Examples Of Interest Articulation

The best way in which a government can help its citizens is by establishing priorities within the state or community or even the country. The United States in my opinion doesn’t follow this method because it tries to over compensate for other aspects it wants to fix. Instead just focus on maybe two or three major concerns that need to be fixed and stick to that for two years or until you finish accomplish that goal. Evade the enticement to enhance more and more goals; that will only split the attention from the major issues that need to be corrected and will increase the chance of failure. Some examples where the government can help is to focus on creating more jobs and decreasing the numbers of unemployed citizens. “On a single night in

January 2013, 610,042 people were experiencing homelessness. From 2012 to 2013, a period of continued slow recovery from the Great Recession, overall homelessness decreased by 3.7 percent and homelessness decreased among every major subpopulation—families (7 percent), chronically homeless individuals (7.3 percent), and veterans (7.3 percent).” 31 states saw a decrease in homelessness, while 20 states saw increases in overall homelessness. The national rate of homelessness fell to 19 homeless persons per 10, 000 people in the general population, but the rate in individual states ranged from 106 in Washington, DC to 8 in Mississippi. The rate of veteran homelessness fell to 27 homeless veterans per 10,000 veterans in the general population, but the rate in individual states ranged from 28 in Wyoming to 156 in Washington, DC. (http://www.endhomelessness.org/library/entry/the-state-of-homelessness-2014). This to me is important issue that needs to be addressed. Another issue that needs attention is to find a cure for diseases like cancer and aids. There are much more ways that the government can increase their part in helping its citizens but to me these issues are the most important.

6.

Define interest articulation, and provide some examples of interest articulation in different societies.
“Interest articulation is the system that allows the people to express their needs and demands to the government. This has taken on multiple forms, in regards to citizen action, interest groups, civil society, and access to the influential. In the United States today, the people are guaranteed their First Amendment right to freedom of speech, and this freedom is what gives people a chance to articulate their interests.” (http://analysisusa.weebly.com/interest-articulation.html?
Voting- The country allows its citizens the right to vote for an individual to represent them and the needs for living in this country. Voting shows a consistent decision on the government's leaders and its programs. The US in particular stands out from other countries because it has relatively low voter turnout rates. Many people say they want someone strong to represent them but they don’t go out and vote. Although there was only a 49% turnout of all eligible voters, 74% of the people in the United States discuss politics indicating that people that didn’t vote still have opinions on matters in this country. What makes me mad is that people complain about the candidates running for office and how their goals don’t really apply to helping them or if they claim that their main goal is to help them, down the line they forget about that particular issue and citizens get mad. If you don’t like the

people running then pay more attention to other candidates and voice your opinion instead of just sitting back and complaining.
Civil Society and the Role it Plays in the Country:
Civil society is defined as a society in which people are involved in social and political interactions free of state control or regulation. Germany as a country with one of the highest voter turnout rates during election periods which shows that the citizens of Germany like to stay active in the participation in social and political interactions. For example: Nature conservation groups. People who are highly aware of the environmental problems will come together to spread a better understanding of the issue to the government because that’s what needs to be done They will sit down with each other and political advisors to discuss practicable solutions to resolve a matter of their concern.( United States does this to an extent). “As Germany runs under a pluralist interest group system, multiple groups that represent a single societal interest (nature conservation in this case) will substitute a greater sense of community among people of shared interests across multiple interest groups.” The opportunity for people to participate in social and political interactions free of state control or guideline will provide us with a greater understanding of government procedures. This shows us that the people are trying to understand the processes that it takes to get involved in helping to fight for an issue that’s important to the people thus reinforcing the idea of interest articulation like a positive feedback so that the country can take interest in what is important and finally do something to help people and opening their eyes to the issues among the people. The government sees how much people want to fix the country and they will take more interest in helping. This motivates people for a cause they feel should be fought for which in Germany the government does take notice and gives the voters a reason to vote allowing the country to have one of the highest voter turnouts. (http://germanystructuralanalysis.weebly.com/interest-articulation.html)

8.

Discuss the presidential and parliamentary forms of democratic government, using the United States and Britain, respectively, as examples.
Presidential system of Government in the United States is very successful and unique. Since the creation of its Constitution. The Constitution of the United States defines the limitations of the three Institutes (1) Executive (2) Legislature (3) Judicial. Her constitution precisely contains the doctrine of Separation of Power between these three pillars. Here are the difference between the two:
“Presidential model, sometimes called a “congressional system,” was invented in the U.S. in 1787, when the new constitution was written. The Founders chose not to imitate the parliamentary model--then still emerging in England--probably because it was too closely associated with the monarchy. Perhaps they also wanted to insure that the new country be guided by a strong chief executive and they weren’t sure they could get that out of a parliamentary system. Other than in the U.S., other models of the presidential system are found in most South American countries and a few African countries. More prevalent are parliamentary systems. One notable reason for the proliferation of the parliamentary model is the legacy of the British Empire, many of whose former colonies still remain a part of the British Commonwealth.”(

http://www.hank-edmondson.com/amgovchapt4/the-presidential-v-the.html).
A parliamentary system, sometimes often referred to as a “cabinet government” may also be a constitutional monarchy. A constitutional monarchy keeps the king or queen in the role of head of state, and in the United States it’s the president instead of a King or Queen, but their power is almost exclusively ceremonial. A president is sworn in as in England they have a special ceremony. The president also has to get congress to vote in order for him to pass any bills. The president may be the highest power in the United States but he actually doesn’t get to use it because congress prevents it. Too much power for one man can hurt the country.” Historically, at least in England’s parliamentary system, the judicial system is not separate from the other institutions of government as in the U.S. Rather, the “highest court” in England is housed in the upper house of parliament, the House of Lords.” A parliamentary system of government, precisely because it combines the executive and legislative functions in one branch of government as in the United States it is divided into three branches of government ,typically displays less “gridlock.” A presidential system, on the other hand, may be more steady at times than the parliamentary system, especially if the parliamentary system is a multi-party system. Each country has a set of different rules and regulations and may vary depending on the situation, so comparing these two forms of government to decide which is better is all depended on how people see the matter. Some may say the Parliamentary form is much cleaner then The United States presidential and vice versa. It’s all a matter of opinions.

9. Contrast Chinas “rule by law” with democratic “rule of law.”
The rule of law is the legal principle that law should govern a nation, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions of individual government officials. It primarily refers to the influence and authority of law within society, particularly as a constraint upon behavior, including behavior of government officials Rule by law is different and unfair compared to Rule of Law. Rule by law is completely different than rule of law. Unlike rule of law, which states that no citizen is above the law, rule by law, involves arbitrary government rule, by using the law to implement their decisions.