Lobbyist and Interest groups

Interest groups influence government policies by lobbying for support by providing funds and support to political campaigns. By supporting politicians and their campaigns they seek to influence policies to support their own interests .some groups have grown so powerful that economics actually “dominate politics”. Some of these groups are so strong and have so much public support that they can influence policy by threatening politicians to get them voted off. Well-funded interest groups make use of litigation to get laws overturned. Meaning that those groups who have money can hire lawyers who can fight for them and get policies changed in their favor.

Interest groups use different tactics to push their individual agendas many will use their financial support as a toll to get politicians to support their agendas, however they ill also use their financial support as a threat. They threaten politician to stop financial support if they can not get the politician to support them. These groups also offer the support of their members if politicians help them with their policies or threaten to remove their member s votes if the politicians do not help. Promised voter support from groups has become very influential in the way politicians push for policies as votes can sometimes be more important than money.

The support and influence that interest groups have on voters can be an extremely strong tool to be used in favor or against politicians in order to gain their support. 

Judiciary

The American judicial system was formed by emulating English law,  a system of “Common Law” in which judges do not just read the law and decide cases based strictly on what is written but based on its individual merits as well as their interpretation of the law.

In the American legal system the Judges are charged with interpreting the written law using their own “judgement” as well as incorporating historical cases which is known as “legal precedent”. As judges are not to go against cases that have already been decided they must consider past cases prior to making decisions and interpreting existing laws. The influence of past decisions has very strong influence in judge’s decisions in cases being considered still today. I partially agree with this particular system as we should not be reinventing the wheel, however circumstances and situations change. Times also change and if we as a society continue to make judicial decisions based on past rulings there may be cases in which judges could send innocent people to jail, or even let guilty people go free based on decisions made with an out dated point of view. In order to consider previous decisions while continuing to maintain their ability to pass judgment over the case at hand judges should be able not only to interpret the written law, use “legal precedent”, use their judgment, consider the case on its own merits, but also use all the new technology that is available.

In our judicial system we also afford our judges the ability to make or accept plea deals in order to alleviate or reduce the amount of time that cases may take. Due to the fact that interpretation of law can be time consuming and may cause back logs in our court systems. This allows the courts to secure a timely resolution therefore allowing the court system to see more cases and be “more effective”.  Our judicial system also differentiates the different types of crimes whether criminal or civil. I believe this separation allows for a more specific procedure that will allow judges as well as lawyers to better serve their offices as well as their clients.

Although many conservatives may oppose the current way in which judges interpret law this is exactly the way the system was designed to work in our Constitution.  Our system of law if interpreted the way it was designed is meant to give all citizens equal rights and equal treatment in a court of law. Any one facing a court must be afforded what is known as “due process” which basically means that they must follow an established process or set of rules prior to making decisions that may lead to prison terms. This due process insures that our citizen’s rights are not being violated.

We may not have a perfect system however if our judges follow the established laws we should be able to afford our citizens as fair a system as is possible while maintaining civil order. Our judicial branch is charged with protecting the rights of all Americans including minority groups as well as the poor which in turn should allow all to get justice not just those in the majority, privileged, or “upper class” groups of our society.

The Executive Branch/ the President

In this section of our course I feel that my blog is going to be very similar to what I discussed in my Congress blog. The President as well as the House of Representatives, and the Senate rely strongly on the relationship, or how they are perceived. According to Richard Neustadt as was quoted by our professor the president power is limited to a certain extent by the checks and balances system however this power can be enhanced by several factors. One being public, and peer perception as well as  strong support from his party and the way in which the president can use his power to persuade others to support his policies. In order for a president to be able to effectively perform his job he must have the abilities shown above. The president must be able to effectively communicate to others his views and persuade them to agree with such views in order to further his agenda. The president must also be viewed by the people as an effective administrator of power and execute with knowledge the office which he has been elected to enforce.

As we have seen in our most recent elected president, a president can impact his office tremendously by carrying out his responsibilities according to his personal agenda. We have had the opportunity to see firsthand how the system of checks and balances works. We have seen how many policies have been enforced by a majority who support the president despite the will of the people. We have also seen how the will of the president has been suppressed by a majority from an opposing party. The current president has been challenged to carry out many of his policies even in cases in which we have seen increased support by his party.  We have seen cases, in which the president has been persuasive enough to have House, or Senate members cross party lines, and we have also seen cases in which he has not been persuasive enough to get the support of his own party. The power that the president is been privileged to have by being elected to represent our country is not limitless, however if said president can gain the support of his peers as well as that of the people they can influence our country and our laws in a great way.

As our nation has grown Congress recognized that the office of president can be a very power office and if left unchallenged could become more powerful than even Congress. In 1947 an amendment was implemented and later ratified 1951 in which term limitations were implemented. This amendment insure that the office of president could not be held for more than two terms by any sitting president, which would limit the amount of years that any president could serve to eight unless they were a sitting vice president in mid- term  when he became president.  Through the years we have seen how the parties that are able to gain the peoples support have been able not only to win the presidential race but also the House and the Senate. We have also seen how the way they deal with foreign policy has been a major factor in how the people perception of their effective has been. Throughout the years many different factors have been influential during election but foreign policy continues to be one of the deciding factors for the American people.

Gerrymandering /Congress

While reading this assignment and the professors blog one can’t help but to see how all our readings intersect at some point. While reading this particular assignment I kept going back to whether our government has too much power or just the right amount. As was the case during the time of President Abraham Lincoln we could see how with President Bush how during times of war people are willing to afford the government powers that would normally not be accepted. During the civil war Lincoln had unprecedented amounts of powers. This was bought on by the need of the people to be able to launch an effective war effort. We also saw the same dynamics taking place after the terrorist attacks of 911 the American people were willing to surrender certain rights in order to feel secure.

It seems that the political climate has not changed in our entire history, although we have system of checks and balances there is always a struggle of power. The House of Representatives is constantly trying to be stronger than the senate, the Senate is trying to be stronger than the House of Representatives, and both the Senate and the House are trying to be stronger than the executive branch of government. It seems the system that had been created to insure a system of checks and balances b also provided an avenue in which parties can strategically put themselves in a position of advantage by securing either or both the Senate or the House.

It seems that in the most recent political environment we can see how the original intent of Congress is being implemented; we can see how Congress is being used as the most power branch of our government. It has proven to be effective to block policies that our president has tried to implement as well as enforce those policies that they are in favor of. In recent years we have seen how if the House and Senate are aligned with the political party of the sitting president they have had the power to appoint positions such as Federal Judges despite the opposition of the other parties and even against the popular vote.

Congress is designed to do the will of the people however in many cases it seems that it does the will of the party. Whether the democratic or republican party is in power Congress has been designed to represent the people and is charged to represent the people in local issues within their district or states. With representation changing depending on the amount of people in their respective states one can see how parties can secure representation depending on parties in their respective states. In cases in which an issues is more conservative when population increases in these states it gives these conservative states advantages during elections.

With gerrymandering the House has the given power to draw new lines which in turn can afford them advantages during elections depending on what party these districts may support.

Citizenship and Social Class

According to T.H. Marshal in order for any person or group to achieve equal rights the judicial system must play a very important role, they are the one main element needed for any one groups right to be enforced and implemented. As per marshal equal rights is only achieved when any group or person can execute political “power”, in other words to have a voice and a vote. He also that in order for a group or individual to enjoy equal rights they must be part of a major group and be participant of its legislations and enjoy all benefits whether social economic and be able to enjoy the benefits of being such a member. 

Interestingly enough while T.H. Marshal was attempting to trace back to see the birth of citizenship he broke citizenship down into three major groups civil, political, and social. He attempted to show that civil rights came first, then political, rights and later social.  Marshal stated that social rights were somewhat unaddressed until the development and implementation of public education. It seems that T.H. Marshal uncovered that the social aspect of equality was not advancing at the same rate as the civil and political aspect. It seems that social equality was not being addressed with the same sense of urgency as were the other two aspects.

According to T.H. Marshall Citizenship is a Status that is bestowed upon members of society and whom enjoy the same status of equal rights and duties as other members of this society. Meaning that Citizenship is a “guarantee” that you will be treated equally as other members of your society and you have the same obligations as other members.  According to Marshal there is no universal principle of what Citizenship should look like but ideally citizenship should   reflect a measure of equality in which all Citizens enjoy the same privileges and responsibilities. In a society of equal rights there should not be differences in the way an individual is treated because of race, or gender. Unfortunately this sense of equality does not carry over when it pertains to class equality. According to Marshal Class equality is very similar to Citizenship as they are both based on a set of values and ideals and as such may bring forth conflicts between opposing principles. To my understanding class and Citizenship are both based on principles that are imposed or implemented by those who have more power and will be opposed by those who disagree. Citizenship should reflect the principles of all its citizens and not just those who have power.

Citizenship at its earliest form was designed as a principle of equality, however as is usually present when men attempt to empower themselves over others equal rights take a back seat to the desires of others to be in control. Capitalism was a conduit for separation of classes. As some people began to accumulate fortunes and power separation of classes also grew and this also led to separation of rights.

Federalism

In my opinion Federalism was the attempt of this newly form government to separate itself from the oppressive rulers and country which they had just fled and fought for their freedom from. As they continued to grow and become this new nation it needed to continue to organize itself in in so doing it began to create numerous layers of government. It seems that every time they encountered and issue a different branch or position was born and charged with facing and resolving these issues. By creating these new layers of functioning committees or departments within the government they allowed for a more precise focus and dedicated administration of these issues. It was designed in such a manner that these different layers or agencies would work independently and have as little influence or dependency from other agencies this way they could insure “preservation of liberty”.

While our forefathers were busy creating our constitution which would provide its citizen with rights and responsibilities as well as creating a new form of government for the people and by the people, they were not prepared for the “politics” that it would create. Our forefathers did not anticipate all the division later to be known as partisanship or political parties that this would generate. They did not foresee or anticipate the fact that unknowingly they had created parties and with this came the “lobbyist and the supporters as well as the opposition. The vision was a government that could lead the people that needed to be governed, but little did they know that this was the genesis of something greater “Politics”.

Reality was that those whom were financially well positioned were also to be well positioned in this newly created system. Alexander Hamilton had the foresight to understand that finance and politics are inevitably intertwined.  He understood that politics would be a great influencer in the creating and supporting of any political system.  He also understood that he who had the political power could also have the financial power, and he who had the financial power could also have or influence the financial power. The creation of parties bought along with them the need for financial support in order to support parties and their respective cabinets. Also the need for financial support also created layers of government as the country needed to have a treasury this treasury needed administrators, secretaries and so on. Once again organization created layers and layers created bigger government.

Civil Disobedience

As I was reading this week’s class on “Civil Disobedience” written by Henry David Thoreau. I was personally confronted and challenged by the many times I have complained and have been upset about unfair laws and the implementation of these laws. I have complained, I have shared my opinion with others and yet I have done nothing about it. In recent years there have been many peaceful movements and marches that have taken place that I have agreed with but have not participated or even thought of participating in. Interestingly enough I can tie this part of our course with the earlier piece that talked about imprisonment. The fact that I am worried more about being put in jail by an imperfect, and unfair judicial system than I am about protecting my own rights is really frightening. Being able to peacefully protest unfair practices should not be accompanied by the fear of one going to jail and ruining ones record, as well as possibly affecting their future professional career. I feel strongly about unfair distribution of wealth in our country, the 99% movement, I also feel strongly about many of the immigration issues that have recently affected our society and how unfair these practices are, and I also feel strongly about the me too movement and how for many years this has been a “non- issue” being ignored and pushed aside.

Reading this article by Henry David Thoreau has challenged me to understand that unless we speak out we become part of the problem while we stay silent injustice continues to reign. We must never forget that even though we have elected or appointed politicians and officials to write and enforce the laws as well as represent us we continue to have an opinion and should never surrender the right to express that opinion and fight for our rights. We as citizens of a free democratic society have this right and should protect it. Those that came before us and continue to stand up and fight for the rights of themselves and others have taken many risks to attempt to bring forth a fair implementation of what are our civil rights as citizens of this great nation. This paper highlights many champions that fought for many relevant issues in today’s society. Issues like women’s rights which apparently have been “resolved”. Champions like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony and even Frederick Douglass. However we continue to see unfair practice in the work place from unfair wages to disproportionate promotion opportunities.  In recent days the #me too movement has shined a light on many problems that women have women have faced for years and without a person to stand up and fight for their rights this would have remained covered.

Without civil rights leaders who continue to stand up and fight we would not be able to enjoy the rights that we as citizens should enjoy. Most of us and yes I include myself are not willing to stand up and fight. We are always ready to complain and wine but this will not bring forth change, standing up and being heard will. As a veteran I have been trained to follow orders without questioning them, however as a citizen I should question unfair practice and implement the rights offered to me by the Constitution and the democratic political system that governs our country.

Another stab at the constitution

In this article we can see how the “Constitution” is not perfect, at the time our forefathers wrote this constitution the political system that existed was very different. It was a new country with new issues and problems. I feel that the constitution was written by men with vested interest in protecting their own rights more so than those of the newly created nation. Times change and so should the laws that govern our country. In the centuries that have followed our country has grown and evolved and so should our constitutional rights. Fortunately the constitution whether planned or by accident has provides us several methods/ loop holes as discussed in the article that allows our elected politicians to make changes. One of the things that I really agree with is the way that these loop holes allow changes but has many safe guards in place to prevent abuse of power or changes by governing political parties that may give them an unfair ability to make these changes. The fact that it includes the house, senate and legislature can help us feel that we the people are being represented.

I agree with the commentary by Jamal Greene that there should be a term limit for federal Judges; I have often seen judges on television that without actually seeing them perform their tasks have made question their ability to see things clearly in today’s day and age. Just as in the case of the constitution, laws must change with time and the ability of an older judges to change his or her opinion along with the laws may be difficult. In addition as stated in the commentary if a judge is allowed to continue in his or her position as long as their behavior is acceptable they may be inclined to align themselves politically while making decision. As they are appointed by the president their “allegiance may be to the president and not to the country.

 I also agree with the piece by Rachel Barkow concerning our prison system. I personally believe that the cookie cutter system that we have in place has created an industry that relies on our judicial system to maintain it well stocked. The prison system has become one of the most lucrative businesses in our country. By having mandatory sentences, and interest groups lobbying for even harsher laws and longer prison terms the system is simply creating a factory of prisoners to supply demand. By our judicial system not viewing each case individually it is simply disallowing the fair representation that is our rights in this “land of the free.

As the system has allowed these groups the ability to push for longer terms and harsher laws we continue to deviate from the fact that prison is designed to punish according to the crime and rehabilitate. As longer sentences we lose sight of rehabilitation and it becomes an issue of housing, guarding, and feeding which is where it has becomes a business.

The Constitution of the United States was written to protect the rights of the citizens of this newly formed nation. As I stated earlier I feel that it was written to protect the rights of a certain group and not all. However I feel that as we have grown and continue to grow as a nation this constitution should change and grow as well.   The “constitution” should change as long as it can change to protect the rights of all and not just the rights of those in power, of those who are politically connected. It should represent us all and protect us all. By making these changes and disallowing the federal judges to serve for life we can change with the time without violating its citizen’s rights.

The Constitution and the federalist

As our country was beginning to take shape and was creating its own identity, the thirteen first states operated more like thirteen independent countries. They were working as individual entities with the power to enforce their own laws and have their own militia, some even had their own form of currency. This made for an unorganized government which was viewed by many as a week. The government as it stood was unable to maintain order effectively, these conditions led the thirteen states to meet in 1787-88 and organize a convention which would lead them to write a document that would help them align closer to what is an organized government. This document is what we know as the constitution and is designed to identify the powers and responsibilities of the government to the governed.

Although as per this article the constitution has many flaws it has been instrumental in marking a transition in “modern” society as it has allowed the people to achieve a standard in which government and laws are not decided by a divine decree but by the people reaching a general consensus.  One quote which I really liked in this reading is that “we have rights because we agree to have rights”. This to me indicates that when we the people agree on something there is no telling what we can achieve. We agreed to have rights and we fought for freedom and unity.

By understanding the different branches of government we can more clearly understand why and how our system of checks and balances exist. We can see how this system of three different branches can prevent any one body or party from having too much power. By creating a system that promotes separation of power we have laid out a frame work that has been utilized by many other governments in the world in order maintain a system of control. This system is designed to have all three branches of government work together in order to pass and approve laws and although though this sometimes leads to ineffective government it is imperative to have a mechanism in place in order to prevent tyranny and governmental abuse by having too much power. Although this system is designed to control abuse of power it has in many cases become an obstacle for legislation as it has become an instrument of partisan muscle. The different political parties have used this system to prevent the other parties from passing laws and legislation which in turn creates an atmosphere of division.

After reading the explanation about the second article which deals with the executive branch, I was able to better understand what happened in our most recent election.

 I truly never understood that the electoral college was designed in such a way that it gave the power to the states during presidential elections and not to the people. I have tried to understand what the electoral college was for many years, especially after this most recent election. I now have a much better understanding as did not even know where to get this information. I am better able to understand why our current president despite the fact that he was not the most favored or popular candidate for the majority of the American people was able to walk away with the win. I am not sure if this is something that could be changed but I do feel this is part of the article that should be amended. If we have designed a system of checks and balances, how is it possible that this issue has gone on unchecked for so long.  I believe that all states should be justly represented but above all the will of the people should decide who the next president of our country should be not the political parties of any given state.

Government is designed to be led by the people and for the federal government to be able to lead and deal with individual states while continuing to work as a united nation. This specific form of government is designed to keep us functioning as one country versus many different countries working independently. We are not a perfect country by any means but the systems that are being implemented are there to protect the rights of the people being governed by the government elected

Trans-national America

Trans- National America is an article that hit very close to home. As an immigrant born outside of the United States I have experienced the pressures of being different and not being considered an American, although as a Puerto Rican I was born an American citizen never the less as a Hispanic I have been looked at as an immigrant who needs to be Americanized. As I read the article I was able to commiserate with the Europeans that came to this country following the initial colonization.

While reading this article I felt that I could quote almost this entire article as I saw many of the negative experiences I myself have encountered. While in the military I lived through moments in which I felt I was allowed to be myself as long I was able to fit into the mold that had been prepared for me. As I read the part about “forcibly assimilating to the Anglo –Saxon tradition which they unquestionably label American” I was immediately transported to basic training in which we were all being “forcibly” transformed from civilians to soldiers however in my case I was also being turned into an “American”. 

The America that I have grown up in is an America of diversity. It is a country in which the contributions of the immigrants that came before us and continue to come have made great contributions to who we have become as a nation and have enriched us culturally. Unfortunately as we see in this article and we have seen in virtually every aspect of live, the dominant group will always attempt to maintain power by imposing their way of life upon the weaker or newer group. The great “melting pot” that America is has a distinction that distinct as it has although most immigrants have assimilated to the American culture and expectations put upon them still while maintaining their own national identity. Although this is not what “our founders” had intended this is the result of the merging of different nationalities and cultures.

We continue to see in our own communities that as time moves forward and we continue to assimilate the American way of life, we also continue to show pride and allegiance to our country of origin. As we as a nation continue to Americanize we also continue to create our own clusters in our own communities. Our Identity becomes that of a hyphenated Latinos, Arabs, Europeans, Etc. I am an American Latino, I am proud to be an American however I am very proud of being an American and even prouder of having served my country in the United States armed forces.

America's View on Governmental Power in the United States

I chose to write about the article concerning America's view on governmental power.

As I read this article I could not help but see the irony in the quote I chose to incorporate in my blog. The American people were very happy with the amount of governmental involvement while we were going through a very difficult time in our history. As it is with all countries and cultures when things are going okay we want to be left alone to govern and rule ourselves. However as things get difficult we immediately need and want someone to get involved, take control, or take over. “Americans were least likely to be concerned about the government's power in the years immediately after 9/11, but half or more since 2005 have said it has too much power”.

 As the article states most people want a less intrusive government, however as we can see in the article after the terrorist attacks of the world trade center, and the Pentagon Americans were very eager and happy to have the government take charge and agreed with the aggressive form of involvement that was taking place in our country. The government had put certain laws in place that most agreed with due to the circumstances but as time went on many opinions have changed. Americans were very happy to support the president when he decided to send our young men and women and our country to war but as time went on they began to protest the same war they had fully supported. They supported tough community policing until it began to affect them personally.

Although the view on the of amount power by the government is extremely partisan, meaning most commonly the opinion depends on which of the parties is in power. If my party is in power then the amount of power is adequate, however if the opposite party is in control then the power is too much. Once again we can see that our opinion on the way political power or the execution of this power by the government is greatly influenced by how it affects the individual at the time he or she is being questioned.  The amount of power that the government has is very subjective. Most people want the perfect balance. We want the government present only when needed, but we also want to be left alone.