Latino Politics in America, reaction

Garcia uses data from the 2000 elections and prior information to emphasize the rise the Latino voice in the political arena of the country. He shows both their percentage in the population as well as their growth rate to be increasing at great levels, suggesting that the "Latino vessel" that many spoke of in the 1990s has finally arrived or begun to arrive. He also charts that Latinos demographically tend to support Democratic candidates, although the results in 2002 showed that the once large gap between Republican and Democratic support was narrowing due to the rise of the Latino middle class. His example of the case in Dalton, Georgia shows the increasing influence and growth of the Latino population, as well as the negative and positive consequences of this expansion.

Overall Garcia simply emphasizes that Latino influence is on the rise, and although they have dispersed throughout the country, their cultural identity and desire to be heard in the political process is likewise increasing.

Blowback, reaction

Johnson argues in his essay for a sort of imperial and political karma, termed as blowback, that haunts every expansionist and self fulfilling policy it enacts. He believes that the majority of the obstacles in foreign policy and global conflicts have been created by former acts of America's Cold War self, seen at that time to be necessary for survival.

The most important fact that he presents in his essay is the duality of "terrorism" and terrorist-like acts. As he accurately points out, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," and the ability to see the oppostite side from our own in viewing America's military actions in retrospect allows for far greater perspective on the global situation, especially in regards to terriorism. Rather than pursue further attacks, he proposes that conflicts of the past could have been solved by simply removing our presence from certain parts of the world. The danger in such thinking, however, comes back to soft power. Soft power can exist between enemies as well as allies, and although some opposing rises to power may have been preventable, our perception in the minds of our enemies must also be taken into account when deciding strategy.

His most powerful point in the essay seemed to be his bit on the future and the unintended consequences that the innocent will face, most likely ones which they had no say in. Terrorism always lashes out on the innocent to punish the powerful, and in all likelihood those innocent will prove to be punished for sins that their generation did not commit, as history tells us. Johnson believes that if America does not rid itself of its Empirical nature and outlook on the world, this punishment will lash out furiously and more intensely than ever in the upcoming generation.

Response to Joseph Nye

Nye argues in this article that a country's "soft power," rather than its hard military might, can be the most effective in influencing on the global stage. He defines soft power as the ability to get other countries to desire the same end that you as a country desire. To accomplish this, one must feed on the attractions and inducement of other countries by tapping into its cultural and political values, and its foreign policies and using them like mataphorical weapons.

Nye also makes a case against the "neoconservative" approach, saying that enthusiasm for the spread of democracy may be in theory beneficial, it may also not necessarily be shared by the parties involved. Therefore the soft power is not actually gained as believed and this "unilateral" policy fails to deliver. He appears to take a rather skeptical view upon politicians and the political process, especially with regards to more conservative thought, saying that they shift the blame to inevitable conditions rather to themselves.

Ultimately, Nye traces our losses in soft power back to the recent events of the Iraq war (foreign policy) and the power of public image as portrayed to the masses. Our attraction worsened, and as result our soft power decreased, with many people viewing America as an imperialist type machine. He makes a very solid argument about multilateral policy making: if soft power is about attraction through shared values, the others must have a say in the policies as they should know their own values more than us. By achieving this level of coordination, American soft power would inevitably increase throughout the world.

Despite his skeptical demeanor, he ends the essay on a high note, believing in the ablility of the United States to regain its balance of soft and hard power in foreign policy just as we have done in the past.

Sharon Hays' Essay on Welfare Reform, a reaction

Hays's essay begins with the charting of the Welfare Reform Law of 1996 that flooded states with federal funds to fit their individual needs in the welfare area. She sets up a comparison between two "state" policies (Arbordale and Sunbelt), and how their approaches differed and remained neither too generous or extremem.
Her main argument: the logic of the welfare recipient as being trained to become a respectable mainstream worker, thereby turning independence into a simple notion of paid work, is fundamentally flawed....1) the assumption that most recipients previously lacked motivation to work. 2) the work typically available to welfare recipients does not offer the support necessary for that type of independence.

She argues that for some, welfare has provided just the financial boost that a family has needed in order to gain stablity, but for many, the welfare reforms required the opposite of what desperate families/mothers needed at the time. It was telling to hear how many of the recipients had a positive outlook on their situation, regardless of how much it was improving--the vast majority of them were grateful and optimistic.

An interesting quote: "At a practical as well as moral level, the services and income supports offered by the PRA have clearly been positive. Yet in the long run and in the aggregate, poor mothers and children are worse off now than they were prior to reform." The question of "is work better than welfare" seems to be one that Hays is putting forth to be debated.

She covers many of the issues, but oddly seems to focus only upon recipients who are mothers? She believes that welfare does work in many senses and provide worthwhile aid, but that it is merely a chip in the efforts needed to respond to the social changes and problems interspersed throughout the lower tiers of the social hierarchy.

Essay: Elections and Government

Do elections contribute to good Government?

If "good government" pertains to the advancement of Democracy through enhancing the ability of citizens to partake in governmental participation, while also socializing political activity for the masses, then elections by all means is a major contributor. While there are many factors that contribute to all around good government, elections stand out among others as a unique institution, a practice subject to rules and regulations that can be predicted and standardized. It is through this institution that nationwide politcal participation can take place on a scale as large that of elections.

One of the most important, yet often overlooked stengths of elections is that they allow for civilized, mass political involvement. As witnessed by human activities throughout history, competition between large groups of people with clashing interests often is reduced to anarchical, sporadic and often violent activity--a fight to the death. Elections allow this exact activity to take place. The difference, however, lies in the formality of national policies that "civilize" these interactions, making the process of mass participation accessible and predictable. In this way elections not only encourage citizens to partake in these political activities, but they establish order by reducing the liklehood of volatile action.

An equally important role of elections in contributing to good government is to increase support for governmental power. Contrasting with the approach of authroritarian regimes, democratic governments must always keep a close eye on citizen-government relationship. Elections not only work to rally support for political leaders in the government but they are tools for legitimizing rule. By allowing the people to vote, government gains a kind of "acceptance" from the them that allows policies to be more nationally accepted. In exchange for voicing their political opinion, the masses are voicing their accepting the policy of those in power. By providing this legitimacy, in accordance with taming and giving rules to the act of nationwide political participation and competition, elections contribute to and reinforce good government.

Does voting matter?

One of the most fundamental rights of any citizen within a Democratic society, such as that of the United States, is right to influence government to more accurately represent their interests--a right most clearly defined in the ability to vote. While some elections, as in that of the President, are not directly deomocratic, voters nevertheless have an important say in the outcome. One of the most important aspects of voting is simply the action, the exercising of a citizens natural right. The result of most elections may still leave a large group (slightly less than the majority) unsatisfied with the results, but without this process of public voting the democratic spirit of the country would be non-existant. Dealing with presidential elections, many citizens argue that since the process is not direct and the decision passes through an electoral college that their vote is meaningless. The electoral college, however, has pledged to cast their vote in line with the majority in their section. While some of these members may, and have broken this pledge in certain circumstances in the past, these occurances are rare and in most cases the opinion of the state is represented through the college. Strong voter trends in particular states may also be a discouraging factor for many voters, as a tradition of party voting may be very difficult to break in a state's history. Despite some of these trends, the current election shows that some states once thought to be sure-captures for either party have moved closer and become toss-up states. These changes prove that no traditions are set in stone; it is never pointless to cast your ballot, even when a state has had a strong, consistent history in similar voting. While those who do not believe in the political process may be hesistant to vote for any political candidate, more and more citizens are encouraging each other to be proactive about using their political voice and showing up on election day. Voting not only allows every man to contribute to the political decisions and appointments of his country, but it is the means through which the purest sense of democracy shows up in the political process, connecting the people to their representative government, if only briefly. Voting does matter.

The Federal Budget Process

1. Budget formulation- in this process, a budget undergoes various processes of request, markups hearings, and voting to decide details of the budget. In this process it will pass back and forth between Congress and the agency and will undergo various conferences in which the agency and Congress negotiate to settle their differences. At its final step the finished version will either be signed into action or vetoed by the president.
2. Execution- small changes may be made to fit the budget to appropriate resources, resources are allocated, and any investigations regarding them may occur.
3. Congressional oversight- continues for three years, after which Congress will remark on the success over that period.

http://www.budgetanalyst.com/Process.htm
-links avaiable at each step