Category: American politics

An adequate solution to a problem of such a broad scope as the under-representation of Asian Americans in US politics requires addressing the causes of the issues and the means for their elimination. Since the recommendations refer to the necessity of new legislative efforts to enhance Asian Americans’ participation in the voting process and overall political life of the country, it is relevant to place solutions in the legislative context as well. The vast disproportion between the percentage of Asian American individuals within the overall US population and the rate of their representation in office might be addressed by improving the likelihood of this community engaging in the political process. This goal might be achieved through designing both federal and state community organizations to improve political literacy. The collective efforts aimed at facilitating the representation of the Asian American community in state and national politics will ensure that more individuals consider voting and participating.

Another critical area for improvement that might be beneficial in problem-solving is the enhancement of practices for the contact between Asian American citizens and political representatives. It might be achieved through the creation of specific committees that would specifically consider Asian Americans’ concerns and translate them to the political field. Within the context of such measures, stereotyping and racial discrimination might be reduced (Visalvanich, 2017). People should not only be encouraged to participate in the political process but also obtain an opportunity and means to express their concerns. The establishment of special bodies to work with this population will be a trigger for consecutive improvements based on the enhanced social perception of Asian Americans within the political context.

More importantly, since the lack of legally processed naturalization cases for Asian Americans constrains their opportunities to become candidates, special legislation is required to simplify naturalization procedures for Asian Americans. This effort will provide the under-represented community with the legal basis for engaging in the elections both as candidates and as voters. Moreover, since the naturalization process involves learning history and language, the naturalization legislation will be capable of eliminating the language gap as a significant constraint to representation rate growth. Thus, powerful and systematic legislative and community-based measures are required to combat the problem of Asian American under-representation in US politics.

In summation, the investigation of the problem of Asian Americans’ passive participation in elections unveiled the inadequate representation of this population due to stereotyping, racial discrimination, lack of contact with politicians, and cultural barriers. Although Asian Americans constitute a large portion of the US population and commonly work in prestigious positions, few Asian Americans are occupying public positions on both federal and state levels. To eliminate the causes of the problem, legislative efforts are required. Among possible solutions to the problem, there are community-based organizations for political literacy improvement, improved contact through the establishment of bodies aimed at working with Asian Americans’ concerns specifically, and naturalization law facilitation. Positive changes have already been noticed in the example of Kamala Harris’ position as a Vice President, who is likely to promote the interests of the Asian American community on a federal level. The proposed solutions will allow for eliminating stereotypes, increase the number of Asian American candidates, and ultimately provide this large community with role models to follow in the future.

Reference

Visalvanich, N. (2017). Asian candidates in America: The surprising effects of positive racial stereotyping. Political Research Quarterly, 70(1), 68-81.

With a party-line vote of 50-49, the US Senate on Saturday, March 6, 2021, passed President Joe Biden’s stimulus bill. The package, which is worth a sweeping $1.9 trillion, passed through the House of Representatives on Wednesday, March 10, 2021, and the Head of State signed it into law the next day on Thursday, March 11, 2021. The package addresses the ongoing crisis’s economic effects while simultaneously tackling poverty-related issues (Kaplan). Its impact on society would be far-reaching as the nation navigates through the difficulties of a global pandemic that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans (Kaplan). It is the second time during the coronavirus epidemic that the US government is enacting a law to protect its citizens economically. The first time it did so was in 2020 during the Trump administration. Biden’s Stimulus Package is his first major policy as US President. I support the new law because it extends jobless benefits, offers direct payments to individuals, gives financial assistance to state and local governments, presents monetary aid to schools, and provides funding for coronavirus-related priorities.

The first reason I support the American Rescue Plan is that it extends jobless benefits to Americans. It keeps the weekly enhancement on unemployment assistance at $300 until May 1, 2021 (Liu). The aid, which arrives in April, is an ambitious antipoverty program that will help individuals cope with the current financial difficulties caused by the ongoing health crisis. President Biden’s Economic Rescue Plan also extends some programs within the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, signed into law on March 27, 2020, by President Donald Trump, until early September 2021 (Liu). These programs include Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) (Liu). The extension of both programs will provide much-needed assistance to gig workers, the long-term jobless individuals, and people who were traditionally ineligible for financial aid. Thus, the new law will cushion all Americans, particularly those without a stable income, from the pandemic’s harsh effects while at the same time preventing the American economy from crumbling.

The new legislation will also provide direct payments to individuals through the US, and this is the second reason why I support it strongly. Working-class families in the US will cumulatively receive one trillion dollars due to unsatisfactory job trends, which is more than 50 percent of the entire Rescue Plan amount (Liu). Thus, the majority of the money will go directly to families as financial assistance from the government. The US Job Report for January 2021, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, reveals that the current job market is characterized by modest job growth despite falling unemployment rates (Pickert). It is the second month in a row that the report bears disappointing economic news. The direct payments to families are timely as they might help reverse these negative trends. The tax waiver on the initial $10,200 of unemployment benefits is great news for individuals making less than $150,000 annually, as reflected in their 2020 tax filings (Liu). Couples earning less than $150,000 per year will receive up to $20,000 of unemployment insurance benefits (Liu). The program has the best interest of Americans at heart, which is why I am supporting it.

State and local governments will get substantial financial assistance courtesy of President Biden’s Rescue Plan, which is the third strong reason I support the new law. In total, states and local governments will receive about $350 billion out of the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 Stimulus Package (Davison). The money sent to state and local governments will boost their financial standing by addressing current deficits and aid small businesses lacking access to market capital. States and local governments are experiencing financial deficits because the ongoing health crisis significantly impacted small and medium enterprises. It is these businesses that have been remitting most of the taxes that have sustained the local and state governments. The $350 billion from the government will help local and state governments meet recurrent expenditure, fund the ongoing projects, and create and implement better policies (Davison). In the long-run, these improved rules and regulations will help the locals and stabilize the general economy.

My fifth reason for supporting the new legislation is that it provides financial aid to schools across the country to accelerate their re-opening plans and full-time in-person instruction. The new law allocates $10 billion to schools to expand their abilities to test students, staff, and visitors for COVID-19 (Richards and Alltucker). In total, K-12 schools will receive $122 billion to accelerate return to normalcy (Richard and Alltucker). The Rescue Plan Act of 2021 also gives higher education $40 billion to combat COVID-19 and related effects. Another $7.6 billion from the Stimulus Package will help homeless children, or those with special needs, to make necessary adjustments. Schools in each state can use their share of the $122 billion to improve buildings (to facilitate social distancing), buy protective equipment, hire additional members of staff, install more WI-FI hotspots, or develop additional learning opportunities (such as summer school) to help students recover lost time (Richard and Alltucker). How schools use the money will vary depending on their unique needs and specific circumstances.

Part of the Stimulus Package will also go to coronavirus-related priorities such as mass testing and vaccine distribution, which is the sixth reason I support it. Out of the $1.9 trillion, $400 billion will address the COVID-19 pandemic directly through mass testing and vaccine distribution (Kaplan). The money will help in infrastructure development to speed up the distribution of the vaccine. Without a doubt, one way to a faster return to normalcy is to vaccinate everyone, which can only happen if there is a proper infrastructure for vaccine distribution and mapping of the immunization progress. Once people are immune to the disease, they can return to their normal lives and businesses and commence sustainable economic growth. Full recovery will take a while, but the time could reduce with government intervention (Davison). The current Stimulus Plan only temporarily cushions Americans and places them in a better situation to chart the way forward. Notably, the country needs a more sustainable plan that encourages increased economic activity rather than simply cushioning people. The President has promised to release such a plan in the coming months.

Perhaps the only problem with Biden’s Rescue Package is that it does not outline how or who will pay for the huge amount. Typically, the government could pay for it by borrowing, printing more cash, or raise taxes. Borrowing is a popular way of raising funds globally, but its downside is that loans are expensive in the long-run. Letting the Federal Reserve print more money could work, but it runs the risk of causing inflation and the US dollar’s devaluation over other major currencies. Lastly, the option to raise taxes to cover the spending would seem imprudent as it could burden people who are already financially devastated by the pandemic. The alternative taxing mechanism excludes the poor and focuses on the wealthy, corporate organizations, and “public bads” such as pollution (Kaplan). Joe Biden’s administration should clarify to the public what funding source it intends to use to help them prepare adequately. People can only support and encourage the implementation of what they understand fully.

I support the Biden administration’s Stimulus Package because it is a desirable public policy and an ambitious anti-poverty program. It will help individuals, states, local governments, and learning institutions cope with the pandemic as the government prepares a more lasting solution (Kaplan). It also cushions the unemployed from the effects of COVID-19 and provides a roadmap towards recovery. The only problem with the policy is that it does not show how the government intends to raise the budgeted money. The direct payments it makes to individuals will improve their financial situation and help them survive the pandemic. Some of the resources will help state and local governments meet their budgetary deficits, complete ongoing projects, and implement new ones. The money will also make schools better prepared to improve learning by providing them the resources they need for testing students and staff, buying personal protective equipment, and improving existing buildings. It will also help schools to offer remedial studies when possible to help students catch up academically. The law is almost perfect, but the administration must follow it up with a more comprehensive long plan.

Works Cited

Davison, Laura. “Here Are the Major Parts of the $1.9 Trillion Biden Relief Plan (1).” Bloomberg Law, 2021, Web.

Kaplan, Thomas. “What’s in the Stimulus Bill? A Guide to Where the $1.9 Trillion Is Going.” The New York Times, Web.

Liu, Jennifer. “Biden signs $1.9 trillion stimulus package — here’s what it includes for unemployment.” CNBC, Web.

Pickert, Reade. “U.S. Jobs Report Disappoints Even as Unemployment Rate Falls.” Bloomberg, Web.

Richards, Erin and Ken Alltucker. “Biden sends $10 billion to schools for COVID testing as part of largest K-12 federal funding push.” US Today, Web.

American politics, especially their early version, are linked to the philosophies pioneered in England. Before the establishment of the United States as an independent republic, its movement leaders pondered the ideas of liberty and civil rights. However, the law was not transparent enough for ordinary people to understand – it did not have a structure or a logical flow. This trend changed after William Blackstone, a British lawyer, published one of his most famous works, Commentaries on the Laws of England. This collection of comments and discussions highlighted the role of the citizen in the country and greatly influenced the formation of the American ideas of the common law.

In his Commentaries, Blackstone outlined four sets of rights for persons, things, private wrongs, and public wrongs. The books were innovative in that they systematized and explained the basis of common law, which made the idea of one’s rights understandable to the reader without a law degree. Published in 1765-1769, the Commentaries reached America by the 1770s, several years before the establishment of the US.

Apart from being easy to read, the texts also contained ideas that aligned with Americans’ arising philosophy of liberty. Blackstone wrote that “political or civil liberty is the very end and scope of the constitution,” which one can see in the founding documents of the US. For example, the Declaration of Independence states that such rights as “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” are unalienable. At the same time, the Constitution posits that the goal of the people of the US is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” Thus, one can see the influence that Blackstone had on the Founding Fathers, providing a template on which they could establish the new country’s common law.

Tocqueville’s writing, Democracy in America, supports Blackstone’s position about people’s rights. Tocqueville considers people within a social system, putting people’s actions in circumstances and laws that surround them. This is a practice that is central to the common law described by Blackstone. Thus, in the US, the position of equality, based on the Commentaries’ foundation of liberty, leads to a particular set of laws that people have to uphold in democracy. Notably, both authors connect their understanding of democracy to the will of God, returning to the philosophy of revealed law.

Thus, America’s philosophy is firmly rooted in the idea that people exist under the law and the rights that were given to them by God. The same idea is present in the Bible: “All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.” The first documents of the US describe people’s rights as given to them by Nature and Nature’s God. The connection between law and scripture is direct in all legal works represented in this paper.

Overall, one cannot overstate the influence of Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England on the formation of American political philosophy. The lawyer made the principles of common law accessible to all, providing a succinct description of most existing legal issues. Moreover, Blackstone put the person in the role of a citizen who was guided by God’s law and was granted freedoms that should be entrenched in the country’s documents. In particular, the right to liberty was ascribed to each person, serving as a foundation for the central belief described in the American Declaration of Independence.

Bibliography

Darsie, Heather R. “Our English Legal Forebearers and Their Contributions to the Practice of Law and American Jurisprudence: Sir Thomas More, Sir Edward Coke, and Sir William Blackstone.” Northern Illinois University Law Review 40 (2019): 227-237.

“Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives. Web.

Jolly, Richard Lorren. “Expanding the Search for America’s Missing Jury.” Michigan Law Review 116 (2017): 925-943.

Miles, Albert S., David L. Dagley, and Christina H. Yau. “Blackstone and His American Legacy.” Australia & New Zealand Journal of Law & Education 5 (2000): 46-59.

Strauss, Leo, and Joseph Cropsey, eds. History of Political Philosophy. 3^rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. PDF e-book.

“The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription.” National Archives. Web.

As part of the 2018 trade war with China, President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on a number of US goods for Chinese buyers. CNN reports that four years after the move, which is still in place despite a change of administration, American soybean producers are feeling the negative impact (Lobosco). The main effect of this decision was retaliatory tariffs on US agricultural imports to China, which led to a decrease in the export of soybeans. Although, in May 2022, President Joe Biden took steps to discuss the removal of tariffs, there are still no clear decisions on this issue. After the introduction of tariffs on soybean exports to China, there has been a significant reduction in the sales of this agricultural product, which negatively affects the situation of American farmers. Many Chinese buyers have chosen to purchase soybeans in other markets, which has also led to a 17% reduction in US share in the sector since the start of the trade war (Lobosco). The article notes that farmers and experts are concerned about Joe Biden’s inaction on the need to eliminate existing tariffs. However, it is also noted that US soybean producers are also experiencing difficulties due to rising production costs, in particular the increase in prices for herbicides.

I chose this event for consideration because it has an extremely long history compared to other contemporary political events, as well as evident long-term effects. Trump’s imposition of tariffs and Biden’s current inaction on lifting them could have a significant impact on the country’s agricultural economy. In particular, against the backdrop of rising prices for production and a reduction in imports, farmers will be forced to reduce production volumes, which can lead to negative economic consequences. This is significant since this event may affect the economic imbalance in other areas of the economy, which is already affecting the entire US. Additionally, Biden’s current tariff policy could have a negative effect on public attitudes towards him, which will also affect the political environment. Finally, it is important that the continuation of the trade war with China will make it much more difficult to develop economic relations with such a major manufacturing and trading power as China.

I chose this topic because I was surprised at how long-term the impact of tariffs on US exports to China has been. I learned that President Biden is currently discussing the removal of these tariffs, but with the terms of restoring the volume of exports of American products to China. In this regard, I believe that the expansion of the domestic soybean market, which was the result of this policy, is rather a positive aspect. In my opinion, the US needs to minimize its economic dependence on China, which is exactly the purpose of the tariffs. I am interested in exploring this topic further, as I’m wondering if tariffs will be canceled or tightened. Additionally, I want to know what economic consequences these actions will have on the country’s economy.

Work Cited

Lobosco, Katie. “Trump’s trade war looms over soybean farmers 4 years later.”CNN, 2022.

Introduction

The podcast Biden’s Student Loan Dilemma by Michael Barbaro and Stacy Cowley examines the state of student debt loans in the U.S. According to Cowley; debt deferral has been the primary strategy used by the U.S. to provide relief for borrowers for the past two years (The New York Times). However, it has led to several unintended consequences, including economic. Thus, Crowley argues that the Biden administration is left with two options to choose from, comprising to cancel student loans entirely or force them to resume the repayment process (The New York Times). The primary obstacles to choosing one of these options are political, economic, and logistical.

Obstacles to Cancelling Student Loans

Deliberations regarding the cancellation of government student loan debt are currently underway, and there are few signs that a compromise is imminent. Meanwhile, rising education fees have made it difficult for learners and employees to settle debts via intricate government waiver schemes and employer-based loan payback systems. It is reasonable that some individuals who have previously repaid their college loans may feel disgruntled that they lost their opportunity to become debt-free. Indeed, such individuals would argue that students have a civic duty to repay their college loans. This is a logical argument given the claim by Crowley that the government is spending 5 billion dollars every month to maintain the deferral scheme.

Attempts to eliminate student loan debt garner much media attention, yet public opinion remains divided. The point of contention often revolves around who should be eligible and whether or not the national government should interfere. About six in ten Americans (67 percent) are in favor of some kind of student loan amnesty, with 24 percent opposing complete debt forgiveness (Aborn and Sean). A greater percentage of Americans (41%) favor debt rescission that helps all borrowers rather than just those with low incomes when exploring several possibilities for debt forgiveness (27%) (Aborn and Sean). This way, it can be argued that public opinion significantly influences the course of policy on forgiving college debt. It also explains why the Biden administration cannot develop an effective solution on the matter.

Tertiary education in the U.S. has traditionally been based on an implied social contract that is at the center of the country’s moral framework. Americans have always been committed to self-enhancement and socioeconomic progression throughout the country, with opportunity fairness as the widely acknowledged foundation for accomplishing these goals. This is evident from the podcast, which states that at least 45 million individuals have borrowed loans to pursue higher education (The New York Times). Even while higher education has a foremost pledge to the American dream of making social and economic transformation a feasible ambition for most Americans, the expensive cost of tuition has hampered its capacity to achieve this objective.

College loans are crucial because they help millions of individuals from low-income families pay for their tuition. All students are affected by ballooning education costs and state budget limitations, but Black kids are disproportionately affected. Consequently, while Brown v. Board of Education helped remove racial segregation in schools, equal access to education remains an American pipe dream. Many of these students cannot repay their loans and are hopeful that they will be forgiven. However, the President cannot legally pardon student debts by executive order. In other words, due to constitutional checks and balances of power, Congress alone can approve legislation granting extensive student debt cancellation. This explains why President Biden’s only strategy has been signing debt deferral executive orders, but he could consider declaring an affirmative action policy. However, many states have banned race-based affirmative action (Stanford University). For example, affirmative action could allow partial college debt forgiveness for students from impoverished Black households.

According to the podcast, most student loans are provided by the federal government. However, tertiary students had diverse reactions to the recently released federal budget. Although student organizations are pleased with a few of the larger budget components linked to the affordability of living, including accommodation and dental services, they are dissatisfied with the absence of metrics connected to the cost of higher education, job entrance, and psychological well-being (Yun). Student organizations note that Budget 2022 has no pledges to completely remove student debt interest or boost the highest income level for the Repayment Assistance Plan, as promised by the Biden administration during the last federal election campaign (Yun). In short, the latest budget had no broad initiatives for higher education students.

President Biden may adopt a number of strate­gies to reduce cur­rent and prospective student loan debt. Biden ought to make it his mission to persuade the states to lower the cost of pursuing higher education. This should include broadening the availability of low-cost and free degree programs and increasing the amount of financial aid made available to minority students and those who have children or come from low-income families. It is also time for him to speak out in favor of policing college debt servicers and extending debt pardons to individuals who have not finished their programs and want to re-apply. The President may also urge states to reduce current college debt weight via state tax incentives for students, state-sponsored repayment schemes, and loan amnesty initiatives for individuals who choose particular professions, such as education and health care.

A key issue widely debated regarding the student loan burden is the interest rates. According to the podcast host, interest rates on loans were paused in the past two years due to the debt deferral program. Interest on college loans is not a way for the national government to earn a fortune from the debts. This is done to balance the expenses associated with granting loans, such as inflation, since extending credit is risky. A few borrowers may fail on their repayments, resulting in lost income for the federal government; thus, the state lowers. its probability of losing funds by collecting interest. Students who take out a government college loan incur the same rate of interest, regardless they are earning basic income or have inherited fortunes. Undergraduates have a rate of 3.73 percent, while graduate students have a rate of 5.28 percent (Armesto). Making nil interest official or reducing interest on current debt might assist debtors in eliminating their loans without increasing the principal balance.

Expanding the usage of income-driven repayment (IDR) is likewise a viable option that President Biden should consider. Currently, the United States has a gradual student-loan cancellation scheme that is often overlooked in policy debates. IDR programs support cash-strapped borrowers who have experienced unfavorable life situations or have low-paying jobs. Even though there have been issues with the execution of IDR schemes in the United States, subsequent legislation has made it possible to rectify them.

Overall, the podcast is educative on the student debt crisis. Unfortunately, it fails to mention the essence of the problem, which is crucial to understanding the current standoff. Most student debtors become higher-earning individuals who have little trouble refunding their debts. In most situations in the United States, a college degree is a gateway to prosperity and a high-income career. Many people who are having difficulty repaying their college debt go to limited schools, the majority of which are for-profit universities. The disparity of motivations between students, institutions, and the state is at the heart of the student-loan crisis. Federal loans used to finance higher education are to blame for this imbalance. If students cannot repay their debts because of their bad employment situations, schools are not responsible for the debt. In reality, taxpayers are the ones who foot the bill.

Conclusion

To conclude, partisan politics plays a crucial role in shaping the direction of the debate on forgiving student loans. Supporters of student debt relief believe that letting repayments start before the elections could dampen Democratic support participation, particularly given the President’s inability to achieve significant policy initiatives. Enabling payments to restart, many Democrats fear, may have political repercussions for the party as it attempts to preserve its narrow House and Senate majority (Egan). Indeed, this was reflected in the poll by Bipartisan Policy Center, which showed that Republicans are far more inclined (40%) than Democrats (4 percent) to reject the federal government canceling college loans (Aborn and Sean). This means that a lasting solution is unlikely to be found in the near future because the matter is highly politicized.

Works Cited

‌Aborn, Maritte, and Ruddy, Sean. “New Survey Provides Insight into Public’s Concerns about College (Un)Affordability.”Bipartisanpolicy.org, 2021.

Armesto, Jason. “Could 0% Interest Rates Settle the Student Loan Debate?”Fortune, 2021.

Egan, Lauren. “White House Confronts Political Pressure to Extend Pause in Student Loan Payments ahead of Midterms.”NBC News, 2022.

Stanford University. “Borrowing While Black: Understanding What Makes Student Debt a Crisis for Black Students.” Stanford.edu, 2020. Web.

The New York Times. “Biden’s Student Loan Dilemma.”The New York Times, 2022.

Yun, Tom. “‘Missed Opportunity’: Budget 2022 Gets Lukewarm Reviews from Student Groups.”CTVNews, 2022.

The idea of natural law is one of the oldest law systems that exist in the world. While its roots go back to Ancient Greece and Rome, natural law has remained a part of modern history. [1] In particular, the rise of Christianity contributed to the evolution of natural and revealed law and their influence on civil society. [2] Some scholars argue that, under the influence of Christian philosophers, natural law at least partially shaped the major pillars of American political philosophy, which can be seen in such documents as the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

To analyze the role of natural and revealed law in American political thought, one must understand these law systems’ main concepts. Natural law postures that people possess a set of intrinsic values that form according to human nature. [3] Therefore, by interacting with one another, people eventually determine particular human rights that they wish to uphold. Christian philosophers expand on this idea and argue that people are unable to form such natural laws perfectly due to the consequences of the Fall. [4] Revealed law, guidance from God delivered through scripture, complements people’s nature and strengthens their understanding of the law. [5]

The Ten Commandments is an example of revealed law; they have such statements as “You shall not murder,” “You shall not commit adultery,” and “You shall not steal.”[6] Thomas Aquinas, a Christian philosopher, wrote that “more than all other animals man is a political and social being.”[7] Thus, civil society is a natural progression of one’s inclination given by nature, and natural and revealed law are what allow one to exist with other humans in peace and prosperity.

At the same time, civil law is a type of human-made law that is not intrinsic but can be changed and revoked. It is a contract that ensures that the person lives for the good of the city, while the city supplies that person with resources that one human cannot obtain on their own. [8] While civil laws are not explicitly based on natural laws, many official documents make assumptions about what is inherent to human nature, thus finding connections to natural (or revealed) law.

In the Declaration of Independence of the United States, one may read, “[all men] are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”[9] The natural right to live and let live is undisputed by civil law, which upholds the idea that God has guided people not to infringe on others’ fundamental rights. At the same time, the Amendments to the US Constitution give people rights to “free speech,” and ensure that one will not “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”[10] Here, one can see the same idea that people’s lives, property, and certain freedoms are sacred – a belief that mirrors the original Ten Commandments. [11]

One can see that civil law is intertwined with the idea that people, regardless of what the legal process may be, are entitled to some indisputable rights that have roots in natural and revealed law. In the case of the Declaration of Independence, the link to the revealed law is transparent. Although other documents do not mention natural law or Christian philosophy, they value the same principles that were explored by Aquinas and other Christian philosophers. Thus, American Political Philosophy heavily relies on the ideas of natural and revealed law, assuming that people have certain rights that cannot be challenged but must be enforced by civil law.

1. Benjamin Fletcher Wright, Jr., American Interpretations of Natural Law: A Study in the History of Political Thought (New York: Routledge, 2017), 157.
2. Justin Buckley Dyer, “Reason, Revelation, and the Law of Nature in James Wilson’s Lectures on Law,” American Political Thought 9, no. 2 (2020): 265.
3. Thomas G. West, The Political Theory of the American Founding: Natural Rights, Public Policy, and the Moral Conditions of Freedom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017), 37.
4. Dyer, 278.
5. Russell Kirk, “Natural Law and the Constitution of the United States,” Notre Dame Law Review 69, no. 5 (1993): 1036.
6. Ex. 20:13-15, NIV.
7. Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, eds. History of Political Philosophy, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), chap. 10, Kindle.
8. Strauss and Cropsey, chap. 10.
9. “Declaration of Independence: A Transcription,” National Archives, 2020.
10. “The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription,” National Archives, 2020.
11. Philip A. Hamburger, “Natural Rights, Natural Law, and American Constitutions,” Yale Law Journal 102 (1993): 910.

Bibliography

“Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.”National Archives. 2020.

Dyer, Justin Buckley. “Reason, Revelation, and the Law of Nature in James Wilson’s Lectures on Law.” American Political Thought 9, no. 2 (2020): 264-284.

Hamburger, Philip A. “Natural Rights, Natural Law, and American Constitutions.” Yale Law Journal 102 (1993): 907-960.

Kirk, Russell. “Natural Law and the Constitution of the United States.” Notre Dame Law Review 69, no. 5 (1993): 1035-1048.

Strauss, Leo, and Joseph Cropsey, eds. History of Political Philosophy. 3^rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. Kindle.

“The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription.”National Archives. 2020.

West, Thomas G. The Political Theory of the American Founding: Natural Rights, Public Policy, and the Moral Conditions of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Wright, Benjamin Fletcher, Jr. American Interpretations of Natural Law: A Study in the History of Political Thought. New York: Routledge, 2017.

Many insist that because Biden failed to follow through on most of his campaign promises over two years and made several poor political choices, his standing in society has declined. However, there is also a counterargument that Biden’s decline in social acceptance was caused not only by his political errors but also by the fact that he took office during a severe economic crisis. President Biden is contentious and deserves both praise and criticism for American society.

Biden provided many occasions for criticism, such as the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. Another example is failed Build Back Better plan, an investment program in childcare, education, and climate protection. His efforts to reform the police also were unsuccessful, as the parties could not agree on this. Biden’s public speaking weakness makes him vulnerable in a significant scandal. He is notorious for causing many mistakes in his talks, including mispronouncing names, numbers, and years.

Biden’s election was made possible by his antagonism to Donald Trump, the outgoing president. The differences between Biden, who put the US back at the forefront of foreign policy, and the odious Trump, who was radical in his focus on domestic politics, are obvious. Meanwhile, both presidents are similar in their statements to restore America’s former power, but Trump mentioned assisting the national economy and its citizens, while Biden stated the country’s role in international politics.

The outcome of the midterm elections for the US Congress, where the Republicans received a majority of the votes, is evidence that Biden did not act quickly enough to address the issues arising in society. In the event of an impeachment process, Biden would have little chance of retaining his position given the balance of power in Congress, his poor public speaking abilities, and his media influence. Since even the sensational Hunter Biden controversy is not clear-cut and might be Russian propaganda, there is currently no reason to discuss the possibility of impeachment.

In conclusion, it is likely due to high expectations that the Biden presidency is changing how society views him. Biden has not even been able to unite the Democratic Party, and some senators have already said they will not vote for him in the upcoming election. There were numerous successful cases during Biden’s administration, but prominent events like the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan overshadowed them. He turned out to be a weak public figure, which is very important in the modern world.

Accountability and transparency are important phenomena for every American politician, and the President is no exception. That is why significant attention is devoted to Biden’s 2023 State of the Union address. This speech is informative and valuable for people to understand what the Biden administration has achieved and what plans it has for the future. Joe Biden comments on issues that are central to American domestic and international contexts. In particular, the President advocates for bipartisan cooperation and democracy, acknowledges the lowest unemployment rate and emerging jobs, and explains the importance of American supply chains (Washington Post, 2023). Biden additionally focuses on taxation, medical costs, high suicide rates, inflation, and other fundamental phenomena that directly influence Americans (Washington Post, 2023). In the speech, he expresses hope that all politicians will unite their efforts to make life in the USA better.

Joe Biden’s speech has a few notable strengths and weaknesses. On the one hand, advantages refer to the content because the President delivered important information. It is good that Biden highlighted the achievements of his administration, which included the lowest unemployment rate in history and efforts to minimize the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukrainian crisis (Washington Post, 2023). Simultaneously, Biden commented on establishing fair taxation and economic safety in the United States (Washington Post, 2023). On the other hand, weaknesses refer to how the President presented his speech. He stammered, made minor mistakes, and kept speaking while the audience applauded (Washington Post, 2023). All these issues resulted in the fact that listeners should have made some effort to catch Biden’s point.

Irrespective of the identified inefficiencies, I believe that the speech is valuable and informative. Today, the United States is facing many internal and external issues, and the President should be sufficiently confident and knowledgeable to explain how the nation withstands and overcomes them. I think that Joe Biden coped with this task because he covered the important issues and demonstrated that the US could succeed in fighting against all the possible challenges.

In his speech, Biden additionally highlighted the targets that his administration wants to achieve in the upcoming year. Firstly, the President offered to ban assault weapons to reduce the spread of mass shootings (Washington Post, 2023). Secondly, Biden admitted the problem of illegal immigration and its consequences. That is why he emphasized the importance of securing the US southern border and providing border officers with better equipment (Washington Post, 2023). Thirdly, Biden respects human rights and promises to ensure that every person will have the right to have an abortion (Washington Post, 2023). This information demonstrates that the President wants to make the US better and safer for Americans.

It is possible to convey the main message of the speech through a single quote. Biden said: “Democracy must not be a partisan issue; it is an American issue” (Washington Post, 2023). This idea is central in Biden’s speech because the President highlights the importance of bipartisan cooperation. Since various problems affect the United States, politicians should join their efforts to cope with all possible difficulties.

In conclusion, Joe Biden’s State of the Union address is powerful and valuable. The President commented on topical issues that affected the domestic and international politics of the United States. Even though Biden’s speech included a few weaknesses, the President highlighted his administration’s achievements and explained its future plans. That is why it is possible to consider the speech an informative summary of the American political sphere.

Reference

Washington Post. (2023). Biden’s 2023 State of the Union address – 2/7 (full live stream) [Video]. YouTube. Web.

Introduction

Americans are proud of their country and they believe the political system of the USA is almost perfect. Of course, there are some controversies, but it is possible to note that the political system of the country does work. The country manages to address some of the most serious issues concerning equality, religion and freedom. More so, many people think that political culture of the USA is also almost perfect as it unites Americans. It is necessary to take a closer look at the most controversial issues like religion and minority’s rights to consider whether political system of the country is that perfect and whether the US political culture does unite Americans.

Minorities Rights

The affirmative action has been seen as one of the most controversial laws in the country. This law is aimed at defending rights of minority groups. This law is especially associated with people of colour. In terms of this law, some employers are forced to have certain quotas for minority groups. Higher educational establishments often have such quotas.

On one hand, the law is very democratic and positive as minority groups can obtain equal rights with the so-called alpha people (Sander, 2004). On the other hand, many argue that affirmative action is still unfair as people pertaining to minority groups are often evaluated in terms of their underprivileged status rather than in terms of their qualifications and skills. In other words, people argue that existing quotas add inequality and tension between different groups. Some groups of people feel neglected due to their race or gender.

Notably, the Supreme Court makes quite controversial decisions in connection with the affirmative action. Thus, Sander (2004, p. 390) notes that the two cases Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger suggest that “racial preferences were permissible under some circumstances but not others”. In the first case, the Supreme Court agreed that the university could have quotas to ensure representation of all groups of students which positively affected diversity within the US educational system.

In the other case, the Supreme Court agreed that the university had the right policy concerning racial equality, i.e. students’ race was not even taken into account as only their skills and ratings counted. Therefore, even the Supreme Court made quite controversial decisions which can be an illustration of the fact that affirmative action is still quite controversial.

Religion

Religion is another controversial issue in the US society. Thus, the First Amendment ensures freedom of religious expression. The free exercise clause ensures people’s freedom to practice any religion. The establishment clause ensures that the state will not pose any standards concerning religious practice and will not establish a state religion. These two clauses protect people’s freedom in different ways as people can be sure that the state will not make them practice a particular religion. On the contrary, people can practice any religion.

However, some controversies surrounding the two clauses have become transparent. Thus, Weaver and Lively (2009) mention the case of Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith which can be an illustration of the controversy concerning the free exercise clause. Thus, the court considered that the use of drugs during certain ceremonies should be prohibited. Thus, the ‘wall’ between the church and the state proved to be rather transparent. Basically, the state interfered in the religious practices.

However, on second thought, it is possible to note that the wall between the church and the state is still untouched. Even though the state may impose some laws and rules, it is the right of a person to decide whether he/she can live in the community where certain practices are prohibited. Thus, the individual can choose to leave the place where some religious practices are prohibited. Of course, the state will not ban just any practice as the state only prohibits practices involving drugs use, violence, abuse, etc.

Political Culture

Admittedly, there are still some controversies concerning religion and equality. However, there is something that still unites Americans even in their disagreement. Thus, political culture is what unites Americans. A political culture is “a patterned and sustained way of thinking about how political and economic life ought to be carried out” (Wilson et al., 2012, p. 80). Americans believe that democracy is the most rightful path to follow. They also tend to use common sense when addressing various problems (Wilson, 2012).

Therefore, the entire judicial system of the USA is based on the use of common sense. Americans tend to use experience of previous generations. References to legal cases can be regarded as examples of such trend. More so, the cases mentioned above can also be regarded as illustrations of the use of common sense.

As for the democratic orientation, the cases concerning equality mentioned above can be regarded as examples of the trend. Thus, Americans strive for equality and equal opportunities for all citizens. Thus even though there are some controversies, the major ideas are shared by all stakeholders involved.

Conclusion

It is necessary to note that the political system of the United States is really sophisticated and can be regarded as almost perfect. There are various controversies concerning such serious issues as religion or equality. However, the US political culture unites Americans even in their disagreement. Americans share the same ideals which can help them the right decision to address the most serious issues.

Reference List

Sander, R.H. (2004). A systemic analysis of affirmative action in American law schools. Stanford Law review, 57, 367-483.

Weaver, R.L. & Lively, D.E. (2009). Understanding the First Amendment. New York, NY: Lexisnexis.

Wilson, J.Q., Diiulio, J.J. & Bose, M. (2012). American government: Institutions and policies. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

The dawn of the 20^th century is one of the most controversial periods in the history of the USA. In his book Murdering McKinley: The Making of Theodore Roosevelt’s America, Eric Rauchway explores the details of the accident which occurred on September 6, 1901, because this event led to the radical changes in the U.S. political course.

Focusing on the aspects of the murder of the U.S. President William McKinley by Leon Czolgosz, Rauchway also describes the particular features of the political and social life in the USA at the beginning of the 20^th century.

The author presents the full story of McKinley’s murder in his book, paying much attention to the details of that day, the consequences of the murder for the killer, the personality of Leon Czolgosz, his motives, and to the global effects for the country’s further political development which was connected now with the personality of Theodore Roosevelt.

Thus, the book covers the shift from McKinley’s conservative period to Roosevelt’s Progressive Era, where the murdered President, his killer, and his successor become the influential historical personalities.

Thus, Eric Rauchway states that the political modernization which came with Theodore Roosevelt was the result of killing McKinley by a person who suffered significantly during the period of McKinley administration, and that is why the President had two killers who deprived him of life and power.

Eric Rauchway’s discussion of the aspects of the murder, the personality of the killer and the following consequences of the accident for the politics and social sphere is based on the documents which are related to the period under analysis and on Dr. Lloyd Vernon Briggs’ diaries in which the details of Leon Czolgosz’s life fixed. Dr. Lloyd Vernon Briggs was a psychologist who developed his investigation of the aspects of Czolgosz’s case, concentrating on his motivation and reasons for murdering McKinley.

The results of Briggs’ research are important for creating the picture of the social environment in which Czolgosz lived and which affected him to kill the President. Having summarized Briggs’ notes, Rauchway presents the story of an average American whose life conditions are so poor that he intends to kill the President as the source of social problems, being mentally sane, but physically sick and hoping for the coming death.

The murder of William McKinley became the turning point for changing the features of the conservative political course during the late 19^th century to the dynamic and modernized beginning of the 20^th century. To explain the characteristic features of the shift from the point of the life of an average American, Rauchway concentrates on the life of Leon Czolgosz in the context of significant social events.

Thus, at the beginning of the 20^th century, the American society rethought the outcomes of the industrial revolution which had a lot of positive and negative effects. Rauchway pays attention to the fact that the family of Leon Czolgosz was among those numerous families in the USA which experienced all the negative effects of the revolution.

Concentrating on the fact that all the events have their causes and consequences, Rauchway discusses the murder of McKinley as a specific consequence of Czolgosz’s sufferings because he positioned himself as an anarchist. Moreover, the death of one President gave the start for the other President’s activity. In his book, Rauchway explores the first results of the President’s progressive direction and modernization of society, accentuating the range of Roosevelt’s methods to achieve the goal.

The author states that Roosevelt’s reforms and transformation of the political course was too radical, and it was supported only with references to the possible threats of the further anarchists’ actions. That is why, it was typical for the public to think of Leon Czolgosz as an anarchist in order to explain his motives.

Eric Rauchway’s Murdering McKinley: The Making of Theodore Roosevelt’s America is worth reading, and it should be discussed by the audience because of the fact the author presents a rather provocative vision of the events which characterized the period between the 19^th and 20^th century in the USA.

Thus, Rauchway discusses the problem of murdering McKinley and the aspects of Roosevelt’s development of his course from several perspectives. Stating that McKinley had two killers, Rauchway pays attention to both figures. Analyzing the features of Leon Czolgosz’s life and his possible motives for murdering the President, the author presents the picture of the real America in the late 19^th century when the social development depended on the aspects of the industrial revolution.

Examining the elements of Roosevelt’s Progressive Era, Rauchway provides the discussion of the consequences of murdering McKinley because the murder could be considered as the trigger for beginning the active transformation of the past system and for providing modernization of the society and politics.

Moreover, the author successfully combines the discussion of all the controversial questions in the sphere of politics, economy, and social life. Furthermore, Rauchway also provides the answers, describing the aspects of Czolgosz’s case.