Bills from My Classmates

• S:1853: Postal Service Protection Act 2011 -- Kathleen
• S:1119: Trash Free Sea Act -- Peter
• S:1510: Clean Energy Financing Act of 2011 -- Hope

The bill I will use in my letter to my constituteint will be either, S:3621: Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011, or S:1108: 10 Million Dollar Solar Roofs Act of 2011.

Budget Puzzle: Solved!

• I saved $226 billion for 2015, and for 2030 I saved $95 billion
• 75% of the reducing came from tax increases 
• 25% of the reducing came from spending cuts
• In reflection, I would have thought this would be easy, but for each and every change I made I had to think about who it would affect, was it necessary, how are people going to react to this, is it worth it? Of all the choices that I made, few were easy, but the ones that were easy included: earmarks no more, carbon tax, millionaire tax, and reducing our nuclear arsenal. The hardest choices were ones like national sales tax, reducing troops overseas.
• I think that if i tried to put any of these proposals through congress it would not be close to working, I mean  why would we even be talking about reducing the debt if there was an agreeable way of easily reducing it. Maybe some of my ideas would go through, but the Congress we have now is divided and partisanship weighs heavy on every decision. And even if there were any compromise ( if there were we would have seen it already!) then it most likely would not be enough to reduce both the debt and the deficit.

Electoral College Reform: The Velvet Coup (Yes)

Facts:

1. Hillary Clinton voiced her opposition of the Electoral College saying, "I am going to try to do what I can to make clear that the popular vote, the will of the people, should be followed."
2.  The author believes that the people or citizens of our country are powerless to do away with the Electoral College.
3. The author thinks Bush v. Gore is an example of how the Electoral College can really change things even if the popular vote is won.
4. Around 700 amendments have been proposed that would reform or abolish the Electoral College.
5. Reformation of the Electoral College would mean that in essence the grip of federalism would be loosened and the people would vote as citizens of the United States, not a a citizen of one state or another, but all under common ground and for one, larger, purpose.
6. Abolishing the Electoral College would allow citizens to "reshape political institutions."
7. There would be a need to campaign in more than just the swings states if there were no Electoral College.
8. By arguing against the Electoral College, Al Gore, would change the campaign process. Campaigners would now consider every last vote, from anywhere and everywhere that they could possible obtain.
9. Gore would be against class war-fare, because of his position against the Electoral College and because of the state that he was the Senator of, Tennessee.
10. The author believes its time to reform and readjust the Constitution for our changing times.

Questions:

1. Do the original arguments for the Electoral College still apply in toady's time and to our culture?
2. Would the election of the President be pure democracy with out the Electoral College?
3. How would you go about changing the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College?
4. Is abolishing the Electoral College completely right or left, Republican or Democrat, or is it more of a personal opinion?
5. If Al Gore and George Bush switched positions would they be arguing for the other side or did Al Gore dislike the Electoral College before the 2000 election?

Terry Gross' Fresh Air: Interpreting the Constitution in the Digital Era

Facts/Details:

1. Constitution 3.0, a collection of essays of future technological developments that stress the Constitution and shows how the current Constitution is out-dated.
2. The Supreme Court is currently dealing with a case on the legality of the Police force placing a GPS tracking device on a car without a warrant. The biggest question is what is the difference of tracking for 10 to 100 miles compared to tracking for a month.
3. The GPS tracking case is possible one of the biggest steps or cases involving privacy, that our time faces.
4. Louis Brandeis, considered a visionary of both rights of privacy and rights of speech, realized, in a case from his own time, that it is not necessary to breaking into or have physical trespassing for the creation of an unreasonable search to occur.
5. Jeff Rosen believes that there is a necessity for translation of the Constitution. In his essay, in Constitution 3.0, he shows a story of a world at the time of 2025, where people have the ability to know what you are doing and where you are 24/7, via security camera and things like such.
6. The Fourth Amendment only prohibits the government from unreasonable search and seizure, meaning that a case against a company, like Facebook, would be very different compare to a case against the government.
7. Senator Ron Wyden, a democrat from Oregon, and Senator Josh Chaffetz, republican from Utah, proposed a bipartisan bill dealing with privacy rights and GPS tracking. The bill is called Geo-location Privacy and Surveillance bill, and it was created to regulate the global positioning devices used by the government.
8. Google Maps became controversial when it started taking 'street view' picture, because it is a possible invasion of privacy. In Germany the decided that they would not let Google because of their strict laws on data gathering.
9.  The lines regarding privacy, adhering or breaking, are very different between American and Europe, as the two have very different policies on data gathering.
10. In France the French Data Privacy Commissioner has said that there should be a legal right to "escape your past" and the content of your person, on the internet, its called the "right to oblivion".

Questions:

1.  As Rosen mentioned that Facebook is a private company, can Facebook be regulated by the Constitution?
2. In Jeff Rosen's Open World essay, what can we do about these private companies and corporations and can they be regulated/ held accountable if a corporation  can be viewed as an individual?
3. Can the existing Constitution deal with such matters like ones in Constitution 3.0?
4. Excluding the case, judge, precedents,etc. What can we do about internet privacy in general?
5. How far, privacy wise, are we able to stretch the Constitution or how far has the American government stretched the Constitution to fit new ideas, technology, etc?

Political Cartoon #3 12/12

Why are there coffins being dumped?

How could the higher ups of Dover AFB allow the discarding of soldiers remains to be in a landfill?

What should we do about the situation, should we pay the families for the disgraces, should the higher ups be fined or reprimanded?

Pending Bills: A Closer Look

S:1108: 10 Million Dollar Solar Roofs Act of 2011
facts/details:

1. The bill directs the Secretary of Energy to establish a program that provides competitive grants to local communities.
2. It uses the funds to also pay for training for use of the solar energy systems.
3. The bill allows the grants to be used for the development of solar energy projects and programs for the use of new strategies.
4. The goal is to establish solar energy systems in no less than 10 million properties by December 31, 2020.
5. Its purpose is to use funds for more standardized, efficient, and less expensive ways of providing solar powered energy systems.

Questions:

1. Will the program be active in all states?
2. Can a lone citizen apply for a grant?
3. With the money come from the Department of Energy or will it come from another source?
4. Will the amount of money or reformation of this bill be determined by the success of this bill, if so how?

HR: 3621: Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011

Facts:

1. The bill requires service providers,search engines, network providers, and internet ad services, to take "preventive measures" against pirated materials/ sites.
2. The bill allows service providers,search engines, network providers, internet ad services, domain registries, and domain resistors, to be "immune to liability" meaning they can take no blame, but this is only if they obey the act.
3. Permits entities to refuse sites that "endanger public health".
4. It expands the current criminal copyright offences to include: copyrighted works by digital transmission, and works intended for commercial use.
5. It expands the criminal offences of trafficking inherently "dangerous" goods which includes: counterfeit drugs and goods falsely identified as meeting military standard.
6. Requires Secretary of State and Secretary of Commerce to appoint the "intellectual" property attache to the assigned US embassy or diplomatic mission in a country in each demographic region covered by the Department of State.

Questions:

1. What happens to the sites like YouTube that oppose this bill, will they be held liable?
2. What does this bill say about dealing with foreign sites out of the control of the US government?
3. How many congressmen are in support of this bill (are they the same guys who made tomato paste a vegetable) ?
4. Does Congress realize that this will basically "ruin" the internet as we know it because the internet is for the most part people sharing things as in music, pictures, etc?

Lessons Learned from FDR

Lessons:

1. A great start: When beginning a presidency the President needs to make a strong push to show both Congress and the American citizens that they mean business. Right at the beginning of his first term as President, FDR came out with the "New Deal" which was one of the biggest economic reforms our country has ever seen.
2. Necessary risks: FDR, during his presidency, took many risks that could have proved to be dangerous for the economy and the country. Many plans within the " New Deal " were risky and could have possible made the situation worse, instead of becoming better. But the risks became necessary as seen in the huge rise in GDP, the drop in Income Equality, and the drop in unemployment.
3. Isolation: Though many people disagree isolationism has its benefits. With FDR this is seen in WW II where he refused to join the war, even though he thought that the US needed to be the leader of the "peace-loving nations". By doing this he also held true to the American people, who did not want America to be involved.
4. Term limit: Even though most Americans would have voted for FDR a fifth time, it showed that even the government should not be run by a single ideology or person, who could possible not address issues that another candidate would have addressed.
5. Lastly a good Judgement: Roosevelt had brought the United States through the war, though he did not live to see it's end, his decisions were very key in  providing the best results possible with the least amount of damage to the US. As seen in the fact that the USA was one of the only nations in the world to come out with a higher standard of living than at the start.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt#cite_note-80

http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch22.htm

http://www.gvsu.edu/hauenstein/franklin-roosevelt-as-a-leader-130.htm

http://www.biography.com/people/franklin-d-roosevelt-9463381

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009010206/forgotten-math-pre-wwii-new-deal-saw-fastest-drop-unemployment-rate-american-h

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009020603/fdr-failed-myth

Campaign Ads: What Works the Best?

• One of the first techniques I noticed was the word "change", it was used mostly by the party that was not in office. As seen in multiple ads, the word change was used if the economy or US foreign relations were bad.

• Jimmy Carter South: http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1976
• Gerald Ford Change:http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1976

• Another really big tactic is blame, blaming other politicians, especially the President before. The tatic usually involves the candidate saying that they would fix mistakes made by others.
• John Kerry "Mistakes were Made (Web)":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2004
• Barack Obama "This Year": http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008
• Out of the Party, as in the candidate speaks of being outside of the party and working for the voter, you, and not there party.
• Adlai Stevenson "Peace is Non-Partisan":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1956
• John McCain "Original Maverick":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008
• Speak of Family, show that your an American! Show the American people that you are not just the candidate, but a family person who care blah blah blah. It gets the attention because it warm the heart of the people.
• George Bush "Family/ Children":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1988
• Also a major factor is the tone or attitude of the commercial itself. It can "shed" light on a situation or scandal that involves one of the candidate. The darker and more serious ads tend to be about our problems, while the lighter joyful ads focus on nationalistic ideals.
• John McCain "2013":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008
• The last technique I will discuss is words used, as it seems like there are words used to specifically darken or lighten the mood. Like change, is usually good, while debt makes is bad or less hopeful.
• Ronald Reagan "Inflation":http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1984

1. In battleground states the lack of advertising heavily affects the voters decision.
2. More advertising alone will not produce better results, there is a need of policy and ideology advertising.
3. The regulation of campaign finance would equal the bias causing a better "fair" vote. 

Electoral College Reform: Should the Electoral College Be Abolished?

Facts:

1. The two-party system, that was unseen by all, except George Washington, became the destruction of the Electoral College.
2. The original Electoral College was meant to choose the best candidate, not the Democrat or Republican that won the most states.
3. The arguments for the Electoral College were that it was supposed to balance the powers of the states that were screwed by the Constitution, and confiding the election of the President to Congress.
4. The Electoral College is unbalance in a democratic sense, because each state gets two votes no matter their population.
5. The Electoral College can also choose the "wrong" President, in a sense that it can mess up the President with the most votes by the people, instead of choosing the candidate who won the public opinion, they choose the candidate who gets the most states. Just like the 2000 election, which i think we can all agree Bush wasn't the best President this country has seen.
6. The original Electoral College's logic may seem odd to us, but it was intended that people of a higher intelligence  than the average American citizen at the time, would make the better choice.
7. The Electoral College makes it so the Candidate only needs to visit the swing states, and can ignore the states which vote one way because of this two party system.
8. The electors are had picked and not elected, how ironic.
9. There are laws the require an elector to vote for the candidate who selected them.
10. There have only been 10 electors that have violated their pledge to a candidate.

Questions:

1. Would the author support an new system, party wise, in hopes of balancing the Electoral College?
2. Does the author see the majority of American are unfit to select their President?
3. How would the author changed the system so the 2000 election occurred differently?
4. Are there any reforms that the author would agree with or do they think that the Electoral College is not the problem?
5. How should we, as voters,citizens, etc. feel about the Electoral College?

Political Cartoon #2 12/6

1. How ignorant, according to the cartoon, would you say Fox News is towards proven theories like global climate change?
2. Would you say this is bashing Fox News or pointing out that they do not acknowledge scientific fact?
3. Why are Fox News viewers generally less informed compared to political comedy shows, like The Daily Show or people that do not watch the news?
4. Why does Fox News go against scientific fact such as global climate change, is it because of their own theories?

Link to Polls about viewer knowledge:http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/

Umm not really sure this a great cartoon, but it shows that people can be affected by media for better or worse, and that political bias also affects the media which in turn the people.

Two Articles from Taxpayers For Common Sense

Article 1: The Department of Energy FutureGen Initiative
link: http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?action=issues&proj_id=5002&category=&type=Project

• FutureGen was a multi-million dollar project aimed at building and operating the first coal powered zero emissions power plant.
• The plant was intended to produced hydrogen and electricity from coal, while capturing the harmful CO2 emissions and storing them underground.
•  The first FutureGen project was canceled in 2008 due to the prices in the economic market.
• In 2010 the project was taken up again, but instead of building a whole new plant the $1 billion dollars would go to an oil-burning plant that would be re-designed so the plant had the ability of "advanced oxy-combustion".
• As of now the company Ameren, that supported the porject, is backing out causing a lose in the money being spent on the project.

Article 2: Pet Rock Budgeting

link: http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?action=issues&proj_id=5008&category=&type=Project

• Instead of cutting spending in certain places, the Super Committee is too busy fighting over whose programs gets cut.
• Many things like NASA and earmarks have been discussed within the committee; we already know what happened to NASA, which is odd because it was one of the only extremely popular programs with in the system.
• The defense secretary says that the Pentagon is doing its part, but there is still evidence to show that the defense budget will go up in the next ten years, and not down.
• The members of the committee do not want to touch tax expenditures, at all.
• The article talks of how the committee has not done nearly enough and there should be more cuts and less wasting time.

Death Penalty: The Answers

Questions and Answers:

1. Why do we spend an excessive amount on this system?
• It seems that the only reason we spend the amount is for the death of whoever we are dealing with. As I researched I found that in California alone taxpayers are paying almost 140 million dollars a year for death row. It has also been show and proven many times that it is less expensive to put someone to in jail for Life without Parole. The real reason for the costs are the legal procedures that have to be taken, which are required by the Constitution. Though why would the constitution have so many rules and procedures for death penalty (many because its wrong?). From a study in Los Angeles, it was found that of the last 11 executions in the past 27 years they spent over $250 million on each person. I think the spending is 'justified' by the 'results' but even then when we start comparing the amount of money spent to the actual results we are still left with the need for the reason of this excessive spending.
• Source: https://death.rdsecure.org/article.php?id=42
2. Has there been any Supreme Court cases that have tried to abolish the death penalty?
• Yes there have been many court cases dealing with the death penalty. Considered one of the most important cases, Furman v. Georgia, changed the view of the death penalty, within courts. This case declared that the death penalty went against the Eight and Fourteenth amendments, because it was seen as a form of cruel and unusual punishment.
• Source: http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=001769
3. Can it be considered cruel and unusual punishment, and what is cruel and unusual punishment in the first place?
• As seen in my previous question, the death penalty is in some cases considered cruel and unusual punishment. As for Americans we can only wonder, but there are polls on whether Americans agree or disagree with the death penalty. In a poll taken in 2011, adult Americans for the most part agree with the death penalty, with around 60% saying they think it is justified. While 28% opposed it an the other 12% were undecided. This question seems to be more opinionated, but i was able to get some facts at least. I Do wonder what Children think of the death penalty?
• Sources:http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=001769
  http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/Rasmussen_Reports_DP_Poll.pdf

I left this topic with still many questions like: Can you justify the killing of a murderer?, How many countries do not use capital punishment?, what are the main reasons for the penalty of death?, and Is it one person that decides?. It almost seems like the decision of putting someone to death is like playing "god(s)".

Pennsylvania's 2008 Elections

Facts:

1. Delaware County was very Democratic, party wise, as the percentage of votes for Barack Obama were over 80% in 2008.
2. The heavily populated, urban, areas voted more Democratic, and not Republican.
3. Despite spending almost three times longer campaigning in Pennsylvania John McCain's efforts were in vain, as Obama took victory at about a 10% margin.
4. Sen. Joe Biden, now VP, helped Obama by campaigning in PA were he was born, hoping to gain more voters.
5. Democratic voters, not counting the registered just those who voted, now out number Republicans by over one million. This isn't too surprising considering there are around 15% more Democratically registered voters than Republican voters.

Pending Bills!

Bills:

• HR: 2865: 9/11 Memorial Cross National Monument Establishment Act of 2011
• status: Referred to a Committee
• purpose: to erect a cross memorial at the National 9/11 Memorial Museum
• reason of picking: At first i thought it was a cool bill to memorialize 9/11, but I soon realized it could be offensive to victim's families because of the cross and how it can represent a religious purpose.
• HR: 3261: Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)
• status: Referred to a committee
• purpose: to prevent theft of US online property
• reason for picking: I dislike the bill, not the piracy part, just the fact that piracy is almost how the internet runs, and the pirates are everyday people some doing it unknowingly.
• S:1108: 10 Million dollar Solar Roofs Act of 2011
• status: Referred to a Committee
• purpose: to get the tools necessary for the production/ use of solar panels to local communities.
• reasons for picking: I love this bill! The idea of providing solar energies to communities around America is cool, reducing our carbon foot print little by little!