatives. These two groups were created so that no one institution had too much power. Congress is responsible for making laws, collecting taxes, providing for the common defense, declaring war, and many other issues. Article II established the executive branch, which consists of the president and the vice president. One thing I didn’t know is that even though the president is commander in chief, only Congress can declare war. This ensures that power is evenly distributed and no one person can make major decisions. Article III of the Constitution established the judicial branch of our government. The Supreme Court and federal courts make up the judicial branch and are in charge of interpreting the laws.

 

3. How important is the Supreme Court ruling in Marbury v. Madison and why?

In the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison, the court granted itself the authority of judicial review. Judicial review gives the Supreme Court the authority to strike down any law passed by Congress if the Court believes the law violates the Constitution.  The idea was that if a law conflicts with the constitution, either the law itself takes authority over the Constitution, or the Constitution reigns supreme over the law. The authority that is given to the Supreme Court by the power of judicial review is extremely important because the Constitution was agreed upon by the people. The Constitution is the fundamental structure of our government and it is important that the Supreme Court makes sure that no laws are allowed to undermine that.


4. Looking at the United States government today, is it more like what the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists envisioned and why?

When ratifying conventions began meeting over the Constitution, two groups were formed. Those who supported the Constitution called themselves Federalists. Those who opposed the Constitution became known as the Antifederalists. The Antifederalists feared that under the new Constitution, the national government would consolidate its authority over the state governments because national law was supreme over state law. The Federalists argued that if the people were sovereign, then they could split lawmaking authority between the national and state governments as they saw fit.  In today’s government with issues such as gun control on the front page of EVERYTHING, it seems that the people are seeing our government more like the Antifederalists did. People are afraid that national law will take their rights away. It seems kind of like history is repeating itself.


 

 

I'm Jessica :)

            Hello all! My name is Jessica Tucker. I live in Oliver Springs, Tennessee and have lived in the same place my entire life. I have been at Roane State since I graduated in 2008 from Oliver Springs High School. I was originally interested in nursing, but after spending time in the program I realized that what I really want to do is be a teacher. It was a difficult decision to make, but I am SO SO happy I did! I am very excited to be a teacher! I have a boyfriend of almost four years, Anthony, and a four year old dachshund named Grady. I look forward to learning in this class and plan to work my hardest to stay focused and get an "A"!!!

Me and Grady when he was a puppy! :)

Anthony and I  :)