Will companies control the courts?

The recent Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission essentially overturned 2003 decision McConnell v. Federal Election Commission which put a limit on campaign funding for elected state judges. Sandra Day O'Connor feels that the recent decision is extremely dangerous to the justice in the American judicial system. With funding basically unlimited, companies or corporations can donate as much as they'd like to certain candidates for election, possibly bringing a bias to the newly elected officials' decisions. Corporations like tobacco companies may attempt to impose their influence on state court decisions that could have major effects. Ms. O'Connor suggested that we do away with state judicial elections and make judges appointed positions in an attempt to eliminate bias.

I agree with Ms. O'Connor; the system of electing judges and allowing exorbitant donations seems to promote a general acceptance of injustice that will only hurt the country in the long run. If anything, the spending should be limited, and I'm not sure why the decision was overturned. Perhaps it was argued that it is the company's constitutional right to support whomever they want to however much they want to, but it still seems like an excellent way to legalize cheating. Sometimes I feel that because of our history, this country gets caught up in everything being fair, and everyones' personal freedom to do as they choose. But the fact of the matter is that people will take advantage of a situation if given the opportunity and that in turn can inflict harm on someone else's rights.

Links:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/oconnor-mildly-criicizes-courts-campaign-finance-decision/

http://www.examiner.com/

Freeze, and put your hands behind your back!

Obama recently announced that he will freeze the spending for domestic programs for three years, only allowing increases caused by inflation to take place. Domestic programs like security/military spending and Social Security/Medicare will not be included in the freeze. The programs that will be hit are air traffic control, farm subsidies, education, nutrition and national parks. This decision will not greatly reduce the national deficit of $9 trillion, only cutting around $250 million. Democrats are already wary of cutting the necessary domestic programs, and republicans mock that it is not really that brilliant of a move since the Democrats have caused such a large portion of the deficit themselves.

First of all, the Democrats are not entirely responsible for the massive deficit, let us not forget President Bush and the Iraq War. However, in our current economic state, I feel that this freeze may be one of the only active things the president can do for the country. However much they don't like it, with a deficit like ours, providing everyone with the perfect benefits of being an American is not going to be possible. Freezing the budget will allow the economy to hopefully stable a bit and eliminate the chance of extraneous, unnecessary spending by the government. I think with the freeze in combination with job creation and the reduction of foreign spending, America will be back on track to getting out of this recession.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/us/politics/26budget.html?hp

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/6835140.html

Is Massachusetts Anti-Woman?

New opinions have surfaced following Martha Coakley's loss of the Senate seat last week that perhaps Massachusetts itself has a problem electing a woman to a high-standing political position. It seems odd that seemingly the most classically liberal state in the United States would be the one with an anti-woman problem, but so the case seems. In all of Mass's history, only five women have been elected to a constitutional office, and none to the Senate.

I find this to be a very strange phenomenon, especially coming out of Massachusetts. However, I will concede that while Mass is one of the most liberal states (being the first one to legalize gay-marraige) it is also one of the most traditional states. Since the beginning of the country, all the way back to the Puritans, Mass has valued traditions, order, and structure. However, for the many liberal-minded people living in the state, it seems odd that this would be where they consciously or unconsciously draw the line. I personally don't think gender should decide, or even influence an election, but it would be nice to see a little more diversity in the political structure of one of our most powerful states.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/us/25mass.html?ref=politics

http://www.mccormack.umb.edu/centers/cwppp/index.php

Is healthcare dead?

After the upset victory of a Republican, Scott Brown, in Massachusetts for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, Obama appears to be reevaluating his current agenda. With a filibuster now possible by the Republicans, Obama is backing off of his strict guidelines for healthcare and says he will take what he can get at this point. However, he did emphasize that he still wanted healthcare costs to be lowered and insurance companies cracked down on for unfair treatment. The 41 Republicans have also upset Mr. Obama's plans for a new energy bill and the banking regulation. As it is, many Republicans are calling for a complete rewrite of the healthcare bill.

I think it is ridiculous that the United States is full of such stupidly stubborn people. I hate the fact that we are a country of warring, never-to-get-along people that can not compromise and basically live to make each other's lives hell. Why is it that the Congress can not all be a little more reasonable. If they want America to really be great, they can't be bickering over the most trivial things all the time. I think it is time for someone to challenge the Congress to become a more united and cooperative group rather than a divide hub of old sweaty men. America should stop tolerating this childish activity and pressure their congressmen to actually step up and try to actively work for a better America.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/health/policy/21health.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-scott-brown22-2010jan22,0,1805237.story

Michelle Obama is taking on hamburgers.

Nearly every First Lady has had a focus while in office, like Mrs. Reagan and drugs and Laura Bush and literacy. Michelle Obama has appeared to have chosen the health of the nation, especially dealing with the threat of exceedingly high obesity rates. Mrs. Obama said in a speech on Wednesday that nearly one third of Americans can be classified as obese, and this number will only continue to grow. It is her goal to promote personal health starting with more nutritious meals and exercise in schools as well as providing more affordable healthy food options and an abundance of information on health and nutrition. Mrs. Obama proposes that the health of the nation will negatively effect our economy with more people needing healthcare involving heart disease, cancer, and diabetes.

I think this is a fantastic issue for the First Lady to approach because health is at the base of life and without it, everything else becomes sort of idle. This topic also seems like one that the First Lady would be able to make some real headway with, it's not to extravagant and yet it is incredibly impactful. I think that this issue definitely needs to be addressed and strictly implemented because schools basically have no incentive now for promoting any physical health as it is. Most meals are dreadful for one's health, and most gym classes are nothing more than social hour. I did find it odd though that the New York Times article would decide to specially note what Mrs. Obama was wearing at the meeting stating, "wearing a plum jacket over a silky leopard-print top." I just find it odd that they would take the time to note this seemingly useless information, but no matter, sexism in America is a topic for another blog.

Links:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/michelle-obama-tackles-childhood-obesity/

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/01/michelle-obamas-antiobesity-movement.html

Obama wants us smarter

President Obama announced Tuesday that he would ask Congress for an additional $1.3 billion for an initiative called Race to the Top. The money would be put toward a grant competition that will hopefully encourage schools to expand the level of innovation. The initiative would require states to, "pledge adherence to stricter standards." Some states, like Ohio, appear to be getting cold feet about the plan, but otherwise, it looks like it will go through.

I think this is a tremendous idea. While today's problems might not be 100% fixable, the future may be better if the next generation can attain better educations. As the "world power" it is astonishing that our school system is not better quality than it is. To most people, school is just something you have to do until you become an adult and not actually a commitment that requires a lot of hard work. I think it is a fantastic idea to raise and hold states accountable to higher academic standards. If everyone is more educated, our nation can run smoother, smarter, and more efficiently - hopefully reinstating us as the real world power.

Links:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/obama-seeks-13-billion-more-for-schools-initiative/

http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/01/19/president-obama-seeks-1-35-billion-more-for-education/

Secretary of State will not waver.

Obama's Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton says that the Obama administration will not waver in their stance towards Asia. Now facing tensions with both Japan and China, Clinton says the US will not compromise on already agreed arrangements or human rights ideals. Japan recently underwent a change of governmental authority, and the new prime minister Yukio Hatoyama says he wishes to remove the US Marine Corpes Air Station from Japan all together, rather than the previously agreed upon move to a less populated area of Japan. China is still stagnated in relations with the US, especially over human rights, climate change, and their newly successful test of missile launchers.

I think it is of vital importance that the US maintain if not good, then stable relationships with the major Asian countries because no matter how much we don't like it, Asia is growing in wealth and power, and if they decided to attack America, it would be highly devastating. I think we could show a little more compromise on the issue with Japan, but I feel that we should stand firm for the rights of the oppressed citizens of China and Tibet. Fold once, and it'll never seem to stop.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/world/asia/13diplo.html?ref=politics

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=9537803

Is everyone a racist now a days?

Harry Reid, senate majority leader, apparently remarked to two colleagues that Obama could be the first African American president because he is, "light skinned and doesn't speak with a Negro dialect." However, Obama and the White House are by no means attempting to distance themselves from the senator. In fact, Obama announced that he will accompany Mr. Reid on a campaign stop in Las Vegas, Nevada. Harry Reid is up for reelection this fall and after his recent comments and the wavering Democratic party, it appears unsure whether Reid will retain his position or not. The White House is desperate to maintain a Democratic majority in the Congress because it is crucial to the furthering of Obama's legislation.

I think the Democrats better work this election season because it is going to be one extremely close race. While I think it is ridiculous to harass Obama for not fixing all of America's problems in one year, it doesn't change the fact that the US public are getting nervous. I don't know how they're going to try to do it. But unless several of Obama's policies miraculously fall into place in the next couple months, the White House should be very worried that that may be the last time they have the luxury of a Democratic Congress.

Links:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/obama-plans-campaign-stop-for-reid-in-nevada/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6962710/Barack-Obama-receives-race-apology-after-book-tells-all-about-2008-election-campaign.html

What to do about the deficit?

So, remember when the government decided it would be a good idea to spend $700 billion bailing out the banks? It turns out, we might actually get some of that back. Obama announced recently that he would be implementing a policy in an attempt to regain much of that $700 billion spent last year. However, he is meeting a great deal of opposition, especially from the four major banks: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America. The banks are upset by Obama's proposal that a tax be implemented on the banks revenue. However, the banks contest that they were initially told to loan to small businesses to help the recession, and now, the tax will limit their ability to do so. No official legislation has been proposed, but a 2-day hearing including testimonies from those four banks will begin on Wednesday.

I think it is a great idea to try to decrease the deficit, obviously. A tax seems like the only real way to go about this unfortunately. It may seem like a socialist idea, but in times of need, sometimes you have to tax the rich to avoid the collapse of the whole country. However, I think Obama should be wary that the tax not severely damage the growth of the banks, or the economy will continue to stagnate.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/business/economy/12bailout.html?ref=politics

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/11/business/econwatch/entry6084139.shtml

Obama a model now?

Weatherproof Garment Company has apparently overstepped the boundaries of the president's picture in the public eye. The company has purchased a billboard in Times Square that displays an image of Obama wearing one of Weatherproof's jackets at the Great Wall of China. The picture was purchased legally and in no way insinuates that the President is endorsing the clothing company. However, the White House is requesting, more like insisting, that the advertisement be taken down. The White House says they wish to avoid as much as possible, the use of the President's image in any type of commercial industry.

I understand the White House's position. I don't think it's wise that the President become associated with an commercial industry, because it really is an abuse of power in my opinion. I think it would be unfair, and a waist of the President's time to be spent in commercial/marketing venues. However, I also do not think that the White House has the authority to require that the company to remove the image. The company is not in violation of any legal, commercial law seeing as Obama does not own the photo. Plus, I agree with the company that it is essentially their First Amendment write to publish what they want, wherever they want.

Links:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/alltherage/2010/01/white-house-rains-on-weatherproof-ad-featuring-obama.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6929284/Barack-Obama-effigy-found-hanging-in-Jimmy-Carters-home-town.html

Obama's Cabinet To Stay Put.

After Bill Ritter's recent announcement that he will not seek a second term as Colorado state governor, many believed that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar would step down from his place in Washington and enter the race. However, Mr. Salazar insists that he will not be leaving his post and will support Denver mayor John Hickenlooper as the Democratic candidate. Although Hickenlooper has not announced his candidacy, it is expected that he will be on the ballot this November.

I don't understand why people would think that Salazar would just abandon his very esteemed position in President Obama's cabinet for a state governorship. I am also very happy that he chose to stay in Washington, because I am very excited about the legislation he is helping Obama prepare regarding the expansion of clean energy and environmental preservation.

Links:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/salazar-wont-leave-cabinet-for-govs-race/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/0110/Salazar_not_running_for_governor_backing_Hickenlooper.html

Obama puts the screws to national security

This Tuesday, President Obama made a speech regarding the lacking aspects of our national security system. The President said that although the actual security screening for the airplane carrying the bomb Christmas Day was done in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, US intelligence agencies had plenty of preexisting information about the threat. Several intelligence agencies had been informed months ago that a Nigerian was planning on attacking the US through the airways as a plot in connection to terrorist organizations. The father of the attacker also contacted several agencies to inform them of his son's radicalization. However, the US missed it. Obama says that it was the US intelligence community's responsibility to, "connect the dots," and that it failed to do so. Mr. Obama says he wants the exact reasons for the intelligence failure and corrective actions to be taken immediately, especially concerning the National Counterterrorism Center. The President feels that the intelligence sector has become lazy and that this performance will not be accepted.

I think it is understandable that the intelligence centers could overlook this information, but I also agree with the President that it is vital that they be resolved immediately. I think the best plan for the intelligence community would be to develop some type of system, probably a computer program of some kind that could be kept running constantly. It would not be that difficult to create a program that could scan through incoming information and match highlighted key terms with information already collected and being stored in the system. I think this would greatly help this particular situation from happening again and hopefully keep our country safer from possible terrorist threats.

Links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/us/politics/06obama.html?pagewanted=2&ref=us

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-obama-0106jan06,0,676913.story