What is the future of democracy? Is it a realistic option?

I think that the future of democracy is good, or at least as good as it has been. I dont think that it is a perfect system, but it is the system that has worked for us as a Nation forever and I think that people respect that. We have a government that is 'ran by the people'. I think that this gives people comfort as well as hope. If they have an equal say in whats going on then they are making a difference, or at least doing their part. I do however think that people take advantage of democracy, including me. People complain about government, politics, taxes and all sorts of other things that are happening in our government, yet they do not do anything about it. Our democracy, the way it is set up does give people the opportunity to have a say, however this can not happen if the 'people' are to lazy to go out and vote, or to lazy to be informed about what we are voting on.

So yes, I think it is a realistic option, but I dint think that it is realistic that people will ever be happy with it, even though we could have so many worse options in the way a government is run.

The following link is for an article that was from back during the last presidential election. And I think that no matter what party you are with or what candidate you voted for or supported, you can agree with this article and President Obama and voter apathy.

He states “making change happen is hard” and “people need to shake off this lethargy, people need to buck up”. He is talking about voters, making an effort to go out and vote, and to be informed voters.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/28/politics/main6907246.shtml

Change doesn’t just happen, we have to make it happen.

Voter Apathy cartoon 2 - search ID njun89

R

What is the process to develop an economic policy that provides services and sustainability?

Week 13 Blog

After reading this chapter I see that building and maintaining a good economy with a steady working economic policy is very complicated. It takes many different parts of government to make it run and there is different money involved. In our economy uses taxes, fiscal policy, monetary policy and regulation to make it all work. The way all of this fully works is still a little confusing to me as the chapter has so much information, but I know that these thing keep the money moving in our economy. 

After doing some research on the economy and economic policy, and getting many results, due to the recession, I see that a lot outside of our own government affects our economy as well. Things that are happening around the world with countries that we import and export to affect our economy as well. Some of these things is obviously gas, as well as food, and material products. Currently a war over seas in Libya is affecting our gas prices, or weather affecting the crops of food that we buy.

The double natural disasters that hit Japan will have some sort of impact on the US and our economy. However, only 6 percent of our exports and imports are to and from Japan, so even though we will be affected, it will not be that much. According to 9 news the conflicts in the Middle East will have much more impact on us than Japans natural disasters.

http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/142251/37/How-Will-Disaster-In-Japan-Impact-US-Economy

Below is a link to a cartoon that I found that was regarding Natural disaster and wealth and power. 

http://www.cartoonstock.com/cart.asp?from=stock&basket=yes

How should a nation-state develop its foreign policy in accordance to its values and in connection to the development of its domestic policy?

This is a hard question for me because I still don’t fully understand how it all works, even after reading about it. But I think that we have to be very carefully when making alliances, and when deciding when to support those allies and when to stand down. I think that when regarding the economy it is best to have trade alliances with many. However, when alliances bring on war this can be a very costly situation to our country.
I don’t think that we should be getting involved in a war unless it is directly involving our country. I think that we must weigh the pros and cons of supporting other countries and their battles before we get involved. And have to be aware of the benefits they can bring to us if we ever need their assistance in a war. But like I said this is a difficult situation for me to comment on because I am still a little confused on how it works.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FSp-LU7OG3U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This link is to a video I watched regarding foreign policy in the US and war. I think that some of his opinions are a little far out there, but I agree on one thing he talks about and this is that Washington likes war.

How does a government facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity?

When reading this chapter and after reading all the discussion, it seems to me that we focus a lot on the people who take advantage of the system, which I totally agree with; however, I would also like to say that the system is not perfect either. In some ways, the system holds people back from moving forward when they are presented the opportunity.

In my Into to SW class we did a project that was focused on helping a woman who was using federal assistance for child care and food stamps who was being offered a promotion at work. The catch of this situation is that the position paid $1.00 more than she currently made, which would put her over the income limit to receive her government assistance, however $1.00 more if income per hour (fulltime=$160.00 a month) is still not enough to cover her and her two kids grocery needs, let alone childcare.

I don’t remember what our group decided regarding helping this woman. Its kind of a no win situation. We could advise her to either not take the promotion and stay off government assistance, while being held down in a low paying position forever just to be able to get by. Or do we tell them to take the promotion and try to get by while improving herself by moving up in the corporate world? Keep in kind that if she takes the promotion she will not meet her monthly income needed to live if she now has to pay for food and childcare.

I have thought a lot about this activity recently. As you all know I just has a baby 3 weeks ago. My first. I go back to work the week after the semester is over, and the baby will be going with me. Thank God!--- Because infant care, per house, cost more than I make an hour, but make more than the CCAP income limit. Therefore, if I couldn’t take my baby to work with me, since I have no family in Denver, and cant receive CCAP, I would either have to quite my job, or pay to go to work.

So, as I agree that far to many people take advantage of the system, sometimes the system creates some of the problem itself.

This is a cartoon that I found kinda funny because I thinik that people dont realize that they are getting some form of assistance while also talk bad about others that do. There are many different types of assistance other than food stamps and housing.



I also found this cartoon which reminded me of many of the other students post for this weeks discussion in regard to people continually having children even though they cant afford them.

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

Unfortunately, I must start out by saying sorry, because I’m sure my opinion on our government and the way it is run is becoming redundant, since in every post I go back to the fact that I fell our government is run and influenced purely by money, who has it, where and how they can get it, and who is going to fund their campaign or special interest. I think that just like the idea of the presidency, the idea of congress, the senate, and checks and balances was all set up with the idea that it would always support the ideal democracy, and that our founding fathers truly did have our, the people’s, interest at heart, and wanted to make this the best, and most honest place to live in the world. Well, they did succeed, to an extent, because I think there is no way they could have predicted how things would have progressed the way they have. However, I think that congress, as it is today, limits authentic representation. Congress today, to, is based on political party influence, special interests, and personal campaigns. Congress members must stay true to the party that voted them in, and this is not always taking the side of the people on issues. They must also think about their own campaign and what is going to get them reelected in the next election, who will fund it. And of course, it is all about the money in the end.
Like other, I feel that this class has opened my eyes on how our government is run, I always thought it was centered around money, but this class has made me more aware of all the other parts of government that are not what people think it is.

In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy?

I think that the idea of a president originally was made to fully support our country as the ideal democracy. I think that expecting a president (a human being) to be perfect is our country’s first mistake. No human, not even the president is perfect, therefore will always have limits in the public’s eyes. I think that the president supports a democracy because he is not able to make decisions on his own, he must get approved by congress and senate, if it goes there. He is also voted in by the public, therefore representing what the majority of the American people believe in, and that is the face of our country to the rest of the world. I think that a president (individuals) have limited a democracy by taking advantage of their position and doing things there own way, instead of how they a supposed to be done, like the examples givin in the book regarding checks and balances. But I think these are individuals and not fair to say this of every president.

Above was my original post for the discussion question for the class.

After doing some more reading I think that we expect to much from presidents. I realize they know this is a large job when they run for president, the largest job in the country, but can one person actually fulfill the job description to the fullest without limits? I think that it is important to remember this when we are talking about everything that the president has not been able to deliver. I don’t think we should lower our expectations of our president, but I think we may want to re-evaluate the way we critique the president 

I found an article about the presidents that was written about a museum exhibit that was made to represent all of the U.S. presidents. Appropriately the exhibit is named ‘The American Presidency : A Glorious Burden’.

Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence M. Small says, "We ask a lot of our presidents. We have expected them to be father, brother, general, diplomat, arbitrator, economist, pitchman, publicist, cheerleader and a dozen things more. We take for granted that the same person who has the qualities to command armies and deploy an arsenal of awful force will also be available to launch a baseball season. This exhibition shows all these aspects of the job." I think that Mr. Small’s statement expresses the enormous amount of responsibility that is laid upon the president, and this is of course no the end of all the expectations we have for the president. Mr. Crew a historian of the museum also sates that, "There was no precedent for the American presidency when the framers of the Constitution created the office in 1787.Yet these revolutionaries—who distrusted centralized authority—entrusted near-monarchical powers to this one office. I hope that visitors will come away from this exhibition with a better understanding of this fundamental contradiction, and how it has given rise to conflicting impulses and realities that continue to shape our country’s political life even today."
http://americanhistory.si.edu/presidency/6a.html

The White House has been the scene of many events in the history of our nation. Here the President holds meetings that decide national and international policy, signs new legislation, and carries out the many duties of the office. Here, too, the President and First Family entertain guests and live their private lives, as every President except George Washington has done.

http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/Tours/White_House/Welcome.html

How does individual people and groups of people influence the demoratic process

I agree with the other post in that we the people of America a very lucky to have a say in what happens here in our country, and who is running things. However I am torn at the same time to say how much individuals actually impact what goes on. I think at a state level we have much more influence on what happens than at a national level. Which is shown in the book on the first page of chapter 5 (pg.101), when stating that George Bush won the presidential election by electoral votes, but lost the popular vote (individual peoples votes). So even though our individual votes decide who represents our state, and what party our state affiliates with, this does not always guarantee that the people we elect to represent out state will vote the way that the majority of the state wants. It can depend on many things, such as the final candidates that are chosen after the primary, where these candidates lie regarding certain issues, and money. I also think that money is a greater influence than anything in our country and who, where and how it is being spent. I do however think that the media has a great influence on how individuals think regarding politics, which then directly effects how politics are run. Campaigns that reach more people and in positive way are more likely to have results in followers.

Week 5- public influence on democratic society

From what I read in the book it seems to me that public opinion doesn’t influence democratic society too much. I almost seems to me that politics, lobbying and governmental media influence public opinion more that public opinion influences government. The books states that most people get their political and governmental influence and knowledge passed along to them from parents and families members, and these beliefs do not usually change except for in big social movements. When there is big social movements is when most people have changes in opinions regarding government and politics, which through our history has only happened a handful of times. It also states that “public opinion is made by politicians, activist, and institutions who seek to shape it by providing information, by appealing to emotions, and by contradicting opposing views” (pg. 93). This to me seems like politicians influence public opinion, not the other way around. The book continues to say “ politicians us polls and focus groups to move their positions closer to the publics but just the opposite: to find the most effective means to move public opinion closer to their own desired policies” (pg93).

How does government and the private sector intersect?

I think that even though for the most part our country has tried to set things up so that government and the private sector do not intercept, they do, and always will. I think this is a good thing for the most part. With out government regulations companies would be able to do pretty much anything they wanted and treat their employees however they want. Due to the government regulations we have things like minimum wage requirement, age requirement so that kids are exploited, and worker rights. The government also regulated the taxes that private companies are required to pay, and as we saw in the last election, this is a very big deal to many company owners. The government also intersects with the private sector when they decide to do bail outs for large companies. I know that the bail outs have been a very controversial over the past couple of years, but I for one thing that it was a good thing. Many companies, and peoples jobs were saved in their decision to bail these large companies out. I think that without government regulations the private companies would have to much control and that eventually our economy would seriously suffer from it.

Above was my original posting for the class discussion.

While looking into the goverment and private sectors one of the things that I find a lot of information on was that the government workers make a lot more money than people in the private sector working in the same profession. According to USA Today " The data flip the conventional wisdom on its head," says Cato Institute budget analyst Chris Edwards, a critic of federal pay policy. "Federal workers make substantially more than private workers, not less, in addition to having a large advantage in benefits."


There is also a chart in this article showing the different in the government saleries and the private sector saleries. CHART: Federal salaries compared to private-sector

References:
Federal Pay Ahead of Private Idustry. Cauchon, Peter. USA Today. 3/8/2010.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm#chart


This cartoon also reminded me of the artice I read on USA Today this is attached.

Week 3- Power in governemrnt, economy and politics

In this chapter there was a lot about power and how it works and controls things in our country. However my take on power is that money equals power. I think that money influence power in the economy, government and politics. I think that money controls politics and how they run (campaign, advertise, etc.) which hand in hand effects the governement. The party (politics) that has the majority usually has the power and has a better handle on how/what things happen in sennate. All and all I think that money equal power.

 

The above was my orginal posting for the class discussion.

 

This chapter, and just the word ‘power’ and associating it with government has got me thinking beyond our own government, especially with all the news on Egypt and there current situation. As much as I think that our government and politics are influenced by money and who as it and how they want to use it, I am also thankful that we have a constitution that allows us to somewhat control how the government is run in a ‘peaceful’ manor. Lately we have seen the mass protest that are taking place in Egypt due to who has the power in their country. Unfortunately for them, there constitution is set up in a way that is legally binding them to stay in this situation, therefore making the angry protest to continue. According an article on msnbc.com “the next presidential election would be held under the same unfair conditions as in previous years. They want to first have a new parliament to the constitution to pave the way for presidential vote that is democratic”. Therefore, until their constitution is changed they have no way to change their current situation as the president had decided not to run again, he will not step down for the rest of his term, and according to their constitution there is nothing that can legally change it. So as much as I might think is wrong with our government, how it is run, and what the influence really are, I am thankful to live where I do, and have the strong constitution that was written to actually protect us.

An image of the protest in Egypt

References

Nakhoul, Samia. Opposition divided ahead of talks with Egypt's VP. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ 2/5/2011

Democracy

I think that the opportunities of a democracy definitely out weigh the challenges, but that is not to say that democracy is without them.

The opportunities that I see is that we are free. We are free to feel, say speak, and elect how we chose without prosecution from the government. We have the ability to chose who we want to run our city, state and country for the next 2, 4 or even 8 years. We also have the ability to impeach that elected person if the majority of the people find that this person is not doing the best for our country or acting unlawfully. This is a great power that most people all over the world do not have. We also have the ability to stay informed (for the most part). We have access to what our government is doing, and also what most of the world outside of us is doing. Many people around the world do not have this right. In many countries tv, internet, book, and religion is run and censored by their government.

Of course there are also challenges to a democracy, and in my opinion most of these challenges are fueled by money, just as most things are. There is a big division in parties, and though not always true, but most of the time the party division is also linked hand and hand with how much money you make and what ‘class’ you fall into. Not only are the parties divided, but candidates of both parties are influenced to do or support certain things depending on where they get their funding from and how the person or organization with the moneys agenda is. We also have a very big influence by corporations here in the US, which has nothing to do or for the general public. Money can even influence whose voted are being counted. It has been a stigma that people of with less money do not vote, but even if they do vote, how do we know that the vote is even counted. I was unaware of this until reading the chapter, but according to pg. 3 of our text "A congressional study found that minority and poor voters were three times more likely to have their votes voided in the 2000 presidential election than ballots cast by affluent white." According to the book this is because the districts where poor/minority voters vote there is budget issues and they cannot afford the newer more accurate voting equipment. This goes back to the Titanic metaphor also used in our text, more money equals more opportunity. And as much as I love that we have the right to vote, I think that the downfall of this is that we as a society in general are very uniformed when it comes to making a decision on what is actually best for us. I am also guilty of this. But often times I think we go with what our friends/families tell us, or see in the papers & TV, without doing our own research. 

Nothing is perfect, and I would rather be here in the land of the free with a flawed democracy than anywhere else, especially a counrty that is not a democracy.

First Time Blogger

I am new to blogging. This is my first time ever, and I must admit I am still very confused by it all, so please bare with me on this. I am blogging solely for the purpose of this class (psc 1010). I am a psychology major with a social work minor with an emphasis on aging and aging services, which has quickly become my passion. Which leads me to why I am taking this class. I have recently applied to Master program for social work here at Metro, and this class is a requirement for the masters program. I am not a political person at all and do not follow it except for what I see on the news, which I’m sure you all know is very minimal. I am hoping that this class will help me understand how politics and our government works, as I am often confused by governmental/political lingo.