Politics In America
Politics In America
Citizens United v Federal Elections Commission court ruling was a huge verdict passed by the Supreme Court. It declared that the financial support of autonomous political broadcasts in an aspirant’s election cannot be controlled due to the first amendment. This ruling was made in favor of the Citizens United. This resulted from a disagreement over if the corporation Citizens United could broadcast a film that was critical to Hillary Clinton and contradicted bipartisan campaign reform act, commonly known as the McCain- Feingold act. This tends to tear up the material of our democracy that is already weak by permitting corporations to totally dictate our already tainted electoral process. The ruling signifies a pointed doctrinal alter and will have key practical and political repercussions. It has caused uproar from various individuals. Feingold in testifying against the ruling maintained that the decision was a tragic error. He explained that the decision of the court was unjustified and extreme noting that the impacts might not be noted today but will be clear in coming elections. Pat Leahy in a video supported this position. On his part he lamented that the court’s opinion is likely to alter the path of our democracy and threaten the public’s confidence on courts impartiality. Keith commented on this issue. He said that this is a Supreme Court sanction assassination of what little democracy is left. Rachel Maddow commented that ordinary people making election donation wouldn’t have to do so since it’s now pointless. President Obama termed this as giving rights to the Wall Street at the expense of the Main Street. On a democracy now video a watchdog group filed a case against justice Scalia and Thomas. It wants them to be investigated if they should have excluded themselves from the proceedings due to conflict of interest. This was on grounds to the fact that these two justices attended workshops supported by the second largest corporation in the United States. It’s proposed that the verdict be reversed or an amendment be made.
Pluralism stress that power is not a material thing that persons have or do not have, but instead comes from various source ( Connolly 13). It upholds that citizens are powerful given that they manage various resources. Robert Dahl clarify that power is a pragmatic relationship, such as A’s capacity of acting in a way that run the reaction of B. Pluralist approaches the issue of power by asserting that there is nothing related to categorical power that any society assume. According to the theory the inquiry is not concerning who controls a society but if any group does. On the other hand, elitism is a conviction that some individuals form an elite group composed of people with intelligence, prosperity, specialized training or know-how or other characteristic attributes (Hollinger 16). Their opinions on a particular issue are given more consideration and weigh more in comparison to others. Their amazing abilities, skills or knowledge make them fit to govern (16). The history of the world favors pluralism as its greatly linked to democracy, by scrutinizing the system and the power balances forging an agreement of the general interest that dictate the government policies. However, elitism perspective states that a select group of the rich and powerful individuals or groups dictates policies that favor their own interest. According to Wassermann United States of America combines the two. Actually, American politics is the combination of these two. On my own view I think that the combination of these two would be most appropriate. This is due to the fact that although the theory of pluralism has been termed as simplistic and of high demand level of resources, policy is a packed arena and hence no grouping or political section is powerful sufficiently to control the others.
Reports have indicated that Security Social Fund is set to go broke by the year 2041. This has left many young Americans wondering why they should continue to pay for something that will not exist in the future. Discussions have it that if the government kept records the way businesses do, the debt of the nation would not amount to $5 trillion but to $17 trillion. This is amount projected to be more than two times the country’s gross domestic product. However, this position has been criticized by many with some maintaining that it is pure fabrication by republicans. On signing for social security benefits Kathleen Casey made a single step for herself but a leap for the baby boom age group. This year the first of the baby boomers attained the age of 65 and became entitled to Medicare. In the year 2012, those who never took early retirement benefits will attain 66 and be eligible for their complete share meaning that millions of baby boomers start to take it. Medicare is already paying more than it intakes .Excepting actions by the congress, social security will follow suit in 2017. In 2019, funds for Medicare will run out and thereafter in 2041 social security fund will go broke. Tax cuts by congress and President Bush in 2001 and 2003 left the fund in a position that cannot sustain pledges to prospect retirees. Furthermore, Congress did add $ 768 billion in a period of ten years to Medicare in 2003 through formation of prescription drug advantage. After two years the legislators nicked Medicaid predicted price by $5 billion more over the period of five years. Bush had tried to overhaul the fund by creating a private investment but was opposed and blocked by democrats. President Obama is also proposing cuts on Medicare a scenario likened to that of bush bid to privatize the social security fund.
Development of policies is in response to an alleged problem. Firstly is the problem identification then the policy objectives follow. So that a policy can succeed it needs establishment of goals and options (Heymann 24) .In the third step of is policy execution of the options selected. Policies may fail due to improper implementation. The final stage of this process is the implementation and the maintenance of this policy. When the problem is indentified potential policy solutions are formulated. Politicians, interest groups and the public participate in discussions and debates. Various solutions to the problem are compared and criticized. If an agreement to one of the alternatives exists it is adopted, by the passage of legislation. Once this policy is enacted and becomes a law it has to be implemented (Sabatier 100). A movie named, The Fog of War, a military phrase from war uncertainties has good foreign policy lessons. The documentary is based on Robert S. McNamara life a former secretary of defense. From it we learn that you should sympathize with your rival that rationality will not help us and there exists something past one self. He explains that we should be ready to re-examine our reasoning, for you to do good you must engage in evil, never give up and finally you cannot change human personality. During the era of bush the above guidelines given by McNamara completely disregarded. The public opinion was not considered in policy making during Bush’s era. Obama should be advised to follow the policy process unlike bush did. Rethink Afghanistan is a documentary that features the period of 2009 focusing on the war in Afghanistan. It discussed vital issues such as the escalation of military, effects to Pakistan and the surrounding area. This movie led to the formation of a new movement based out of the increasing need for non-military solutions the regions problems. This movie went hand in hand with a variety of campaigns aimed at advocating for alternative US policies on this region.
References
Connolly William. Pluralism. Durham: Duke University Publishers, 2005. Print
Hollinger Robert. The dark side of liberalism: elitism vs. democracy. New York: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996. Print.
Sabatier Paul. Theories of the policy process. Pennsylvania: West view publishers, 2007. Print.
Heymann Philip. Living the policy process. London: Oxford University Publishers, 2008. Print.
