Nuclear Nightmare-North Korea(1/5)

This video which was made in 2009 talks about North Korea's revived nuclear weapons program. The video begins by telling the viewers that North Korea has successfully conducted its second nuclear test despite new restriction put in place by the United Nations Security Council. The video also explains how North Korea's weapons program has received international opposition and specifically from the USA, South Korea, and Japan. Because of this, the UN security council unanimously passed a resolution which allows for the inspection of cargo vessels and airplanes headed for or leaving North Korea which are suspected of carrying weapons and nuclear technology. In closing, the video states how North Korea claims if there is any move by another nation to infringe on there land or rights, then there will be extreme consequences.

Lanahan Reading: Judicial Review

1.     Why is judicial review democratic?

Judicial review is democratic because it provides for a check on the legislative and executive branches. Also, judicial review makes sure that the majority does not have full control to do whatever they want.

2.     Please cite one case that proves the democratic nature of judicial review.

Brown vs. Board of Education

3.     Why is judicial review not democratic?

Judicial review is not democratic because the American people never have a voice as to who is put on the Supreme Court to make decisions. Also, often times the Supreme Court is made up of elites who attend highly prestigious schools and who do not represent the diversity of America.

4.     Please cite one case that proves that judicial review is not democratic.

Roe v. Wade

5.     What is one thing you agree with in this article?

I liked when the author explained that the majority and the government should not disrupt certain parts of American life.

6.     What is one thing you disagree with in this article?

I couldn’t really disagree with anything.

Robert Bork: Supreme Court Nomination Hearings from PBS NewsHour and EMK...

Bob Bork

            In 1987 after the moderate Lewis Powell retired, President Reagan sought to replace him with a much more conservative justice. Which makes sense due to the fact that Reagan was a conservative and wanted someone with his same philosophy in the court. His choice was Robert Bork. From the announcement of the nomination, there was much skepticism and concern that surrounded Bork. During the Senate hearings Bork was torn apart. One of the most vocal critics of Bork was liberal Ted Kennedy. Kennedy accused Bork as being someone who would “force women into back-alley abortion, make blacks sit in segregated churches, and allow rogue police to make midnight raids on houses.” Kennedy didn’t stop there either. He also called out Reagan saying, “He [Reagan] should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans.” In response Bork told Kennedy none of what he said was the truth and that it was ridiculous to say such things. Although what Kennedy said probably wasn’t true it was enough to convince the Senate and the American people that Bork shouldn’t be a Supreme Court justice. In the end the Senate rejected Bork’s nomination and Bork got Borked.


Source: www.nytimes.com/.../the-bork-hearings-bork-s-testimony-ends-with-panel- still-deeply-split.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ffTtOMIJAk&feature=related

Combat In Afghanistan

This short video from 60 minutes talks about the War in Afghanistan in 2008. In the video it is explained how the US and its allies are beginning to experience more attacks from enemy forces. The video also explains how it is extremely difficult to fight this war because the US and coalition forces do not know who is on which side. In many ways this is very similiar to the Vietnam War in this instance. The video goes on to say how it is also difficult to fight the war because of the geography in Afghanistan. In some places it is desert and very dry and humid, while in other places it is extremely mountainous and very hard to navigate.

Supreme Court

1. How did the judicial philosophies of Justice Brennan and Rehnquist differ?

                Justice Brennan and Justice Rehnquist were very different in their political philosophies. Justice Brennan is far more liberal while Justice Rehnquist is more conservative. Justice Brennan believes that it is his responsibility to protect the minority from the majority. Just as these two justices are on two different ends of the political spectrum when it comes to ideologies, Justice Rehnquist believes that it is his responsibility to let the majority to do what they need to do.

2. Which justice do your personal beliefs align most with? Why?

           

I would have to side with Brennan on this issue because I believe the minority should always have some say in the political process. This philosophy also helps to protect democracy.

Louis Brandeis

                Justice Brandeis was the first person of Jewish descent to sit on the Supreme Court. Brandeis was a strong defendant of freedom of speech laws as well as issues dealing with right to privacy. Because of this Brandeis has a legacy of being one of the most influential justices in the history of the Supreme Court. He was labeled as a “crusader of social justice” by his peers. Brandeis University in Massachusetts was named in his honor.

Source: www.brandeis.edu/legacyfund/bio

1995 Government Shutdown

What specific issues led to the government shutdown in 1995?

The government shutdown took place in two parts. The first lasted five days in November 1995, until the White House agreed to congressional demands to balance the budget within seven years. But talks on implementing that agreement failed, and the second shutdown lasted 21 days, from Dec. 15, 1995 to Jan. 6. 1996. The main issue was the GOP demand that Clinton agree to their version of a balanced budget. In months of negotiations, Clinton had actually given a far amount of ground, infuriating Democrats on the left. He agreed to a balanced budget over seven years, to tax cuts, to changes in mandatory spending programs such as Medicare. But the two sides were remained far apart on the pace of spending cuts

Who "won" the government shutdown in 1995 and why?

Ultimately the Democrats won. The Democrats won because after weeks of turmoil, the Republicans finally cut a deal with the Democrats which actually didn’t make anything different than it was before. The Dems also won because the GOP shutdown of the government made the GOP look bad especially after they did not accomplish what they said they were going to do.

Why are we currently operating under a current resolution?

We are currently operating under a current resolution because Congress has yet to pass a new resolution for the new fiscal. Per protocol if a new resolution is not passed the federal government has a certain amount of time where it can operate under the prior year’s resolution. If an agreement is not reached for a new resolution in the allotted amount of time then the government is shutdown.

Judging by the specific events of the last month or two, do you think we will face another government shutdown?

In short I do not think that will face another government shutdown. During the shutdown in 1995 John Boehner was the # 4 Republican in House leadership and he experienced how detrimental the shutdown of the government was to the Republican Party. Now as Speaker of the House he is the unofficial leader of the GOP not just in Congress but across the whole country. It is his job to promote and represent the GOP in a positive and productive manner.

Source: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/02/lessons_from_the_great_governm.html

Locked in the Cabinet

1.  Summarize the article in your own words (not their summary:)

                Basically, the article was about a day in the life of the secretary of labor. The secterary explains his busy day and also describes the “bubble” that he works in. This bubble is something that protects him from contact with people from outside the department. The secretary despises this “bubble”. Ultimately, the article is a behind-the-scenes look at what it is like to be the secretary of labor.

2. What is one thing that surprised you in the article and why?

One thing that surprised about the article is how much protection the secretary gets. From the time he leaves his apartment to the time he goes home, someone is constantly with him. He even gets driven around. This surprised me because I didn’t think that cabinet members needed this much protection.

3. What is one thing that you agreed with in the article and why?

One thing that I agree with is how the secretary hates the “bubble” and wishes he didn’t need it. I would be very annoyed if someone was by my side shadowing me all day. I thought it was funny how the secretary got yelled at when he went for a walk and no one knew where he was.

4. What is one thing that you disagreed with in the article and why?

I really don’t think there is anything that I disagree with in the article because the passage was more or less about the secretary’s day in the life and he really was trying to make a point or shed light on any of his views.

A Government of Strangers

Summarize the article in your own words (not their summary:)

Basically, what the article discussed was what we’ve been talking about in class for the past few days. The article discusses how the President and his top appointments have a large amount of power, but much of the government is run by civil servants who are chosen by their merit exam score. Many of these civil servants make a career out of their work and unlike the President they remain a civil servant for decades.

2.

One thing that surprised me in the article was how some civil servants seem to disregard ethics when trying to get something done. For example, one civil servant already had bills drafted before any of the ideas and policies were even discussed.

3.

One thing that I agree with in the article is that there is widespread political sabotage throughout the government. I believe there is widespread sabotage because each separate agency has their own agenda of what they want to get done and this is one method to effectively execute their policies.

4.

One thing that I disagree with in the article is that there cannot be continuity between the incoming administrations and the bureaucrats. I believe if both sides work together there is a way to achieve continuity between administrations.

Diplomat- Ronald Reagan - Tear Down This Wall

In this video President Reagan is acting as a diplomat. In his speech Reagan tells Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down this wall" in reference to the Berlin Wall. Here President Reagan is effective as a diplomat and this speech is regarded as one of the best of his presidency.

National Mourner- Willam J. Clinton: Oklahoma Bombing Memorial Speech

In this video, President Clinton is acting as a national mourner for the country. This is a speech he gave in response to the Oklahoma City bombings. He is effective as a national mourner in this speech because he connects with the American people by shedding tears and showing he is emotionally touched by this event.

Crisis Manager- George W. Bush - 9/11 Bullhorn Speech

This is a speech given at ground zero by President Bush just days after the 9/11 attacks. In his speech President Bush told America that the terrorists will hear from America. President Bush recieved high marks for this speech and was effective as a crisis manager in this instance.

Johnson Impeachment

Andrew Johnson is known for being one of the worst Presidents in the history of United States. On February 21, 1868 Johnson removed Edwin Stanton as Secretary of War and replaced him with Adjutant-General Lorenzo Thomas, only three days later the House of Representatives impeached him for "high crimes and misdemeanors." Thaddeus Stevens and John Bingham were in charge of informing the Senate that Johnson had been impeached. In the following days the House adopted 11 articles of impeachment against Johnson. They were as follows; Dismissing Stanton from office after the Senate had voted not to concur with his dismissal and had ordered him reinstated, Appointing Thomas Secretary of War ad interim despite the lack of vacancy in the office, since the dismissal of Stanton had been invalid, Appointing Thomas without the required advice and consent of the Senate, Conspiring, with Thomas and "other persons to the House of Representatives unknown," to unlawfully prevent Stanton from continuing in office, Conspiring to unlawfully curtail faithful execution of the Tenure of Office Act, Conspiring to "seize, take, and possess the property of the United States in the Department of War.", Conspiring to "seize, take, and possess the property of the United States in the Department of War" with specific intent to violate the Tenure of Office Act, Issuing to Thomas the authority of the office of Secretary of War with unlawful intent to "control the disbursements of the moneys appropriated for the military service and for the Department of War.", Issuing to Major General William H. Emory orders with unlawful intent to violate the Tenure of Office Act, Making three speeches with intent to sow disrespect for the Congress among the citizens of the United States. On three different votes 35 senators voted Johnson guilty and 19 voted him innocent. Because the Constitution says to be convicted you must receive a 2/3 vote, Johnson was thus acquitted. One more “guilty” vote would have changed the verdict.  

Source: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/impeach/impeachmt.htm

Nuclear Nonproliferation: Comprehensive U.S. Planning and Better Foreign Cooperation Needed to Secure Vulnerable Nuclear Materials Worldwide

            In April of 2009, President Obama and his administration announced an international initiative to secure all vulnerable nuclear materials worldwide within 4 years. In its report the Government Accountability Office assessed the United States efforts to implement the President’s 4 year global nuclear material security initiative; the status and challenges, if any, of NNSA's nuclear security programs in Russia; and, the NNSA efforts to secure nuclear materials in countries other than Russia. The report found that NSC officials have approved a government wide strategy for the President's 4-year global nuclear material security initiative that describes the scope and objectives of the interagency effort and identifies the main efforts by U.S. agencies and programs to support the initiative. However, this interagency strategy lacks specific details concerning how the initiative will be implemented, including the identity of vulnerable foreign nuclear material sites and facilities to be addressed, agencies and programs responsible for addressing each site, planned activities at each location, potential challenges and strategies for overcoming those obstacles, anticipated timelines, and cost estimates. Overall, the GAO recommended to Congress to amend a law which would give more time for this process to occur. Also, the GAO recommended to President Obama and the National Security Council to provide a clear sense of the overall scope of work anticipated under the President's initiative to secure all vulnerable nuclear materials worldwide within 4 years, the NSC should lead and coordinate through NNSA, DOD, State, and other relevant agencies, including members of the intelligence community, the development of a comprehensive plan for implementing the initiative.

Source: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-227

The Final Days of the 111th Congress

                As the New Year approaches and the 112^th Congress is waiting to be sworn in, Democratic lawmakers are rushing to push legislation through Congress before the lame duck session expires. According to Politico.com it looks as though lawmakers on Capitol Hill will be forced to stay in session until Christmas Eve and there is even talk that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will call back the Senate for a post-Christmas session. This would be the first time a post-Christmas session took place since 1995. The Senate has yet to vote on various pieces of legislation such as the START treaty, the government funding bill, and a food safety measure bill. As the 111^th Congress draws to a close the schedule in the House looks a little less hectic but House members have yet to vote on a 9/11 first responders bill which was amended by the Senate last week. Since the Congress has yet to pass an appropriations bill all year there is the prospect that the government could shut down. Because of this Reid says that this bill is of top priority and that a vote is expected to take place Tuesday evening. The senate would also like to vote on a lands bill and a defense policy bill but it looks as though there will not be enough time for a vote to take place. As the year draws to a close, Capitol Hill has been a very chaotic place especially because the incoming congress who are moving into their new office spaces. Many defeated lawmakers are being forced to work out of small cubicles in the basement.

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46634.html

A Pledge to America

            Although the new Republican proposal “A Pledge to America” is built around the same idea as the 1994 outline “A Contract with America” it is also very different. The 2010 model is different from the 1994 model because it focuses more on economic issues than value-based issues. The first few pages of “A Pledge to America” discuss the Declaration of Independence in modern terms and also warn about the power of an unchecked executive branch. The document than lists four specific goals that they plan to achieve. The first goal is to extend the Bush tax cuts to both the middle class and the upper class. After that, they plan to lower spending to pre-stimulus levels. Thirdly, they plan to repeal the recent healthcare reform and replace it with common sense solutions. Some examples of a common sense solution are outlined as keeping the ban on pre-existing condition exclusions and also getting rid of the individual mandate. Lastly, they plan to reform Congress and restore trust by citing the constitutional authority of any proposed bill and by also reading aloud any proposed bill and to allow at least three days to pass before the bill can be voted on. Whether or not the Republicans will accomplish these goals is a big question and in my opinion they will not accomplish all of them. However, the Republicans and Democrats have compromised and plan to extend both Bush tax cuts and a vote on the extension is scheduled to take place in congress sometime next week, so it appears that the GOP will be able to cross that goal off their checklist. In regards to the lowering of spending levels, I don’t think that the Republicans will be able to accomplish this, because they do not outline any major cuts anywhere in the document. They only list small cuts that will have very little effect on the budget. Also, I believe that the Republicans will not be able to kill the healthcare bill because they do not have a majority in both houses. Lastly, in regards to reforming and restoring congress I think that this is just something the Republicans put in the pledge to make look good and is something they won’t actually do.

Five Questions for Fox

1. What has the been the response of the natural gas lobbyists to your film? Have any of them contacted you directly?

2. Have you conversed with any lawmakers on the state or federal level that have proposed bills to regualte hydro-fracking?

3. Have you contemplated filing a lawsuit against the natural gas companies?

4. What is the next step of action you plan to take, if any?

5. Will you make more documentaries or is this a one time thing?

Electoral College

            The Electoral College is the name of the process which is used to select the President of the United States. It is unique to the United States in that no other country uses this exact system. Under this system the United States really has 50 individual elections rather than one national election.

How does the Electoral College work?

            The Electoral College works by awarding a candidate a certain amount of electoral votes if they win the popular vote of that specific state. The number of electoral votes is the sum of the number of senators and representatives from each state. This means that the minimum amount of electoral votes a state can have is 3. In order to become President a candidate must win at least a majority of the electoral votes which would be 270 (538 total).

When has the popular vote and the Electoral College vote conflicted?

            The popular vote has contradicted the Electoral College on three occasions; the election of 1876, election of 1888, and election of 1888.

What happens if no candidate wins a majority in the Electoral College?

            If no candidate wins the required 270 electoral votes then the Presidency is decided by the incoming House of Representatives. This occurred during the election of 1824 when John Quincy Adams was named President despite the fact that Andrew Jackson had won a plurality of the popular vote and electoral vote. Henry Clay and William Crawford were also candidates in the election.

 What about the Electoral College is good?

            The Electoral College is good because it still puts importance on smaller states with smaller populations. For example, New Hampshire is a very small state which only has 4 electoral votes but it is considered a “swing state” and is relatively important for a candidate to win.

What about the Electoral College is bad?

           

            The Electoral College is bad because theoretically a candidate can win the Presidency without actually winning the popular vote. This is bad because if a majority of the country thinks that the President-elect should not be President than it will be difficult for the incoming President to accomplish much early on in his term.

 Should the United States eliminate the Electoral College?

            I do not think that the United States should eliminate the Electoral College. I say this because then most parts of the country would not have an effect on the election and all the campaigning would take place in the large cities like New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, etc. I like the uniqueness of the Electoral College and it is the fairest process for all 50 states, so it should not be eliminated.

Source: www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college

Fixing the Deficit

            For this assignment I was charged with the task of solving our national deficit problem. Currently, we have a projected shortfall of $418 billion dollars in 2015 and an estimated shortfall of $1,345 billion dollars in 2030. To fix the budget I used the New York Time’s interactive online game called Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget. This puzzle forces the user to either cut programs or raise or implement new taxes. While trying to solve this crisis there were many easy decisions but also very hard decisions that are sure to affect a lot of people but I feel that I did what I think is best for the country. Ultimately, my plan will have the USA at a surplus of $7 billion dollars in 2015 and a surplus of $328 billion dollars in 2030. To see my full plan you can visit this link- The Cam Smith Plan.

            Domestic Programs and Foreign Aid- I chose to cut all domestic programs and foreign aid. I don’t have problem with giving other countries aid, but with the situation that we are in right now we definitely have to scale it back a bit. In my opinion, you have to shovel the snow off your own porch before you can shovel your neighbor’s porch. Also shrunk the workforce of the federal government because it will save taxpayer’s money and I fundamentally believe in a smaller government.

            Military- I made a lot of military cuts with the only thing not being cut was the size of the navy and air force. The only cut I really had a problem with was the reduction of noncombat military compensation and overhead because it reduces the benefits of some of our armed forces members. There are some positives to this however because it gives members of the military shorter tours of duty and longer breaks between each tour. As far as pulling troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq goes my view is that it is more or less a losing battle at this point and we should bring them home slowly, so a reduction to 60,000 by 2015 would be a good proposal.

            Health care- As far as healthcare goes I raised the Medicare age to 70 because in this day and age people are living longer than ever before and it is only five more years than the current eligible age of 65. Also I decided to reduce the tax break for employer provided health insurance and cap Medicare growth in 2013, both of which will save the US hundreds of billions of dollars down the road.

            Social Security- When dealing with social security I decided to raise the retirement age to 70, tighten eligibility for disability, and use an alternate measure for inflation. I chose to raise the age of social security for the same reason I raised the Medicare age, because people are living longer than ever before.

            Existing Taxes- The only tax I chose to implement was the Lincoln-Kyl proposal which is an estate tax that would exempt the first $5 million of any estate and tax any estate over $5 million at 35%. This is proposed tax is the least aggressive of the proposed estate taxes. I also chose not to implement any aggressive taxes on the rich because they are the people who use their money to stimulate the economy and are going to be the people who ultimately get us out of the current recession.

            New Taxes- I chose not to implement any new taxes.

            Ratio- My ratio between cuts and taxes was 98% cuts and 2% taxes.    

Mitt Romney eyes smaller footprint, later start for 2012

In a recent news story on politico.com, Mitt Romney says that he will begin his 2012 campaign for the presidency much later than he did in 2008. According to Romney, he will not announce has plan to run in January or February because he believes that are people are worn out from November’s midterm elections and need a break from major politics. Also, Romney said it was not as crucial to announce his candidacy for 2012 as early as he did in 2008 because he is a better known national figure now. In 2008, Romney had to spend millions just to get his name known by the American people. Romney also alluded to the fact that he will campaign with a much smaller staff this time around. In 2008, Romney needed a large staff to get his ideas and messages out and to organize his campaign just to keep up with frontrunner John McCain. Since this is his second time running for the presidency, Romney now knows what it takes to run an effective campaign so a smaller campaign staff will simplify the process. Romney even stated that such a larger staff was the cause of much confusion and miscommunication during the 2008 campaign. Romney was quoted saying this information during a conference call addressing his biggest financial donors along with Senator Scott Brown and former Florida GOP chairman Al Cardenas. The article also mentioned what are believed to be the other major candidates for the GOP; Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, John Thune, Sarah Palin, and Tim Pawlenty. Overall, the main idea of the article was to express the notion that Romney will announce his candidacy sometime later in the year, most likely the late spring or early summer.

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45369.html