Category: American Government

1.  What are PAC’s and super PAC’s?  How do they operate and why are they important?  
2.  Should we make every state a battlegraound by electing the President by a national popular vote?  Why or why not? Explain your answers.
3.  Explain the different theories of interest group politics.  Which one makes most sense to you and why?

Watch: The Constitution by David Barton
presentations were recorded live at convocation at Liberty University shortly before the election of 2008. Although David Barton refers to that election, the basic principles are valid at any time. Almost 10 years later, David Barton appeared with Governor Huckabee to discuss the moral failure in the United States for taking God out of the public square. This interview Constitutional Christian – is divided into four parts
America: Our Roots 
America and Divine Providence
Removing God from America
America: One Nation Under God
Using the information from the presentations, and current issues in America today, you will write
a 3- 5 page essay in current APA format. Your essay will have an introduction, conclusion, and level headings. You will include a title page, a reference page, one additional scholarly source not more than six months old, and at least three biblical references which include the full text of the scripture verse. Include the video presentations and the Bible in your reference list. These do not count as “additional sources”. Wikipedia, and similar sources, are not permitted. Do not simply write parts of Barton’s presentation verbatim. As a reminder, collaborating with other students on this assignment or borrowing answers from other students’ work is considered plagiarism and will be treated as such.
1. Explain the problems confronting the Constitutional convention in 1787, how they were addressed, and the role of God in the creation of the Constitution.
2. Barton gives several examples of scriptural references in the Constitution. Name any two principles, give the complete text of the applicable scripture, and explain how this constitutional principle does, or does not, work in practice today. Give specific examples.
3. Barton gives four examples of political issues, based on the Ten Commandments, which receive God’s highest priority. Select any one political issue and discuss how it is either in or out of compliance with God’s law. Discuss a specific court case related the political issue and the applicable commandment.
According to Barton’s presentation, the government should not be involved in meeting the needs of the poor. Cite a verse in the Bible that instructs us how to help the poor. Give an example of how you, your community, or your church serves the poor. Comparen this to a similar government program. Who provides a better outcome
to the recipient? Explain.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the SafeAssign plagiarism tool.
https://watch.liberty.edu/media/t/0_f04mrupx   (start at 24:15)

This is the last piece of your class project. Imagine you’re presenting your policy solution to Congress. Make it interesting and informative. 
Take your research from the essays and present it in a multimedia presentation using PowerPoint. Here’s a link to instructions on using PowerPoint if you’re new to it. APUS provide access to Office 365. Even if you don’t want to use Microsoft Office, Open Office can also be used to create PowerPoint presentations. Alternative formats are acceptable too if available to you, such as Prezio or Knovio with free versions or free trials.
There is no need to purchase additional software to complete the assignment.
REQUIREMENTS
A title slide and reference slide.
Each topic will have a four-slide minimum to explain the problem, illustrate the competing solutions, and explain why one is better.
At least one use of animation and one sound should be used within the final product.
Be sure graphics are readable.

ESSAY: Write
an analytic essay by taking a position and support it using expert opinion (the
readings, discussions, lectures, videos, presentations in class) – 60 points.
INSTRUCTIONS:
This is an analytic essay-exam answer that is meant to be brief (3 pages) but
well-reasoned and thoroughly examining a political behavior, phenomenon,
policy, based on the readings, NOT A RESEARCH PAPER. Take a position by
formulating and defending your thesis. Support it by developing an analysis of
the essay question. An analytic essay is a type of expository essay. I am
attaching for you its rubric.
ESSAY
QUESTION:
How would
you explain the gap between rhetoric and reality in the idea of the American
Dream? Do you believe in the American Dream? If yes, why? If not, why not?
Definition
of rhetoric: rhetoric: [noun] the art of speaking or writing
effectively: such as. the study of principles and rules of composition
formulated by critics of ancient times. the study of writing or speaking as a
means of communication or persuasion.
The American Dream: The American Dream is the belief that anyone can attain their
own version of success in a society where upward mobility is possible for
everyone.
The “American Dream” is a sort of ethos or set of beliefs that
drive many U.S. citizens as they work toward creating a life for themselves.
This set of ideals – which includes notions of individual rights, freedom,
democracy, and equality – is arguably centered around the belief that each
individual has the right and freedom to seek prosperity and happiness,
regardless of where or under what circumstances they were born.
INSTRUCTIONS:
This is an analytic essay-exam answer that is meant to be brief
but well-reasoned and thoroughly examining a political behavior, phenomenon,
and policy, based on the Revel readings, not a research paper. It is not
necessary
or even recommended, that you research beyond the course
readings to complete it. But you should discuss the texts in some detail and
use short quotes when appropriate.
Length:   3 – 4 pages, double
spaced, Times New Roman (12), 1-inch margins
STYLE:   All references must be cited.
Use MLA in-text citation next to quotes or paragraphs with author’s
last    
Name
and page number, e.g. (Nathan, p.25). In our case (Struggle for
Democracy, ch.11, p 3).
Provide
a list of readings cited in a ‘works cited’ page in the end, or your 4the page.
Although you are
using only The Struggle for Democracy, the works cited page is a mandatory part
of your essay.

Assignments :find at least one article that identifies one more weakness of modern day public opinion pole. Summarize this article. Provide one example of a poll affected by this issue or issue. Evaluate the potential solution to the problem and offer for your opinion on whether or not this is adequate. If not, what are your suggestions for other solutions?
Submission method : your paper should be a minimum of 400 words double space with a title page and reference page and text citations. The title and reference page do not count toward minimum word count. A Microsoft document is required and you must ensure your assignment is properly uploaded by the due date.

This is a discussion post reply to this below with a 150-200 rebuttal/submission. Your response should be more than just “I agree/disagree”. Challenge the person’s claim with facts and/or an informed opinion. The judicial branch is one of America’s cores within the government as they decide the constitutionality of federal laws and resolve other disputes about federal laws(1). The legislative and executive branches both allow ordinary citizens to choose high-ranking public officials and to hold these officials accountable for their actions(2). However with the judicial branch, justices are voted into their positions within the court by the Senate. This shows a divide with representation within the system of government in the United States. Despite having a lack of representation, having an unelected judiciary is indeed beneficial to a representative government. By having elections for the justices in the judicial branch, it could create problems with those who are selected. Elected judiciaries could create bias within court cases, follow what the people tell them to do, be corrupt with their power, etc. When laws must be enforced, unbiased judges are needed to determine guilt or innocence and – if the accused is found guilty – the appropriate punishment(3). With these potential problems to having elected justices, it would most certainly put the current justice system and the government overall into chaos. Having the Senate choose who they believe is fit for the role of a justice within the courts, it shows no bias and allows for the right people to follow the laws set within the country. Federal judges are very important within the judicial branch of America’s government as they serve in the courts throughout the nation. These judges are found to “hold their office during good behavior”(4), as stated by Article III in the Constitution. It is argued by some people however that these judges shouldn’t be serving such a long time as it can cause them to lose touch with how they live their life, how the job affects both physical and mental health, distance themselves from the people in America’s society, etc., but they should not have their terms limited due to the problems it can cause. The reasoning for this lifetime role was so that it would remove them from politics and to ensure that they would view only the legal merits of a case and not make decisions with an eye toward re-election or re-appointment(5). Having a limit to terms would prevent these problems from occurring and would keep balance in the court systems. America’s current ways of how the justice system works allows judiciaries to follow the law and stay by what was set down in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court is one of the most important parts of the judicial branch as they take care of cases that usually affect the entirety of America and is the last federal court one can go to for their case. Nonetheless, the amount of justices that serve in the supreme court has been nine since 1868. It has been argued that this number shouldn’t be so low as the Constitution doesn’t limit the amount of justices that can, and that it would be beneficial to have more since the presence of only nine justices might constrain the number of cases the Court hears(6). Yet, this can cause some issues within the court itself. By adding more justices, it could cause politics to interfere within the courts, as justices have historically decided cases according to their own beliefs about the law and the case at hand, not because of any sense of obligation to the politics of the president responsible for their appointment to the court(7). Having more could also cause a split between the both Republicans and Democrats’ beliefs, which would prevent the Supreme Court from having their own independence and their ability to follow the laws of the United States

This is a discussion post, I will attach someone else’s response and I want u to reply with a 150-200 rebuttal/ submission. Your response should be more than just “I agree/disagree”. Challenge the person’s claim with facts and/or an informed opinion.
The United States Is a democratic republic meaning it has to main parties democratic and republican. The constitution states that federal judges are to be nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate.
During the presidencies many federal judges appointees are of the party of the president. Over the years the process of judicial appointments has become partisan which was not the intent. The nominees are questions about issues from gun rights, abortion, to federal power under the commerce law. In other words presidents nominate judges who share the same political perspectives as them. For example, “Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush looked for appointees who supported the ideological and philosophical positions taken by the republican party at that time particularly opposition to governmental intervention in the economy and to abortion.”This is what creates the problem of elected judiciary because judges tend to be partisan instead of A political. The judiciary was made to be unbiased and be neutral to both parties. An unelected judiciary can be more independent from political pressures allowing judges to make final decisions without the influence of political interests. Doing so will prevent the abuse of power and ensure that the government actions are constitutional. Not to mention judges may receive luxurious gifts influencing them to political parties.
The court needs some reform to take place in order to relieve it from bi partisan politics and restore balance.
Term limits should be limited because of several reasons including judicial accountability, encouraging diversity and preventing lifetime appointments. The supreme court justices now have served the longest in American history. Supreme justices hold onto their positions until the “right” person is elected into the White House to retire. Creating regular appointments would make the process less political. “Justice Breyer has argued that an
18-year term period would give justices enough time to fully learn the job and develop jurisprudence”. Since judges term is lifetime they get comfortable knowing they can’t get fired because it’s rare. Change will ensure judges are up to date with societal norms and expectations. With regular appointments in the first and third year of presidential election there are greater changes for judges to be appointed from diverse backgrounds. “Term limits will ensure that an entire generation of Americans will not suffer a further loss of their freedoms under a reactionary and partisan Supreme Court, and that no future Senate Leader can stack the Court the way McConnell did.” With term limits there would more effective representative governance.
Court packing is the idea of adding justices to the supreme court or lower courts to shift the balance in a liberal conservative or other direction. Increasing the number of justices can help rebalance the ideological composition of the court. Since it increased in numbers it also does in diverse perspectives preventing political groups dominating the court. “Expansion would allow the president to increase racial and gender diversity on the Court, and to appoint justices with different types of professional experiences. It would let the justices hear more cases each term and return the Court to the historical standard of having one justice oversee each circuit.” Since there aren’t enough judges supreme court cases have also increased heavily over time delaying cases. In general the framers intended to have representative governance.. The government today should intend to uphold that. Expansion of the supreme court is the best way to ensure there are judges that are fair because of their diverse backgrounds. The Supreme court has the final say in the case; it is only fair for the judges to all be unbiased to resolve the case in the most fair way possible.