During the process of Mock Congress I was a Republican. I researched two bills and prepared a convincing speech for each of them. The Republican bill I supported was Bill #4. This was a bill to implement a national sick day policy. This meant that all full-time employees in the United States shall be paid their ordinary daily wage for up to fourteen days per year for days missed due to illness or injury. Throughout this speech I described many beneficial factors that would come with passing this bill. I found this information by going to google and then looking for .org websites on my bill topic. One of the beneficial facts I found was that three-quarters of adults support a policy giving employees a minimum number of paid sick days (Fact Sheet: Paid Sick Days). Another interesting point I found while researching was that paid sick days can be …show more content…
I find it interesting that the decision of whether or not a bill should be passed and made a law all boils down to which representative gives a better speech. Also, until I was in this position, I didn’t realize that it can be quite difficult to persuade people to agree with you. Overall I feel like it is a fairly productive way of running our government. I feel this way because representatives of each party are given the chance to state their opinions on each bill and describe how it would benefit or hurt our country in the future. This gives the rest of our country an understanding of the many different ways you can look at a certain bill and how it may affect us. One moment during the Mock Congress process that both surprised and frustrated me was when the democrat party filibustered. To filibuster means to delay tactics. The democrat party did this by prolonging their speeches with unimportant information and asking silly questions supporting their party’s representative. Although this did frustrate me, it was quite
Mann and Norman J. Ornstein argue that the Legislative branch is the most broken branch of government. Congress was designed by the Framers of the Constitution of the United States to be an independent and powerful party. The Framers wanted the Legislative branch to represent the vast diversity of people of the United States, to deliberate on important issues and policies, and to check and balance the other branches. However, Congress’s role in the American Constitutional System differs from the part it was meant to play. The authors argue that Congress has failed to fill its responsibilities to the people of the United States because of the division of the Democratic and Republican parties, which leaves little room for compromise and negotiation. Members of Congress focus on their own needs and interests, and will travel to far lengths to prove that their political party is the most powerful. Congress has turned a blind eye to the needs of the American people. Congress cannot succeed in getting the United States back on track unless they start to follow the rules dictated by the Framers of the Constitution. A vast series of decisions made by Congress, driven by Congress’s disregard for institutional procedures, its tendency to focus on personal ethics, and the overpowering culture of corruption, led to Congress failing to implement important changes in the United States
...ilities of Congress is that minorities and factions exist: dissent takes place, not disagreements. Verbal brawls take place rather than actual argumentation, and that is what kills democracy. That is why things never get done.
Political gridlock and dysfunction is a central aspect of studying Congress because it determines a huge part of how they function and their general effectiveness. When it comes to the political landscape in the United States, law-making and legislation ultimately comes down to what the Senate and the House of Representatives vote on and how they vote. Gridlock has been studied for years because of how it has changed the political landscape, essentially from the beginning. The Jacksonian Era in the mid 1800’s shifted the way that political parties operated, and from then on a two-party system has been a critical part of American politics. The winner-take-all format of elections in the United States, along with the increasing importance of political parties, has forced a two-party system into being and prevented a third party from being able to get their feet off the ground for more than one or two elections.
The United States of America has engaged in the battle known as political polarization since before its foundation in 1776. From the uprising against the powerful British nation to the political issues of today, Americans continue to debate about proper ideology and attempt to choose a side that closely aligns with their personal beliefs. From decade to decade, Americans struggle to determine a proper course of action regarding the country as a whole and will often become divided on important issues. Conflicts between supporters of slavery and abolitionists, between agriculturalists and industrialists, and between industrial workers and capitalists have fueled the divide. At the Congressional level there tends to be a more prevalent display of polarization and is often the blame of Congress’ inefficiency. James Madison intentionally designed Congress to be inefficient by instating a bicameral legislation. Ambition would counter ambition and prevent majority tyranny. George Washington advised against political parties that would contribute to polarization and misrepresentation in his Farewell Address of 1796. Washington warns, “One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.” Today, the struggle to increase power between political parties results in techniques to gain even the smallest marginal gains. To truly understand political polarization, we must examine data collected through a variety of means, the effects of rapidly changing technology, and observe what techniques are used to create such a polarized political system.
Today the U.S. government’s legislative branch, Congress, is divided into two independent chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate. The system is called a bicameral system, which means it is divided into two chambers. The Framers of the Constitution created the system because was it successful in Britain, the two separate chambers could ensure that each side would not abuse their power, and the system created a compromise between the New Jersey and Virginia Plan. Although both chambers can initiate laws, they were created independent of each other and different in authority. In the House, “committees consider bills and issues and oversee agencies, programs, and activities within their jurisdictions” (House of Representatives). The Senate is in charge of giving guidance and approval of treaties or presidential appointments and holding impeachment trials (American Politics).
Political conflicts regarding oversight are becoming a common occurrence in Washington, but have you stepped back and analyzed why this is? These unnecessary strangle hold on the democratic process are due to a few common practices, party politics, a deference to the Executive Branch, and prioritizing voter concerns with wasteful government spending. Some cause more problems than others, but overall these are the three biggest causes. Party politics prevents Congressmen and Senators alike from rearing off the path of their political party stance. We also see voters own ignorance as a big part of the government waste problem. Many like to complain about problems in our laws, but then are supportive of the laws when they go through Congress. This makes it very easy to pass laws with waste because they know the general population most of the time will let it slide. If your party holds the presidency, but that president does something that is unconstitutional that party will most likely stand its ground supporting the president. While the Executive Branch is an office that deserves respect, respect cannot get in the way of the Constitution and the laws of the land. No one is above the law, especially people in high office if anything they should be held more accountable due to their importance in American life. Congressional oversight is a major part of the checks and balances system, and if these major problems continue to occur we will see more and more people abuse the American democratic process.
Filibustering in the US has been around since the beginning, and has created tension and wars between the US and other countries. Filibustering affected politics before and after the Mexican-American war. Before the war filibustering was condemned and law was passed to stop it from continuing. After the war filibustering legislation was thrown away when a new president who supported filibustering was elected. Popular culture was affected as well and many felt the adventurous side of filibustering thrilling. Filibustering created political turmoil for the US government and made the affects of it either good or bad.
Filibusters have been a part of the American political process since the adoption of the U.S. constitution although, most people are not very familiar with the tactic. However, Senator Ted Cruz has shined a light on filibustering in recent years. He does this by using extreme filibustering strategies to oppose Obamacare .While some people think that a filibuster is a waste of time, filibusters actually play a very important role in the U.S. senate today by fighting for what they believe is right or wrong.
Filibusters can be a very strong tool for the minority in the Senate. A Senator or his minority party can block full Senate consideration of a bill or a nomination by prolonged debate of the proposal. This is especially important to the Senate if there is only 50-59 Senators that are in favor of passing a bill. This is because of the rule of cloture. A filibuster can be ended in the Senate by a cloture vote which is 60 of the 100 Senators voting to end the filibuster and take the bill or nomination to a final vote. This is almost a check and balance sort of system within the Senate.
A filibuster procedure that allows a senator to speak against a bill for as long as he or she can stand and talk. It can become a formidable obstacle or threat against controversial bills near the end of a legislative session. (Gibson, Robinson pg.243) Some of the reasons why the filibuster is regarded an obstacle to legislation starts off with the two-thirds rule which basically requires the approval of at least two-thirds of senators before a bill can be debated on the Senate floor. This type of rule allows minority of senators to block controversial legislation. This rule also gives the senators the opportunity to vote on both sides of an issue. (Gibson, Robinson pg. 243 para 2) A filibuster can become a potent and ever-present threat against controversial legislation near the end of a session. An example of this is when a lieutenant governor may refuse to recognize the sponsor of a controversial bill because of the fear of a filibuster will delay the process for the legislative proposals. Something really interesting about filibuster that happened in the past is when State Senator Bill Meir of Euless was able to speak for forty-three hours in 1977 against a bill with the public reporting of on the job accidents. By doing this he was able to capture the world’s record for the longest filibuster, which he held for years. (Gibson, Robinson, pg. 243, para 5.) In my own aspect of the view of filibustering, I think its abusive power is a threat to legislation because it can become even deadlier when senators decide to use a tag team approach taking turns against a bill. (Gibson, Robinson, pg. 243 para 5) Another great example is recently Texas State Senator ...
In our countries government, Congress plays a major role in decision making. They’re primary role is to pass laws. These laws start off as bills. Bills can only be introduced by members of Congress. Although these bills only come from Congressman, there are many people who influence these bills. Such as the president, regular citizens, offices in the executive branch, and many others. The bills right off the bat do not have a very good chance of passage. Only one out of every ten bills even gets any attention at all. This is because they must go through many tests and hearings before they even have a chance of landing on the president’s desk. These steps in a bill becoming a law are very important, and make sure that all bills passed into law are the best of the best.
Much like the majority of political science classes, view and opinion are the basis to answering every question. At the start of this course I believed that as a citizen I have a role to contribute to society. I knew that I hold a responsibility to participate in elections and to remain informed. This is my responsibility to the government, but what is its responsibility to me? I could not give you a confident answer. Yes, I’m aware of the basics laid out in Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the many other federal laws, but striping it down to the basics I didn’t know what the base duty of the government for citizens was. Going into this class, I would have told you someone like Karl Marx would be amongst the top theorist to influence current government. The United States has moved more in the direction of capitalism and away from the importance of democracy. This course included reading
That bill would have to be sponsored by the Congressman or woman, in order for the bill to have a hearing. That was talked about in class, where there are step in getting the bill to pass as a law. For one the bill becomes a law it has to be sent to the president and be passed by him. Even before that both of the house must pass the bill in the same form. In a review of the movies in The New York Times by Elvis Mitchell, he talked about how the main character running into some problem while using the original way to getting a bill pass, so within the movie and the review it does reflect the theme and facts that we talked about in class, because within those step to getting the bill to pass there are problems where the bill is rejected by the committees
For this event, there was a business fair that included many of the major businesses in the area. The minimum for the extra credit was to talk to three different companies, however, I chose to talk to nine. I talked to J.B. Hunt, 3M, Cargill, Valspar, Best Buy, and a few other companies. For each company, I would walk up to the table, introduce myself, and ask them to tell me a little bit about their company. Once they were done with their pitch about their company, we would then ask each other some more questions. They would typically ask what year I was in for school, what my major was, and what I wanted to do when I was done with college. From there, they would typically relate one of these answers to how I would fit in with their company. I then would ask if they had any internships available for the summer and they would typically either hand me their card or tell me to check their website for the application. The basic style for each of these companies varied, however, the type of information they would give was all pretty similar. Also, some company employees were more forward and expressive while others hung back and waited for me to ask most of the questions. Each person was pretty unique
I have never thought in a million years that I would be able to apply a lesson to a television show regarding any sort of topic. It is actually quite amazing that we as humans are instinctively very social creatures learning about the communications we as humans use on a day to day basis and how it affects us. A lot of people do not really understand we have our own communicative language until they start to delve into this class, like myself. Watching “The Office” Season 1 Episode 3 all of the office employees (mainly Jim, Pam, Kevin, Meredith, and Oscar) very clearly made it known that they were not happy with the new and not so improved healthcare plan that Dwight diligently picked out exclusively