Assignment 9- The Judiciary

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 9- The Judiciary

      The assigned reading for the week of 11/21/15 were 1803’s Marbury v. Madison, 1906’s Swift & Co v. United States (U.S.), 1919’s Schenck v. U.S. , 1954’s Brown v. Board of Ed. , 1967’s Loving v. Virginia, 1973’s Roe v. Wade, 1976’s Buckleyv. Valeo, and 2005’s Gonzalez v. Raich. In this discussion, I will discuss Schenck v. U.S. as presented in oyez.org, oyez.org write the “facts of the case” are:

“During World War I, Schenck mailed circulars to draftees. The circulars suggested that the draft was a monstrous wrong motivated by the capitalist system. The circulars urged "Do not submit to intimidation" but advised only peaceful action such as petitioning to repeal the Conscription Act. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and to obstruct recruitment.”

       I humbly disagree with the conclusion of the case. As a citizen in a democratic country one would think our freedom of speech is protected, but the reality is that it is not if it goes against the current political campaign. As it is portrayed in this court ruling, Schenck was simply informing fellow citizens of their options to refuse and peacefully argue back for their rights. It is evident from this court ruling that our opinions and actions are controlled, and a person’s honor and respect could be questioned. The minority or majority opinion will get little air time if is different from the narrative the political agenda coming from Washington D.C. has outlined. 

      

       I choose this passage because I think there is only minor difference between the freedom of speech in the USA and the oppressive actions that are taken in “communist” countries.  I think the minor difference is that in the “communist” country, they fear people organizing against the state and in the USA they do not fear as much. The USA is less fearful as they have figured out how to orchestrate political campaign and how to manipulate the population to not listen to those acting out against the government. There are many who yet trust the mass media/ social media and does not realize they are been fed biased sensationalized reports instead of critically looking at both sides of a story. In conclusion, the population in a democratic country have to learn how rhetoric, propaganda, slogans, sensationalized reporting, researching both sides to the story, campaigns and marketing work in our every day lives.

Reference

Schenck v. United States. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 27, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47

Assignment 8- Presidency

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 8- Presidency

     The assigned reading for the week of 11/14/15 were John F Kennedy’s 1961 Inaugural Address, Kennedy’s 1963 American University Commencement Address, Ronald Reagan’s 1981 Inaugural Address & 1984’s State of the Union Address, Barack Obama’s 2004’s Keynote speech, Obama’s 2008 Speech on a Race: A More Perfect Union, Obama’s 2008 Father’s Day Speech, Obama’s 2008 Victory speech and lastly Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Address. In this discussion, I will discuss an excerpt of Kennedy’s 1963 American University Commencement Address, he states:

           “I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in 

           an age where great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear

           forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an

           age where a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force 

          delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age

           when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind

          and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.”

        I am in agreement with President Kennedy as nuclear war fare is something to be feared and be worrisome about. One may not recognize the dangers that are possible through nuclear war fare. In 1945, the United States was the first and still the only nation to use atomic weaponry during wartime when it drops an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima (History.com, 2009). This ignited the nuclear arms race, this is the content in which President Kennedy is speaking in. The USA atomic bombing occurrence has been cited as the end of world war 2, and the beginning of the cold war by many historians (History.com, 2009). The atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima killed approx. 80,000 people and caused catastrophic secondary effects to survivors and near by villages (History.com, 2009).

       I choose this passage to speak about previous occurrence surrounding Kennedy’s speech. I think if one does not know the history of nuclear weapons his speech can be less understood for what it is meant to be. I think the occurrence of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was a terrible act, that put those living in the USA in great danger as the world knows what happen and it was not that long ago. I believe this is why our federal government works hard to keep the USA as a leader in foreign negotiations because there is great fear of the unknown. 

Reference

Kennedy, J. (1963, June 10). American University Commencement Address. Retrieved Nov 14, 2015        from http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkamericanuniversityaddress.html

History.com Staff (2009). August 06, 1945 : Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima

     Publisher A+E Networks. Access Date Novemeber 16, 2015 Retrieved from URL        http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/atomic-bomb-dropped-on-hiroshima.

Assignment 7- Congress

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 7- Congress 

          The assigned reading for the week of 11/07/15 were Christopher Ingraham May 2014 Washington Post Newspaper articles “America’s Most Gerrymandered Congressional Districts”  and “What 60 years of Political Gerrymandering Looks Like”.  Ingraham’s  in these article addressed the practice of  gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is  explained in the articles to be congressional district are redrawn to manipulate the boundaries of an electoral constituency  in a way it is in favor of a group either a political party or economic class. In “What 60 years of Political Gerrymandering Looks Like”, he states :

              “What does all this mean? It means states can actually control the extent of

              gerrymandering. Take New York, for example. It's the one state among the 

             eight that has shown a meaningful decrease in the level of gerrymandering 

             across multiple congressional terms. New York also has also set up an independent

              advisory commission that recommends congressional and state redistricting plans

             to the state legislature. This commission was set up in 1978, and shortly thereafter

              the level of gerrymandering in the state peaked and has been declining ever since.”

            I am in agreement with New York state setting up independent advisory commission to provide recommendation when is time to redraw the district. The oversight is necessary when power and influence is at stake. The act of gerrymandering when used for its intended purpose is one of good. As a minority population does not want to end up with their voices not being heard in a district; therefore, is preferable to have a district that doesn’t look geometrical but have people in them with a similar cause.

            I choose this passage to review because it highlights a solution for the troubles associated with gerrymandering. If gerrymandering is not utilized as supposed to and is used to ring election of house of representatives, then it is an assault to our “democracy”.  I see it necessary to have oversight of leaders redrawing congress district. The oversight is needed to assess the items pointed out by Seth Masket from the Pacific Standard, in the article “equal population size, absence of racial discrimination, compactness and contiguity of districts, preservation of county or municipal boundaries and preservation of communities of interest”. There is hope that other states will look at the initiates being carried forward in NY.

References

Ingraham, C. (2014, May 15). America’s most gerrymandered congressional districts. Retrieved            November 7, 2015, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/15/americas-most-gerrymandered-congressional-districts/

Ingraham, C. (2014, May 21). What 60 years of political gerrymandering looks like. Retrieved             November 7, 2015, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/21/what-60-years-of-political-gerrymandering-looks-like/