The Future of Our Democracy

            The idea of democracy is so that there is equality in our government system. As we all know, this is not true. Some jobs pay higher than others, some people have to work harder in their jobs, while some people are on the streets because they have been laid off. We all see a sense of unfairness, like teachers should be paid more because they are setting the future for our children; most CEO’s get paid the most in their business even though they do not understand much about the job they are looking over. If more Americans became self-less and took a stand for what is right and wrong in our economy we might get somewhere in the future of our democracy. “Like baseball, the politics of power offers structural advantages to players and teams with more assets” (Katznelson, pg. 383). Unlike baseball that can change without life consequences, politics can change, but will have more consequences on the lives and chances of Americans. If politics change and put everyone on the same salary no matter what their job is, there would be discretion in unfairness and inequality, and everyone would be on the same level. There would be not be rich or poor people, car companies would not have nice, expensive cars, everyone would have the same thing and life would probably be boring. This is why there is diversity in our economy, and sudden political changes can not necessarily happen.

            Due to the decision of the Bush administration in 2003 on creating a structural change in the Department of Homeland Security, “The size and power of executive agencies concerned with safeguarding the country from the threat of terrorism expanded and transformed” (Katznelson, pg. 384). Politics is based on a structural foundation and building up. This structure can be changed and result in a change in society. “Such structural alterations and adjustments can be distinguished from intentional political activity aimed at protecting or changing the status quo” (Katznelson, pg. 385). With the thought that politics can change things at the drop of the hat, should encourage more people to stand up for their rights and realize that they could change the economy they live in if they dislike it. This could mean that less people would be agitated without government because they would be helping to make choices, too. On 9 news the other week, there was a mother who sent a letter to the president telling him if the government actually shut down they would be ruining children’s experiences to go to Washington D.C. Although I do not believe that this one letter did much to change anyone’s mind in the government, President Obama still acknowledged it in his speech meaning that he did listen. If more people took a stand, then we would probably have a better democracy for our future. 

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and              Democracy. pgs 383, 384, & 385. Norton & Company, New York.
9 News

Economic Policy that Provides Services and Sustainability

  The policy is not just something that is made up. "It depends on how well the economy is doing and what the government spend the money on" (Kitznelson, p. 297). The government is always allowed to borrow money from different programs, usually they go for programs that are not in as much debt and can soon pay them off, but sometimes the government borrows so much money from these programs it puts our future into debt. This is where our economy runs into problems. The government will never run out of money as long as they keep borrowing from all of these programs they are creating. However, for the rest of us living in this everyday economy, it puts a burden on us and how much we have to pay for items and don't end up getting paid for. The gross domestic product takes a look at how much is produced in the United States. "These figures have risen to the common belief that the government is too big, that it confiscates too much money in the form of taxes and spends too much in the form of wasteful programs" (Kitznelson, p. 290). Social welfare and dense are two of the biggest programs from the government that take much of the expenses from the people in the economy, too. The size of the government versus the economy also puts an impact on power, money, and employment. "Public sector employees in the United States compromised about 15 percent of total employment in 2008, about 23 million government workers at all levels--state, local, and federal--out of a workforce of 137 million" (Kitznelson, p. 292). If we had more members sitting on the council because our population is always increasing, we might be able to gain more power over the economy and look at what needs to be fixed. The money factor becomes an issue for income and cost of living. Many people especially people who work for school districts did not receive their cost of living raise for 2011. However, this did not stop the cost of living to raise. Now all of these people who "watch" other people's kids and don't get paid much as it is, did not receive their cost of living raise which impacts their own living. "In many other rich democracies, the government either provides child-care services directly or gives more generous subsidies for child care than American families receive" (Kitznelson, p. 292). This just shows that the American government is semi backwards in where they put the money and when it is taken away.

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and              Democracy. pgs 297, 290, & 292. Norton & Company, New York.

Personal work experiences in child care

Government's Care

         The government offers many rewards to the lower class people. But what about the upper and middle class? People in the upper class are typically born into their status and have all the money they need (if they spend it wisely). The people in the middle class are more likely to slip into the lower class. This is because the middle class usually does not receive any help. College is another big factor for middle class people. Many students attending college work long hours or many jobs just to keep up with their bills on top of student loans. If the student’s parents have a great income, the student is pretty much screwed out of financial aid money. There are many other unexpected circumstances that could arise and leave the middle class and lower class without any money. “Across the political spectrum, almost all Americans support national policies, and much spending, that cushion citizens against the dangers that come with age, ill health, unemployment, or the death of a spouse” (Katznelson, pg. 319). With all of this in mind, the government has offered people Social Security. “Since the early 1970’s, Social Security payments, which are set nationally, have been indexed; that is, they increase in step with the previous year’s rate of inflation” (Katznelson, pg. 320). This help guarantee that people will have some money when they are no longer working.

            In my own experiences, I have always been in a middle class family until my step family came into the picture. We soon were on food stamps and getting government assistance because my family went from 3 people to 8. The idea of being on food stamps when I was younger made me feel bad because I did not understand where all of the money went. I now understand that raising a family takes a lot of money from working in daycare. After most of us left that household, I am sure that they are no longer on food stamps or any government assistance. Being in the lower class was not uncommon for the families of the kids I went to school with. This then made me learn that food stamps and any government assistance are not a negative thing. “Many Americans believe that government’s efforts to alleviate poverty to relieve the poor of responsibility for their own situations; this belief is so strong that the very word welfare, despite its positive dictionary meaning as something that promotes well-being, often is used as a negative term” (Katznelson, pg. 320). Although being poor is not a very proud thing to admit, it is more common these days to not be as upset or negative about it because we know the government offers help. This could be bad, because what will happen if or when the government runs out of money?

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and Democracy. pgs 319 & 320. Norton & Company, New York.

Personal experiences in middle/lower class

Developing A Foreign Policy

 

            The idea of a foreign policy is a broader perspective on a domestic policy. "However, the process of foreign policymaking is much more centralized within the executive branch, and the number of public and private actors involved as far smaller" (Kitznelson, pg. 362). To me this is saying that what the executive branch says goes. According to Kitznelson, the policy before World War II focused on George Washington's farewell address that wanted the people of the future to use their geography to their advantage and find good fortune from it (pg. 353). Since the United States focuses on more than just Americans, the foreign policy needs to focus on other countries values as well. This will help everyone in the country agree somewhat on policy. The military is also a huge determining factor on what the policy says. “Two sets of statistics—military and economic—provide the context for understanding the American policy” (Kitznelson, pg. 350). With the American people understanding that our military personal are pushed to their limits, they can understand that part of the policy will be based on the power the United States has gained from strong army personal. The other context of the policy is based off of the economy. The economy lately has been going through a recession that can impact how well we reflect our policy. Before our recession, I think that the policy reflected our economy better, however when September 11^th happened, our economy hit a down fall because we lost our World Trade Centers. This created a lot of stress on people losing their loved ones and also on using their own money to help others out. Money was a huge factor for the economy, too. There was money spent to transport fire departments to New York, help out families, etc. As this event scared most people, we were able to send our own military troops over to Iraq to fight them for it. (Kitznelson, pg. 353-354).

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and Democracy. pgs 250, 251, 281. Norton & Company, New York.

September 11, 2001 tragedy

Judges and the The Judicial System Supporting Freedom

            Judges and the judicial system play a huge role in freedom, whether is it supporting it or limiting it. “The United States has a dual court system; state and federal systems of justice exist side by side” (Katznelson, 250). Each state is responsible for their own court system, but when things are that extreme, the case can be taken to the federal level. By allowing every state to be responsible for their courts, it allows some freedom in who is the judge. Thirty-nine states allow the people to vote for judges to be elected or reelected into office. However, some research has been done to find limitations, “the Supreme Court ruled in their favor, claiming that excessive campaign contributions to a judge create an unconstitutional threat to a fair trial” (Katznelson, 251). So by allowing freedoms for the people to vote, it is actually limiting the judges’ freedoms to a fair trial. As the book goes on it talks about the amount of money it takes to campaign and how judges start to become harsher with their punishments to bring the people on ‘their side’.

            The justice system here in America is much different than those in other countries. We are allowed to elect our judges, while other countries have somebody that may choose the judge for the people. This freedom allows us to see who we are voting for. “By contrast, in the United States the question of whether a law is constitutional or not is heard in the same court where all other types of cases are tried” (Katznelson, 281).  This is another freedom of our people that allows us to have a fair hearing because many other cases, probably some similar, have been heard and people are usually given the same sentence. In the courts, the person being tried has the right to speak and tell their side of the story, this allows for freedom of speech. Then the judge can take everything he has heard and examine the Constitution to decide on the punishment that should be given. Sometimes a jury is held which allows outside people to hear the case and view the evidence to determine what the person should be punished for.

When I was on jury duty myself, it took us a good 6 hours to determine the final answer of what this person should be convicted for. Without my own personal experience in a court room, I would not be able to understand what really goes on and what the judge’s role is. At first I thought that the jury was doing most of the work, but after reading this chapter, I see that the judge has to look over the laws and then have the jury duties opinion. From there the judge goes with the evidence that is seen most likely because he himself does not want to miss anything or elaborate. It was very hard to examine only the facts and to stop elaborating on what could have happened, versus what actually did. This freedom of allowing people to be on jury duty allows us to learn more about the judges and inside the judicial system.  


 Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and Democracy. pgs 250, 251, 281. Norton & Company, New York.

Jury Duty Personal Experiences

The U.S. Congress Supporting and/or Limiting Authentic Representation

                Congress has always gone back and forth between the Republicans or Democrats taking ‘over’. So in having the war between who is more powerful, how can the U.S. Congress support authentic representation when it sounds like they are limiting the representation within the Congress. When the parties come together and can be represented in an equal sense we create a unified government. “Under unified government, the Obama White House entered into more robust collaborative relationships with the majority in Congress crafting the details of key legislation, including the stimulus package and health-care reform” (Katznelson, 219). Now that Congress has been seen as coming together, they are able to focus on more problems in the society. Even the health-care reform was helping the majority population, but also the minority populations in ensuring people have health care. This brings me to my next point of the minorities being heard.

            There is some limitation by the Congress being mostly white, educated, rich, males. Although the minorities have a chance to be in on Congress by being in the House of Representatives, I still feel there are not enough of them to make a difference. The white males are the majority, and usually majority rules leaving those minorities out, unless the minorities are on the same vote as the majority. Even in society, the educated, rich, white population is seen to vote more than the minorities. However, we still have some support from the Congress. “For example, Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia comes from a very wealthy family, yet has been among the leading advocates of social programs for the poor” (Katznelson, 227). This leaves hope for the minorities, whether it is race or status that classifies them. It could also inspire people to want to join Congress and be a part of a program that can help a minority group they may not be a part of, but want to help. “...A white member of Congress can do a very good job representing a black-majority district, as Steven Cohen of Memphis, Tennessee, has been doing in the House since 2006; and a black member of Congress can do a good job representing a district where whites significantly out number blacks, as Barack Obama did for the state of Illinois when he served after his 2004 election to the Senate” (Katznelson, 227).

            The idea of minorities being ignored is not very shocking as I am learning from my Cultural Diversity class. We watched a video the other day that showed us how white people are the majority and even white females are looked up to in commercials and movies. They showed a commercial where the female is seen looking up at the white male, and the white male is always looking down on the female and having a sense of power. However, there was a scene where the white female was looking down on an African American male. The roles are very reserved to show that the majority or the whites have the power over the minorities. This idea is driven into our heads at a very young age from the TV we watch, and I believe it should be changed to not send this underlying message across while are kids.

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and   Democracy. pgs 175, 185, 206. Norton & Company, New York.
Cultural Diversity Metro Class 

U.S. Presidency and the Ideal Government

            After the Revolutionary War and the ideas of a new government, ideas of the founders started arising of who should be running the government. “Many of the Founders believed that a new government required and autonomous and energetic presidential office, as opposed to the weak executive that labored under the Articles” (Katznelson, 2011, 175). Although this did not necessarily happen within the government, Hamilton decided that a strong executive branch was needed. When different presidents are elected from the different branches of government, like democrats or republicans, it seems to cause a bit of an uprising for particular tasks to be completed. For example, “When the Democrats gained control of the Senate in 2004 and the House of Representatives in 2006, pushback began” (Katznelson, 2011, 185). The constant battle of who has more power of the house comes with the President’s election.

            The people that have the power to choose their president are the members of the American society. People are allowed to vote for who they feel will be a better president. Now if the voting is skewed, nobody knows although rumors have spread. After the president is elected into position, he has the power to listen to or ignore the people and what they want and feel will make a better economy for them to live in. Aside from this, President’s still have a lot on their plate. “Presidents must contend with countervailing pressures from citizens, business firms, interest groups, and social movements” (Katznelson, 2011, 206). This means that the president looks at all of these groups and their opinions and then bases his decision off of the majority. However, is this true? Presidents are supposed to look at all of these opinions and what is going on, but we won’t actually know if they do until one of us becomes president. The idea of a perfect society is like the idea of Big Brother from the book 1985 by George Orwell. Big Brother was seen to be so perfect that he watched every move you made and made things better when he saw discontentment. Then, when one person tries to break away from this perfect society, all hell breaks loose. With so much on the presidents hands, he may not necessarily mean to create flaws, but by overlooking the minorities opinions, he might be doing just that.

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and           Democracy. pgs 175, 185, 206. Norton & Company, New York.


1985. George Orwell

Individuals and Groups Influence

As individuals we have the right to vote for a presidential candidate. However, it is the groups we create that chooses who wins the election. “Consequently most voters fear wasting their votes on candidates from small parties, since these parties stand little chance of gaining a plurality” (Katznelson, 2011, 97). People are more likely to follow their parent’s views and become a Democratic or Republican. In my own family, we are not big into politics (I am the first to have voted in my family), but I claim myself and undeclared. I believe this is because my parents never followed the political parties and picked a side. “American political parties blur issues, ignore new demands, and fail to adapt to new conditions”, but is this based off of the groups or individuals that want change? (Katznelson, 2011, 97). Many people feel that the political parties ignore the societies wishes. This could also be a result of the political parties themselves too. If the individuals in the political party groups disagree and the whole group can’t agree, then it may seem as if they are ignoring an issue when they could possibly be ignoring it and coming back to it, or maybe just throwing the idea out completely. In a way it can be like jury duty. When the whole jury agrees the person is guilty, the consequence is given. If the whole jury disagrees, then usually the person is let go with no consequence. But if there is conflict within the jury, then the case can be dismissed and nothing happens.

In Chapter 5, there is a section called A Comparative Perspective on American Interest Groups on pages 148-150 that talks about how interest groups are influential! It talks about how groups of people (especially interest groups in certain parties or topics) make a difference. Some ways groups of people help are by participating in court, committees, campaign assistants etc.

Some individuals have also helped create social movements. Rosa Parks did not give up her seat in the front of the bus and was hauled off because of the discrimination at the time. Martin Luther King gave his “I Have a Dream Speech” where he had said he had read somewhere we can protest to have rights. These little things that these individuals did created movements for the society and now groups or people either agree with or disagree with these decision that were created by these individuals actions. (Katznelson, 2011, 150-151)(Martin Luther King).

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and Democracy. pgs 97, 98, 148-151. Norton & Company, New York.

Martin Luther King Speech. “I Have a Dream”

The Public's Opinion

            I feel that the only way the public opinion can really influence the formation of a democratic society is by allowing the people to vote others into office. Then once officers are in position of authority or have enough power to follow through with their promise, i.e. lowering taxes, they choose not to. Because of that, I feel that is why negative commercials are created about each other, but that makes me dislike the person being negative more, not the person making broken promises. “There is extensive evidence that both parties--but primarily the Republican Party—have engaged in dishonest means of rigging elections” (106). It was said that this was an old practice of the parties, but even know it is obvious that elections are not fair and are not necessarily following what the people have asked for.

            On the flip side of the society not being heard, with all of the new technology they can easily support candidates now. “By brilliantly using the new media, such as Facebook and online fund-raising (one-third of his contributions came from the Internet), the Obama campaign revolutionized the way political campaigns are financed and conducted” (107). Now that we have more social networking available, many people are able to use this as an advantage, for political candidates, they can use it to raise money for their campaigns in certain states or even cities. Without people being interested and using the social networking, though, this would not have happened, so apparently the candidates are focused on the society and some of what they have to say, even if it is to get them in office. (I doubt people who were not supporting the candidate would want to help.)

            “E-media alters not only the way in which interest groups mobilize, but their internal structures as well” (148). The internet is the resource most people have turned to now for everything. They can follow political parties in the news and see what their decisions are; they could even email a political party to put their two sense in. But who’s to say that those emails get read, or are even sent to a legit address. I feel that the society is very much ignored even with all the efforts they put forth into trying to have their society or even country change and become better. Sometimes the laws that are put through are bogus and the society disagrees. “A DEMOCRACY IS a society in which all adults have easily accessible, meaningful, and effective ways: …to participate in the decision-making processes of every organization that makes decisions or takes actions that affect them” (Democracy Watch). According to this statement, the society should be allowed to put in their word of what should happen and then the parties take it from there, but it seems as if the public has an opinion that the parties almost blow off. So what would happen if the political parties actually took the societies opinions into consideration? Would our society be different? A question we may one day know, or never know.

Katznelson, Ira, Kesselman, Mark, Draper, Alex. (2011). The Politics of Power, Capitalism and Democracy. pgs 106, 107, 148. Norton & Company, New York.

(2004). Democracy Watch. http://www.dwatch.ca/democracy.html