Government

QUESTION 1 Detail the components of state bureaucracy and the issues surrounding representativeness and responsiveness. Your response should be at least 200 words in length. QUESTION 2 Explain in what ways states reform, privatize, and reinvent government, and describe the associated problems that can occur as a result of these changes in metropolitan areas. Your response should be at least 200 words in length. QUESTION 3 Define the major roles of governors and how their power influences their leadership role and legislative relationship. Your essay should be at least 300 words in length

Excerpt from Key Constitutional Concepts: View the first film (approx.. 20 minutes) of Key Constitutional Concepts, “ Creating a Consititution.” http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/key-constitutional-concepts (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) You’ll just have to watch the first portion of the 3 part documenatry available (but feel free to watch all three parts!) It is important to review your class notes and read the text chapters before you answer your analysis so that you have a grasp of the larger political issue at hand. Considering what you know about American Political Culture, how are the major foundation principles of: Limited Government Competitive Individualism Citizenship and Democracy -Made manifest in the new Constitution? -Do the Founders do better at some rather than others? -How does the Constitution (and the whole episode of the Constitutional Convention) demonstrate the pragmatic nature of our political culture? -Were there any flaws in their pursuit of ordered liberty under the Constitution?

Submit a 500-word response that includes the following points: 1. Discuss the positives, negatives, and lessons learned from the New Zealand collaborative governance study (400 words). 2. Reflect on whether such collaboration is or is not possible in your public sector life experiences and/or a public sector case with which you are familiar (100 words) 3. Be sure to support your statements with appropriate references to this week’s readings and other sources. 4. Apply correct APA citations and format to your paper.

It’s for government class involving Texas. The assignment is to examine the lack of professionalism in our state (Texas) legislature, evaluate measures to increase this professionalism and make a recommendation for change. • Explain the reasons why the Texas Legislature is considered by many to be unprofessional. Examples include low salaries, temporary nature of legislative sessions, high turnover of legislative staff, high cost of winning elections, lack of financial support from political parties, etc. • Describe various options for change, which may include higher salaries, full-time legislative sessions, state subsidized campaigns, etc. • Considering the various options for change, choose one or two and make a recommendation. In this section of the paper you need to consider the costs and possible support and opposition by the public and political parties for your recommendation. Of course, policy recommendations don’t happen in a vacuum and these things must be taken into consideration. • Draw a final conclusion about the need (or lack thereof) of a more professional legislature and the feasibility (or lack thereof) of your recommendation based on the political reality in the state. In this section I will also take into consideration the format, spelling and grammatical aspects of the paper.

Using a country of your choice [preferably your own] provide an evaluation of the current policies in place and recommend new policies that would encourage disruption that leads to some form of competitive advantage as well as economic development. To do so, provide a formal report that allows you to analyze the current policies driving economic development, an analysis of what regional/or neighbors are doing in this sphere to encourage their own economic development and what you would recommend for your own country to pursue.

President Reagan and his “new right” supporters (in a challenge to the Great Society) pledged to reduce taxes and federal regulations, and government spending on social programs, loosely dubbed “Reaganomics”. What were some of the major specific features of Reaganomics? Did they achieve their goals? Your paper should be 3-4 pages in length and conform to CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA (Links to an external site.). Include at least one scholarly reference in addition to the course textbook and one primary source (a source created at the time of the event). Any websites used should be quality websites and NOT encyclopedia type sources with basic information.

An essay about American government. Can be about freedom, oppression, immigration, economic prosperity, etc. Then provide several examples of the concept you choose(Can be any from above).

Argue for a position on the scope of free speech – what is the justification for the right to free speech, and how expansive should this right be? Apply your position to at least one of the cases we’ve discussed related to hate speech (Collin v Smith, R.A.V. v City of St Paul) – should the court’s ruling be changed, in light of your position on free speech?Why or why not?The primary goal of your paper is to provide convincing answers to the prompt above. With that said, a good paper requires more than convincing answers; it will include exposition that provides background for the reader and makes the structure of paper clear.In particular, your papers should do the following three things (in addition to providing convincing answers!):1) Include a brief introduction, where you explain what you’ll do in the paper. Be sure to state the thesis that you’ll argue for (for example, “In this paper I argue that Mill’s position on the scope of free speech is superior to those of Meiklejohn, Redish, and Emerson”).2) The prompt requires you to argue for your preferred position on the scope of free speech. Before you argue for your preferred position, you must explain each of the four positions on the scope of free speech that we’ve covered in class(Mill, Meiklejohn, Redish, Emerson).In particular, this requires that you do two thingsi. Explain how the law can limit speech, andii.Compare and contrast each position. For instance, what value(s) is the freedom of speech meant to serve, according to each author?3) The prompt requires you to apply your preferred position on the scope of free speech to one of the cases we’ve covered related to hate speech. Before you apply your position to one of the cases we’ve discussed, you should briefly describe(1) the nature of hate speech and (2) some details of the case you will consider. In particular, this requires that youi. Explain what hate speech is, and what it is not (for instance, speech that merely makes someone angry is not hate speech). You are not required to discuss Waldron’s view on hate speech here, but if it helps you make the discussion clearer, then you arewelcome to do so.ii. Summarize the facts of the case you will consider.iii. Explain the court’s ruling in that case.

Reply to Peers *Note: Let’s try to identify which peer’s posting you are replying to by using their first name at the beginning of your reply. Replying to one or two peers will satisfy this criteria. Here is what the aim should be for when replying to your peers: 1. Extending meaningful discussion by elaborating on your peers’ initial posting through adding to or expanding upon the initial thoughts or questions posted. 2. Advancing the discussion by posing new questions to your peers or class. 3. Asking for clarification (in a respectful manner) on confusions you may have about initial postings by the instructor and/or peers. Peer Person: Emmanuel Nfawmor Presidential Powers and the Constitution: 1. Would the United States be improved overall if the leadership role of president as head of state, chief executive officer, and commander in chief were constitutionally assigned to other governmental officials other than one president? What do you think the advantages and disadvantages to giving the president all these powers are? Additionally, modern presidents have gained more power through different inherent powers (i.e., executive privilege, executive orders, executive signing statements and executive agreements). To begin with, I will unapologetically say “YES,” with the assertion that “the United States would improve if leadership role of the president in all three dimensions as mentioned above, were constitutionally assigned to other governmental officials other than one president.” Some presidents may know what is right but may not do what is right. As president Lyndon Johnson once said, “A president’s hardest task is not to do what is right, but to know what is right.” Moreover, when it comes to decision making, presidents make hundreds of decisions that affect the nation, and, in making these decisions, they must try to consider what is in the best interest of the country and act accordingly. It is true, according to the constitution of the United States, the president is head of state, chief executive officer and commander in chief, but as per the leadership role, the constitution grants the president specific executive, military, judicial and legislative powers. Thus, the president can decide and act based on such constitutional powers vested on him. However, the provision of checks and balances, as applied through separation of powers in the United State government, ensures that the president does not take powers into his hands through his decisions and actions. Reason why the powers of the president are checked by the legislative and judicial branches of the government. In my humble opinion, therefore, although the president has specific official constitutional powers, and certain unofficial or informal powers not stated in the constitution, I think “there will be more improvements (advantages) than disadvantages, if the leadership role of the president, especially as commander in chief of the arm forces were assigned to other governmental officials other than the president.” For example, the constitution grants Congress the power to declare war. However, citing their constitutional role as commander in chief, presidents throughout history have taken it upon themselves to call troops into action without getting a formal declaration of war from Congress. Despite the efforts of Congress to clarify war-making responsibility with the passage of the War Powers Resolution in 1973, for instance, there remains tension between Congress and the president when it comes to the use of U.S troops or military powers. As commander in chief, the president has the responsibility to ensure the defense and security of the nation and its interest around the world. The constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, but from the beginning, presidents have claimed the power to take military action without a formal declaration of war from Congress. Presidents have called out the armed forces more than 200 times in American history. Following the Vietnam War, Congress decided to restrain the president’s power to commit troops. Over president Nixon’s veto, Congress passed the War Power Resolution in 1973, which calls on the president to consult with Congress before and during any possible armed conflict involving U.S military. Since the law’s enactment, presidents have contested its constitutionality. The war in Iraq (2002), was another case under president George W. Bush. As a result of such power execution by presidents towards war without consulting the Congress, it has led to loss of lives of many U.S troops and other war related losses. Furthermore, regarding legislative powers, the president is also permitted to suggest legislation at any time and his legislative power is the veto. However, Congress has power to override the veto by two-third votes of the members of each house. The problem here is, it can be hard for Congress to obtain the votes and override the veto. On the side of judicial powers, the constitution gives the president the power to nominate federal judges and justices, in which case, the president may place men and women on the Supreme Court who have similar political beliefs. They may also alter the sentences of people convicted of crimes. Sometimes, such decisions may be objected by the masses and families of those who disagreed with the president’s decision to alter, pardon or order the release of the said convicts, especially if it has some political attachments. Moreover, nominating judges and justices, or the president’s appointment of judges, in most cases, remain on the bench for years after the president’s term is over, simply to support the president’s agenda. Thus, this allows the president to still have an influence on government long after his or her term is over. Furthermore, although the constitution gives the president power to appoint people, oftentimes, a president will use the power to nominate and appoint as a political tool, rewarding political supporters and winning new ones. This power also allows presidents to place in key positions people who support their policies, such a politically induced motive of appointment would not improve the U.S system of governance. All these, add to the disadvantages, which otherwise, would have improved things in the United States for the better, if the leadership role were assigned to other governmental officials apart from one president, especially in the situation where executive agreements have been used for more far-reaching ends. The North American Free Trade or NAFTA, is an example. 2. Do these claimed inherent exercises of presidential powers upset the system of check and balances between branches? Why or Why not? No, on one hand, yes, on the other hand, but to a lesser extent as seen through the executive privilege attempts by the president (executive branch). As explained above, sometimes there is conflict between the president and Congress or court over presidential decisions such as, taking military action and other legislative issues. Significantly, the system of checks and balances is intended to make sure that no branch is allowed to exceed its bounds, guard against fraud, and allow for timely correction of errors. In effect, the authority to take a given action rests with one branch, while the responsibility to verify the appropriateness and legality of that action rests with another branch. While the legislative branch enacts the law, the executive implements and the judicial interprets the laws in reference to the constitution, and applies its interpretations to legal controversies involving the laws. Although they are separate branches, but all have equal powers; for example, the president of the United States in the executive branch can veto laws passed by Congress in the legislative branch as well as nominating judges through checks and balances, while Congress can override presidential vetoes with two-thirds vote from its two houses (Senate and House of Representatives) and can amend the constitution to overturn the Supreme Court’s decisions. In like manner, the Supreme Court at the judiciary can nullify laws passed by Congress and presidential actions as unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court’s power is balanced by the fact that its presiding judges are appointed by the president with approval of the Senate. This can be done by each branch without upsetting the system of checks and balances as intended by the U.S constitution. Nevertheless, there are some few reasons, as an examples of why the claimed inherent exercise of presidential powers can upset the system of checks and balances between the branches is when the executive branch, headed by the president, often controversially attempt to expand its authority over the legislative and judicial branches, such as the power to issue executive orders by the president, the power to declare local and national emergencies, the power to grant presidential pardons, the power to withhold information from Congress through executive privilege, to name but a few.

Assignment: Provide an approximate 1600-word document analyzing important concepts in the readings. Ensure your apply the discussion points below and assume you are writing for an uninformed reader that knows nothing about the topic and has not read what you read. Provide an introduction, body, and conclusion. Analyze, discuss, and apply the following: 1. The interagency (local, state, and federal governments, Non-Governmental Organizations, volunteer organizations, etc.) response to the 1900 Galveston flood. Include a discussion regarding lessons learned and the contribution to the interagency emergency management. 2. The interagency (local, state, and federal governments, Non-Governmental Organizations, volunteer organizations, etc.) response to the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and Fires. Include a discussion regarding lessons learned and the contribution to the interagency emergency management. 3. The interagency (local, state, and federal governments, Non-Governmental Organizations, volunteer organizations, etc.) response to the 1918 Great Influenza Pandemic. Include a discussion regarding lessons learned and the contribution to the interagency emergency management. INSTRUCTIONS: DO NOT list out the topics or questions and answer them, APA style, provide an introduction, body, and conclusion, 12 references.