Category: Political Science

Welfare

The state has several responsibilities, as it is the custodian of the public interest meaning people rely on it for important services, such as healthcare, creation of employment opportunities, provision of social amenities, enhancement of educational services, and ensuring the security of citizens.

Welfare entails offering the minimum level of well-being and social support to the populace. In some countries, social support is treated as public aid and the government provides it with the help of aid organizations, informal social groups, spiritual groups, and inter-governmental organizations. However, countries differ in terms of providing these important services to the people and a number of factors account for this.

In capitalist states, such as the US, Britain, Canada, Australia, and Ireland, the term welfare is understood differently because the government is only supposed to facilitate individuals to achieve their ambitions (Ta-Nehisi, 2014). In this regard, each person has the role of paying taxes and the rule of law is given priority. In such states, institutions that are supposed to facilitate welfare are not developed since ethical principles are never followed given the fact an individual should determine his or her own destiny.

In Scandinavian states, welfare is important and political parties that win elections should always have strong policies towards improving the standards of living. In developing countries, especially those in Africa, Asia, and South America, welfare is not an issue of discussion because it does not feature in the political agendas of parties, as the main problem in these regions is economic and political development.

In Africa, the states do not have capacities to facilitate welfare services and the non-governmental organizations and the global governing institutions, such as the United Nations, fill the vacuums left. In communist states, the welfare services given to the public are regularized, as the state holds too much power over individuals and resources are communally owned. This paper looks at the factors that account for the institutional variations among states as regards welfare services.

A state is said to be developed when its institutions are well established to handle a social, political, or economic issue that threatens the survival of the locals. In the US, institutions are well placed to tackle political and economic conflicts that are likely to emerge whereas the Scandinavian countries, especially Norway and Denmark, have the strongest social institutions that cater for the welfare services, such as healthcare and employment.

One of the factors that lead to institutional differences is the efficient institution’s view whereby it is believed a society chooses an institution that is socially efficient. Under this model, a state opts for a system of resource distribution, which does not interfere with the performance of economic institutions (Piketty, 2014). The idea of efficiency is given priority as compared to optimality hence surplus, wealth creation, and output maximization is critical factors.

This perspective suggests that institutions should negotiate to prevent incurring unnecessary costs to gain competitive advantages. In the United States, the government does not set up institutions to provide welfare services to the population, but instead it negotiates with leading to companies to fund healthcare needs and education for the local populations. The ideological difference is an additional factor that leads to institutional variations, as each ideology has its principles and tenets.

In the United States, for instance, the effort is always rewarded leading to low taxation for the hardworking citizens given the fact the country is a supporter of the capitalist ideas (Cassidy, 2014). A belief system of a society has a strong influence on policy formulation and institutional formation. In countries that embraced socialism, such as Tanzania under Julius Nyerere, leaders wanted to promote the welfare of its citizens through the sharing of property under communal ownership.

In India, Fabian socialist beliefs were seen as the solution to the problems that affected the country at the time. In Korea, leaders in the North, such as Kim II Sung strongly believed that communism was the only available option in resolving the problems that people faced while Southern leaders led by Rhee and Park had a different view, as they were pro-capitalism since they wanted to empower individuals to create wealth and be independent.

From an incidental institutions perspective, the differences are brought about by the historical and political developments that a state has encountered. Britain, Germany, Russia, and the United States have gone through different political and social problems in history, which result in significant differences in the way institutions are structured.

In Britain for example, agriculture was commercialized long time ago and this played a critical role in the development of labor policies, especially the ones that dictate relations between the owners of the means of production and the proletariat.

This led to democratization, as the economy was under the control of the middle class who were politically assertive, something that helped in the fight against feudalism successfully. In Germany, the working class failed to seize the opportunity when it entered into an agreement with the ruling class leading to fascism while communism is Russia came about because of the inactiveness of the working class (Gough, 2005).

Models of Development

Market-friendly policies

Many developing countries in Asia, Africa, and South America are faced with an uphill task of ensuring they achieve economic, political, and social objectives, but they are faced with a dilemma of choosing the best application development model. In Africa and Latin America, states had an option of settling on the modernization model that called on the political leaders to borrow the economic ideas from Europe, as the continent had already taken off economically.

However, the ideas of Marxist scholars and leaders changed the developmental policies of the regions. Additionally, the developing state is currently following the Asian model keenly given the speed in which some of the countries in the region, including South Korea, China, Singapore, and Taiwan, are developing. The market-friendly policies favored by some western countries, present several opportunities given its robust principles.

The model suggests that the market should be free of certain pressures that limit the prices of products and the wages paid to employees. Under the model, the government does not have any role to play in the economy apart from protecting consumers from ethical malpractices. Based on this, the market should operate according to its internal logic where the demands influence the supply meaning it is self-regulating.

If suppliers are allowed to offer prices at the price they deem sustainable to their business, they will be motivated to be innovative, which is an advantage to the economy. The system functions well in the labor market whereby people are paid based on the knowledge and talents they possess. In a free market, any person is free to set up a business, as there are no barriers to new entrants, something that plays a role in ensuring equality in economically.

The state wishing to develop will benefit from strong trade policies that characterize the model, advanced monetary policies, capital flows that permit foreign investment, a steady wage system, respect of property rights, regulation of business activities through licensing, and informal market activities (Kaumfman, 2014).

Welfare State Model

The welfare state model is mainly utilized in the Scandinavian countries and is based on common values. Any state intending to employ the model will have an opportunity of sharing political goals with the purpose of encouraging social solidity. The state has to offer equal opportunities by ensuring security, which is in terms of personal safety, health, and food is provided to each person.

Discrimination is highly discouraged in the model and each citizen should have access to education and health. In the free-market model or the market-friendly policies, the rights of the individuals are respected, but citizens have the responsibility of obeying the state laws. Whenever an individual fails to follow the law, the criminal justice system is applied strictly and the rights of the convicted individuals are limited.

However, the welfare model is different since even the prisoners have rights and the state has to take good care of them. The system enables women to penetrate through the labor market that is always dominated by men hence giving them economically opportunities. In Denmark for example, the private sector has incorporated the welfare services into its operations and foreigners are treated as ordinary citizens who are entitled to quality healthcare services.

The case is different with other welfare states, such as Sweden and Norway that develop policies to integrate foreigners into society. The developing countries wishing to adopt the model are likely to benefit from innovation because the model is flexible in the sense that it aims at coping with the new challenges that people face socially.

In terms of gender equality, taking care of the special groups, the establishment of social amenities, and setting up powerful educational systems are some of the areas that the welfare model is so successful (Potter, 1992).

Asian Model of Development

The free-market model has always failed to reap the desired objectives among developing countries because it has been applied unsuccessfully in Africa and Latin America. Africa has been facing political and economic crises that have undermined the successful application of the western favored model.

For instance, the continent has hardly experienced peace because leaders want to remain in office forever and the only policies formulated are meant to realize personal political and economic ambitions. The Asian model gives powerful technocratic elites the power to make governmental decisions without consulting the public, as development is technical.

Additionally, public servants must exercise and embrace strong work ethics through the sharing of cultural values (Park, 2010). The model suggests the balancing of private and public enterprises, as leaving investments in the hands of the few rich is detrimental to the economy.

The African continent should consider employing the Asian model of economic development since it does not tie democracy to economic issues. Democracy is a special model that fits within the European continent and North American because of the culture that dominates the regions. However, it has failed to play a role in sparking economic development in Africa

References

Cassidy, J. (2014). Forces of divergence. New Yorker.

Gough, I. (2005). European welfare states: explanations and lessons for the developing countries, Arusha conference. New Frontiers of social policy.

Kaumfman, F. (2014). The man who stole the Nile. New York: Harper.

Park, J. K. (2010). The East Asian model of economic development and developing countries. Journal of Developing Studies, 18(4), 330-353.

Piketty, T. (2014). Excerpts from capital in the Twenty First Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Potter, D. (1992). The democratization of the Third World States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ta-Nehisi, C. (2014). The case for reparations. New York: The Atlantic.

The action of Russia in Crimea and Ukraine is of great concern to the United States and its western allies because it signifies aggression. The Ukrainian populace managed to oust their ineffectual and fraudulent regime after demonstrating for three months. The country’s parliament observed the democratic ideals by pardoning all political prisoners that the government had detained without trial.

The country’s constitution drafted in 2004 gives people the right to fair trial whereby the due process should always prevail. However, the overturning of events in the country never augured down well with the Russian government forcing the Vladimir Putin to authorize his soldiers on 28 February to occupy Ukraine with claims of providing security to Russian nationals living in the border. This was an infringement on the Ukrainian territorial integrity.

The Russian president connived with the Crimean rebels to organize a referendum to determine whether the citizens of the Crimean Peninsula wanted to reunite with the Russian Federation.

Even though the results of the vote favored Russia, it suffered a setback because members of the G7, EU, and the NATO were quick to denounce the move terming it a plot to deprive Ukraine of its rightful position as a sovereign state. Irregularities marred the voting process since international watch bodies were absent, and the presence of the Russian military influenced the vote.

While Russia has been aggressively reasserting its position as the region’s hegemony, the United States under the leadership of Obama and the western powers have been silent on the Ukrainian crisis. The EU member states have drafted several sanctions, including cutting trade links and withdrawing visas for the powerful individuals associated with the Russian president.

However, implementation of these sanctions is problematic given the fact Russia is Europe’s major supplier of oil and gas through Gazprom. The current leadership of the United States under Obama assumes that Europe is currently safe and Putin is willing to cooperate in realizing collective security interests. However, the current actions of Russia suggest otherwise because it is willing to go an extra mile to protect its interests.

This calls on the United States and its western allies to act before things get out of hand. Apart from the annexation of parts of Ukraine, Russia is forming a strong economic and political relationship with its former colonies, such as Abkhazia and Armenia. Russia does not see the taking over of previous colonies as a violation of international law as it believes these countries are part of the Russian Federation.

Putin’s administration decided to give the American rebel Edward Snowden asylum, which proves it poses a serious threat to the American national interests. From a realist perspective, the United States should intervene, but military intrusion is unattainable given the current nature of the international system.

The current American foreign policy towards Europe is insufficient in protecting weaker states, such as Ukraine given the fact the country focuses too much on strengthening trade ties with Asia, especially the Asian tigers such as China, Singapore, Taiwan, and Malaysia.

This shows that the American foreign policy makers are missing something and they have to act urgently to avert a crisis that Russia is likely to bring in Europe. This entails readjusting the relationships with the aggressor to ensure the continent remains safe and free from belligerent actors.

The US and its western allies should consider designing short-term and long-term policies that will serve to deter Russia’s aggressive behavior. Reviewing America’s missile defense policy will play a role in silencing Russia in the long-term because the strategy was tested and found effective during the Cold War era.

In the bipolar world order, Russia and the United States could not engage in military actions against each other because of mutually assured destruction. In other words, there was a strategic balance between the two countries as far as ballistic missiles were concerned. Russia has proved that it can apply military force to achieve its strategic interests hence the United States should consider enhancing its ballistic missile defense in Europe to safeguard its national interests, as well as the interests of its allies.

Reports in Russia suggest that the country is engaged in diversifying weaponry, a program that was set up just after the Cold War. While Russia is planning to pump close to fifty-five billion dollars to the military industry, the US is simply allocating eight billion dollars to the industry. Russia is modernizing the types of armaments it has, and it currently obtained intermediate-range ballistic military hardware, which is some of the arms forbidden in the Nuclear Weapons truce.

While the US had accepted to drop its military ambition towards Russia, the current actions in Ukraine should serve as a motivation in assessing the missile defense plans. For instance, the Obama administration should consider implementing Bush’s missile plan that aimed at developing X-band radar, which is a military weapon with high capability of tracking events in Europe.

The short-term strategies include showing commitment to the already existing military organization in the region by providing adequate resources. The US should move to assure NATO members in East and Central Europe because they are wary of Russia’s military capabilities.

Obama regime should convince these states that NATO has the power to contain the spillover effect from the Ukrainian conflict; hence, their territorial integrity is already secured. Additionally, the US and its allies in Western Europe have to enact meaningful sanctions that go beyond punishing only twenty individuals in Putin’s government and friends. The US should target senior government officials in charge of policy formulation, as they are responsible for interfering with Ukrainian sovereignty.

These sanctions should include freezing their bank accounts and withdrawing visas. Fortunately, the United States has a policy enshrined in the country’s constitution, denying people associated with gross misconduct entry into the country. The Sergei Magnitsky Act permits the regime of the day to slap monetary sanctions to influential Russian business people and political leaders who donate finances towards programs aimed at infringing on human rights.

The US has to work with European countries in dealing with Russia about its actions in Ukraine and the entire East Europe region. For instance, the US should agree with France to stop selling assault ships to Russia. Similarly, it has to persuade Spain to deny access to the Russian navy in the North African front. The START treaty is flawed because it gives Russia an advantage meaning the US should consider pulling out of this military agreement because it affects its military decisions.

Bibliography

Evans, Alfred. “Putin’s Legacy and Russia’s Identity,” Europe-Asia Studies 60.6 (2010): 899-912.

Shchetko, Nick. “Ukraine government forces clash with rebels in Donetsk.” The Wall Street Journal, 29. 9 (2014):1-21.

Shively, Phillips. Power & Choice: An Introduction to Political Science. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012.

Introduction

Privacy is one of the main issues of concern in the current society where technology has become highly sophisticated. People are concerned about the need to protect their personal feelings, especially when they express them to people whom they consider their confidants. However, many governments around the world are trying to use modern technology to access some of the information that people consider confidential for the purpose of enhancing security or addressing public concern.

According to the research conducted by Smith (14), it was established that Americans highly value their privacy. They always try to use all possible means to ensure that their personal lives remain personal. There has been pressure on the government to eliminate all the technological instruments that it is using to spy on its citizens.

However, we have just learned that the Library of Congress has plans to archive all the tweets to form researchable information that the government can use to understand the needs of its citizens. This noble move will help the government to capture the varying opinions of its people on various issues. However, the main issue of concern is the privacy of Americans. People use Tweeter to communicate sensitive issues about business.

Others use this social media to share their personal lives with people close to them. Some of the information available at this site is so personal and sensitive that many people are worried that their privacy will be jeopardized by the state. This research will focus on understanding how this move will breach on Americans privacy and the possible state of privacy in the future.

Library of Congress’ Decision to Archive All Tweets

The public was shocked following the revelation made in early January 2013 that the Library of Congress was archiving all American tweets. Americans value their privacy, and many of them always make all the possible efforts to ensure that it is protected. This explains why the recent decision to archive all the Tweets of the Americans has raised a lot of concern. The management of the library has explained that the archived tweets will remain protected from any form of intrusion by any third party.

However, a section of the society is reading malice out of this move. It is not the first time the government is trying to breach the privacy of its citizens, and that of notable world leaders (Smith 14).

Many people feel that the government is interested in gathering intelligence that may not only help it track the activities of the criminals, but also enable it to gather other personal information that is relevant to the state. Some powerful people can use such pieces of information for their personal gains. The following are some of the questions that people are asking following the announcement of this decision.

1. What is the exact motive of the government in collecting such information?
2. Who are the people who will access such tweets once they are archived?
3. What guarantee will the government have that this information will be protected from misuse by personal individuals?

They are some of the questions that Americans have following this announcement. Others are even concerned about the scandalous tweets that would reveal their private lives that they have been hiding for years. Although the management of this library has tried to respond to these questions in order to assure American citizens that there is no malicious motive in the deal, many people are yet to be convinced.

China Uses iCloud to Spy on its Citizen

In October 21, 2014, a leading newspaper in China reported that the Chinese government is using the Great Firewall of China to spy on its citizens. The Chinese government has been struggling to quell the revolution that has been common in some parts of the country, especially among the Tibetans. More recently, student-led protests paralyzed the operation in Hong Kong, one of the most active cities in China (Torres 1).

These events got the government worried, and in its attempt to crack the whip on the dissenting voices, it has improvised the Great Firewall of China to help it track the troublemakers. This has been made simple because of the technology that the government uses to track down messages shared by users of iCloud.

The decision remained secret until some investigative journalists revealed it. However, the government has maintained that those are speculations that have no basis. However, the reports have credibly proven that the security agencies are not using the Great Firewall of China to access information in the iCloud. This has created worries among individual Chinese and companies using these services.

Similarities and Differences in the Above Two Cases

The two cases about the United States and China demonstrate a deliberate attempt by the government agencies in the two countries to spy into the personal lives of the members of the public. Both governments are denying the claim that they are breaching into the privacy of their citizens by giving lame excuses. The Library of the Congress is giving the excuse that the archiving is meant to provide information for research.

The Chinese government on its part is denying any possibility of having apparatus, which are meant to collect information from the citizens without their consent. These two cases have some differences. The main difference is that while the American government has accepted that it is archiving the tweets, the Chinese government has not accepted the claim at all. The Chinese move to spy on its citizens is motivated by its desire to crack the whip on the dissenting voices, while the American government is trying to enhance its security.

Prediction of the Future State of Privacy

With the ongoing advancements in telecommunications, the future state of privacy is very bleak. Although people cherish their privacy so much, technology is increasingly making it easy to access information from people without their own knowledge. It is now clear that any information shared using phones, internet, or any other online platforms can be accessed by the government without the knowledge of the concerned parties.

In the future, it will be almost impossible to protect one’s secret unless it remains in mind. There is a possibility that the government will have the capacity to gather information shared between individuals who speak face-to-face. This may be worsened by the growing tension in these countries. As Bell (64) says, many governments are now pursuing interests, which are not in line with the desires of their citizens.

This will hurt social life because almost all good things are shrouded with mysteries and secrete. The government will be at liberty to collect any form of information it desires from its citizens. This will hurt many, and the technology that we believe is helpful may be avoided by future generations.

Works Cited

Bell, James. Exploring the Singularity. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, 2007. Print.

Smith, Richard. “Library of Congress Is Archiving All Of America’s Tweets.” The Telegraph 2013: 14. Print.

Torres, Charles. “China allegedly using iCloud to spy on its own citizens.”Slash Gear 4.12 (2014): 1.

President Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East covers the interests of the US in Iran, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, Israel, and Libya. The Obama’s foreign policy in this block includes strategies for ending the Iraqi war, militarization of local groups fighting terrorism, the provision of aid to Gaza and Syria, rebuilding and constructing strong alliances with Israel, Libya, and Iran as a strategy for securing the interest of the US in the Middle East, and direct engagement of the citizens of this region in the democratization and demilitarization of different militia groups.

For instance, the Obama administration has pledged more than $900 million aimed at reconstructing Gaza, increased sale of legal military hardware to Saudi Arabia, where the US earned $60.5 billion in the year 2010, coerced the Iran government to support democracy and human rights through economic sanctions, and probable return of the US forces in Iraq to counter the rise in extremist Islamic militias such as the ISIL (Gerges 54).

The Obama administration’s approach in foreign policy in the Middle East is a mixture of trade alliances, promotion of democracy, thwarting of terrorism and extremist groups, and reconstruction of regions that have been desolated by prolonged conflicts.

Impact of the Congress

From the beginning of Obama’s term as the president, there has been mixed and sometimes heated disagreements in Congress with regards to his foreign policies. Interestingly, the Obama administration’s foreign policy in the Middle East has received opposition by the

Congress members from the Democratic and Republican parties alike. The opposition has hurt some of the policies such as ending the war in Syria, which was opposed by the Congress based on lack of prioritization, limited public interest, and minimal returns to the US economy.

Presidency in the US and the UAE

Similarities

In the US and the UAE, the president is both the head of government and the head of state. Besides, the two countries share similarity is the role of the president as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The constitutions of the US and the UAE have vested formal executive powers to the president who has the duty of appointing different state officers in the diplomatic, judicial, and executive arms.

Besides, the authority of executing international treaties, pardons, and adjoining the government of the day rests with the president in both countries. Also, the presidency in the US and the UAE is mandated with the role of signing bills into laws after endorsement by the legislative arms of the two governments.

Differences

The presidency in the US is an elective post that the holder can only occupy after the indirect election by the Electoral College. Since the presidency is elected in the US, there is a time limit of 4 years for each term and maximum of two consecutive terms for a single person. In contrast, the presidency in the UAE can be described as de-facto hereditary; that is, the president acts as the customary ruler at the same time through a leadership lineage.

Therefore, there is no time limit for a single individual who occupies the office. The presidency in the UAE is more of a ceremonial position, unlike the system in the US where the president exercises direct control in governance. Also, the presidency in the US is a competitive post while it is a reserve of a family in the UAE.

Works Cited

Gerges, Fawaz. Obama and the Middle East: The End of America’s Moment? New York, St. Martin’s Press, 2013. Print.

The process of retrieving information from the inhabitants of the MENA region may become extremely complicated for the representatives of another ethnicity due to the obvious cultural differences between the representatives of the reconnaissance team and the local residents.

Therefore, for the mission to be successful, the understanding of the Arab culture and mentality is required. Consequently, it is imperative that the culture manifestations of deference to authority, suspicion and risk avoidance (Wunderle 42) should be taken into account.

Deference to authority: Seeing that the Arab culture involves the idea of respecting the authority of the people that they are related to as subordinates: “Arab culture favors centralization of authority. Subordinates are expected to be submission and obedient to their superiors” (Wunderle 42).

Herein the necessity to use the power of authority when insisting on the information retrieval lies. It is crucial, therefore, to make sure that the negotiation process should be carried out after the representatives of the reconnaissance unit should introduce themselves properly and make sure that the local residents realize the significance of the unit’s mission.

The unit, thus, will have to use the aforementioned characteristics of the Arab culture in order to promote obedience among the local denizens and make sure that the people inhabiting the MENA region will be willing to answer the questions concerning the insurgents. It will be crucial to supply the team with what may help identify them as the representatives of “authority” (Abdallah 17). Specifically, papers and IDs may be necessary for proving the unit’s power.

Suspicion: Unfortunately, displaying mistrust to strangers is another characteristic feature of Arabs, according to Wunderle: “Arabs, in general, are very ‘conspiracy-theory-oriented’” (Wunderle 42). Thus, it will be imperative to establish trustworthy relationships with the local residents, convincing them that the unit is not going to pose any threat to their wellbeing whatsoever.

One must bear in mind, though, that the development of a sense of connection between the reconnaissance unit and the denizens of the area may be quite time consuming. In addition, the process of gaining people’s trust is more than carrying out “competitive and collaborative” (Moran, Abramson and Moran 329) negotiations between the representatives of the two cultures successfully.

Major efforts will have to be made in order to display the friendliness of the team and prove that no threat is being posed to the security of the people living in the vicinity. Consequently, the specified factor may serve as the reason for the local people to refuse from providing the required information to the reconnaissance team.

Risk avoidance: The last, but definitely not the least, the unwillingness to take responsibility for something that may have major consequences is another trait of the MENA region dwellers. As Wunderle put it, “Arabs tend to feel threatened by uncertainty and ambiguity, and thus try to avoid these situations” (42).

Thus, the unit will have to elaborate on the explanation of their demands so that the slightest chance for the local residents to misinterpret the unit’s intentions could be eliminated. It is only with the help of a careful analysis of the communication strategy to be adopted by the unit and a good understanding of the specifics of the Arab culture that the team can possibly retrieve the required data. Unless the people living in the vicinity consider the unit as a threat, they will share the necessary data with its members.

Works Cited

Abdallah, Salarm. ICT Acceptance, Investment and Organization: Cultural Practices and Values in the Arab World: Cultural Practices and Values in the Arab World. New York< NY: IGI Global, 2010. Print.

Moran, Robert T., Neil R. Abramson and Sarah V. Moran. Managing Cultural Differences. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014. Print.

Wunderle, William D. Through the Lens of Cultural Awareness: A Primer for US Armed Forces Deploying to Arab and Middle Eastern Countries. Sydney, AU: Military Bookshop, 2006. Print.

America and pluralist democracy

To some extent, America is not a pluralist democracy and to some extent it is. Lowi (1979) affirms that America is not a pluralist democracy because of its adoption of the interest group liberalism ideology. Here, overemphasis is given to processes rather than goals. This implies that public policies are made against a shaky background since no central administration has a say or no standards are followed. This undermines effective politics and democracy because no matter who is elected into power, the devolved agencies will continue having their way. In this light, America is not a pluralist democracy.

Conversely, Birnbaum (2001) believes that pluralist societies are an essential part of modernized states and that they provide the means with which individuals can express themselves and hence find unity in diversity. Grieder also echoes these sentiments claiming that there are several ways in which public interest can be protected in pluralist societies since public authority is placed under devolution. Through the insights of both writers, America is indeed a pluralist democracy.

De Tocquevile (1945) claimed that the organization of Americans into religious, political, and economic interest groups was an essential manner of ensuring that the public was educated about issues that mattered to them. The interest groups were a critical way of creating common identities since they united diverse groups and made them close their respective governments. From this author’s perspective, America was a pluralist democracy.

Congress limitations of the impact of money in political campaigns

Congress has tried to limit the impact of money in political campaigns ever since the late nineteenth century. This was through the Pendleton Act in 1883 which was enacted to make the civil service independent such that campaign contributions by public holders would not count towards their parties. After this legislation, corporations began funding parties thus leading to the 1907 Tillman Act which prevented campaign contributions by corporations.

This did not lead to substantial reform and therefore caused the 1910 publicity Act. At that time, it was stated that post-election disclosures of high amounts contribution to Senatorial elections needed to be disclosed. However, after it was found that some secret financiers were still creeping in then the Federal Corrupt Practices Act was passed in 1925. It limited spending by candidates and stated that disclosures be made within election times. However, because of no enforcement mechanisms, there was a need for firmer controls that caused the Pendleton Act and Hatch Act 1939; it limited the extent of participation of federal employees in political competitions.

The latter legislation was later amended to ban state agency funding through employees. Limitations on national committees’ campaign contributions were stated. The Smith Connally Act of 1943 prohibited labor union contributions and was later solidified by the Taft Hartley Act of 1947. In 1966, the presidential campaign Fund Act allowed for contributions from taxpayers, and the 1971 Revenue Act solidified the latter legislation. In the latter, contributions were expanded to denote anything of value. The Bipartisan campaign Act 2002 minimized contributions made to third parties and directly to candidates (Nicholas, 2009)

Differences between civil rights and civil liberties

Civil liberties are those rights that the government guarantees citizens as outlined in the bill of rights. In other words, the party that can violate civil liberties is the government. These liberties are contained in the constitutions through the Equal protection clause brought out in the fourteenth amendment. Civil liberties are therefore understood as inalienable rights. (Kennedy, 2005) Examples here include the right to privacy, marriage, vote, free speech, and religious practice. Civil rights on the other hand can best be understood as those qualities that cannot be used as grounds for discrimination.

Examples of such qualities include race, gender, disabilities, and others. A civil right can therefore be violated if a person is denied a position at their place of work because of their race or gender. However, if the denial was based on some aspect of their qualification i.e. that there was no indication of discrimination then no civil right was violated. The history of civil rights is more recent than that of civil liberties.

For instance, in 1964, Congress decided to pass the Civil rights Act which was aimed at deterring discrimination in education, employment, and other personal areas. In the past, civil rights were mostly centered on commercial areas and public service providers. This was followed by the local and state civil rights Act that prohibited favoring others on the basis of their race etc. Today, some civil rights laws on gays are still being debated in states like Indiana. (Kennedy, 2005).

Chalmers Johnson’s idea of “blowback” is not always a negative

Chalmers Johnson argues that the US is locked in twentieth-century thinking where it believes that it is the only superpower. This gives it the misguided sole right to maintain its position as a superpower by oppressing other nations that may threaten it. Furthermore, overreliance on military strength is used to advance this cause and hence resulting in a blowback of undermined democratic principles and eventual disasters within US territory. (Johnson, 2004)

However, sometimes the blowback may not necessarily be negative. For instance, through the sacrifices made by the United States in its industrial sector other countries have been able to move from underdevelopment to development and this is a plus on their part as a nation. Obama has agreed to greater cooperation between Asian countries and the United States. Although Chalmers argues that workers in such areas are usually paid very low wages and cannot access the goods they create, it is wrong to ignore the vast majority of citizens in such countries that can actually purchase goods. Many Chinese consumers are buying cars, houses, and the like and this is a positive blowback. (Kreisler, 2010)

Whether America’s historical injury to Black should be considered paid in full

Black people in the United States have been through an immense level of injustice and although the country has advanced in very many levels today, there are still staggering levels of discrimination that are living proof that the injury to Black people is yet to be paid in full. It will be paid in full when black people are perceived to be equal to other members of the US society. In the employment sector, it has been found that employees still prefer admitting a white person with a criminal record to a black man who has never been incarcerated.

In housing, a recent survey indicates that racial residential segregation is still a harsh reality in most federal states. Furthermore, the education sector offers no solution to this problem as disparities between access to education resources and opportunities to blacks are still quite inferior to that of whites. For instance, a study showed that predominantly minority schools tend to be poorly funded by the federal government. Furthermore, the actual treatment of blacks by law enforcers is biased as they tend to be suspected even before committing any crime. The government’s response to the victims of Hurricane Katrina also solidifies this notion of inequality. (Massey, 2007)

Affirmative action may have two directly opposite effects when analyzed in terms of constitutional implications. In certain instances, it has led to laws that advance the affirmative action agenda and therefore prohibit discrimination. Conversely, affirmative action has led to laws that actually prohibit those agendas since the federal laws are assumed to prevent discrimination. Examples here include the Nebraska Civil rights 2008 initiative and the California proposition of 2009. (Mazrui, 1999)

Interest group

An interest group may be defined as a series of people who come together for the purpose of exerting pressure upon the legal or political systems in their nations. In other words, they are driven by certain values that they feel ought to be promoted in the process of making the country better. Furthermore, people in interest groups usually come together in order to utilize government power so as to enforce certain values.

There are numerous types of interest groups in the US; economic groups are formed with the sole basis of furthering business or trade goals and are usually related to certain sectors or associations for example the National Association of home builders, the national dentists’ board. However, there are also large organizations that do qualify as interest groups through their employees like General motors.

The second type is a public interest group that focuses on specific issues of public interest such as Public citizen, common cause, and consumer watch. The third category is the social policy category that promotes political or social ideologies such as the American Civil liberties union the National Abortion & Reproductive rights league and the Brady campaign for the prevention of Gun violence. Two ways in which they achieve their aims are through contributions to political campaigns (although this is limited by law) and by engaging in lobbying efforts to their Congressmen through emails and other communications.

Major steps in the legislative process for a bill to become law

A bill starts with the submission of a draft; something that is done by a congressman, president, cabinet member, or federal agency. It then goes through committee action where chances of passing are clarified and may be passed off as defeated. In the third step, a subcommittee reviews the bill for hearings and this is followed by the mark-up stage which involves making amendments to the bill. Sometimes the subcommittee may decide not to report the bill to the committee and this bill may therefore be shot down. The fifth stage is the committee action of reporting where the full committee decides on recommendations to be made to Senate.

The sixth stage is the voting stage where members pass it or reject it. After approval in one house, the bill is then taken to Senate or the House of Representatives where they also vote for it. A conference committee action can then come in to reconcile the actions of the separate houses. Final action takes place when the president gives his accent. A bill may also be prevented from becoming law if Congress votes for it and fails to get a majority vote. Conversely it might be rejected by the President when he decides to carry out a veto and congress fails to override the veto by getting a two third majority. (The US constitution, 2010)

Major legislative achievements of the Obama administration

The most notable legislative success in the Obama administration so far are the Affordable Healthcare for America Act and American recovery & reinvestment act. The latter act was identified as the stimulus bill which was needed in order to bailout large corporations like GM, energy projects, transportation and other economic strongholds within the market. This Act was passed because of support from democrats and was done relatively easily owing to the fact that the country was in urgent need of reform at that time. The second legislation which was the healthcare bill took a much longer time.

The president had to engage in intense lobbying but at the end of it, it was support from the Democratic wing that got the legislation to pass. There may be no formula for success of any legislation because this all depends on the dynamics at the time. Obama’s pattern echoes an overreliance on his Democratic party; however, this may have to change in the future. (Page & Hall, 2010)

Constitutional challenges between Congress and the President over the power to start and end wars

The best example of such challenges is the Bush administration with regard to the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. Those who opposed the war felt that it would do the country more harm than good but their wishes were overridden by the majority. In the Obama administration, there was a struggle to deal with the Russian arms issue especially its nuclear warheads. The negotiation by the President and the Russian administration is yet to be ratified by the Senate currently.

References

De Tocqueville, A. (1945). Democracy in America. NY: Vintage books.

Birnbaum, P. (2001). The idea of France. London: Hill and Wang.

Lowi, T. (1979). End of liberalism – 2^nd republic of the US. NY: Norton and Company.

Kennedy, S. (2005). Difference between civil liberties and civil rights, Common place magazine.

Johnson, C. (2004). Blowback- costs & consequences of American empire. N: metropolitan books.

Kreisler, H. (2010). Chalmers on the downward slope of the empire. Deep journal.

Massey, D. (2007). Categorically unequal – American stratification systems. NY: Sage.

Mazrui, K. (1999). Constitutional implication of affirmative action-race neutral actions. Virginal law school working paper, no. 3.

The US constitution (2010). How a bill becomes law.

Page, S. & Hall, M. (2010). Voter anxiety clouds Obama’s historic success. USA today.

Nicholas, P. (2009). Pervasive effects of campaign contribution limits. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania press.

The international relations can be either strained or relaxed, reflecting the relationships between the countries. Though globalization made the relations between most countries more favorable for the development of economies and partnership, it is necessary to remember about the balance of powers that makes the cooperation possible while force concept should be analyzed to evaluate the necessity for interactions and responses to inequalities. As such, the role of forces, especially military ones, should not be underestimated for international relations and major conflicts in terms of bipolarity or unipolar system.

The role of the military force in contemporary politics is as high as it was in the period of the cold war which is marked with two devastating conflicts that influenced the economic, political, and social stability of both superpowers talking about the United States and their Vietnam affairs and the Soviet Union and Afghanistan.

When two superpowers became involved into a conflict which was the major issue of the entire world being the challenge and a problem for all, a concept of a strong state was to be considered because the stronger state could spread its influence on other countries while the theory of overstretch identifies the collapse of empires as inability of states to commit their obligations before other countries.

Though the multipolar system is more stable and typical of the current globalization situation because there is a number of strong states able to perform their obligations, the situation of the cold war period was a bipolar one being substituted by the tripolar when China got stronger. The theory of imperial overstretch can be applied to both major conflicts that took place I the cold war period when the Soviet Union supported the Vietnamese communist camp while the US-supported Afghanistan in the Soviet war against it.

The domestic politics of every state in this confrontation play a crucial role as the stability inside the country enable it to oppose the external opponents. As suggested by Ferguson and Kotlikoff (2003), “America’s chronically unbalanced domestic finances” (p. 2) can be considered the reason for its inability to commit its obligations and promises it gave in terms of financial and ideological support as well as military aid.

Though the conflicts between the US/Vietnam and Soviet Union/Afghanistan were financial devastating for economies of more countries than these two superpowers, “Today, colonial rule is not only widely condemned but far too costly, as both cold war superpowers discovered in Vietnam and Afghanistan” (Nye, 2002-2003, p. 549). In this respect, the financial aspect of the conflict supports the theory of imperial overstretches developed by Paul Kennedy applied to these two cases.

The social relations contributed greatly to the collapse of the Soviet Union, while the same strategy applied by the United States would inevitably lead to a collapse as well because it is impossible to sustain the country with all economic and political relations using fragile domestic politics. “In the Vietnam era, for example, American government policy and popular culture worked at cross-purposes. Today popular U.S. firms or non-governmental groups develop soft power of their own that may coincide or be at odds with official foreign policy goals” (Nye, 2002-2003, p. 554).

In this respect, the society works for the development of further relations and ties with the foreign units which provides evidence of the theory of imperial overreaction not be applied to the United States in case the state receives support and approval concerning their actions from other countries and the domestic units such as nongovernmental and manufacturing enterprises.

The expansion of powers can be used to sustain the economic stability of the country, whereas it can be effective as well as unprofitable and leading to collapse. As reported in the study by Snyder (1991), “Counterproductive aggressive policies are caused most directly by the idea that the state’s security can be safeguarded only through expansion” (p. 1). In this respect, both superpowers involved in the cold war had the idea of safeguarding the state’s security by expanding its influence over other countries and territories, whereas the stability should have been cultivated within the state without involving other parties.

The development of technologies is another aspect that has to be analyzed in terms of the theory of imperial overstretch to be applied to the US/Vietnam and Soviet Union/Afghanistan conflicts as the attempts to sustain their influence over others to prove that they can expand the influence and, in this way, protect their domestic affairs from intrusion or aggression from outside. Besides, the aggression can be referred to as military campaigns as well as ideological propaganda that appears to have contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union when people learned about another lifestyles. “Postindustrial societies are focused on welfare rather than glory, and they loathe high casualties except when survival is at stake” (Nye, 2002-2003, p. 549). As such, the glory was the major aspect for the US and Soviet leaders and governments making the imperial overstretch theory applicable to both states.

References

Ferguson, N., & Kotlikoff, L. (2003). Going critical: American power and the consequences of fiscal overstretch. Web.

Nye, J. S. (2002-2003). Limits of American power. Political Science Quarterly, 117 (4), pp. 545-559.

Snyder, J. (1991). Myths of empire: Domestic politics and international ambition. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

United States of America’s military budget is equal to the collective military budgets of Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and Cuba.

The defense budget of apparent enemies should not be the decisive factor for America’s military spending.

US officials denounce the intentions of other nations to develop nuclear weapons while their own country is not ready to decrease its arsenal.

America’s decision of withdrawing troops from Europe could communicate a wrong message to the apparent enemies.

Washington rules are not scrapped because there are some vested interests.

Among the people who benefit from Washington, rules are politicians, administrators, corporate bigwigs, military personnel, scholars, and investigating groups.

Such benefits are not necessarily in cash but can also be in the form of favors.

The fraudulent practices have made Washington one of the most corrupt places in the world.

There is not even the slightest possibility of such practices being stopped within the near future, albeit with the collapse of both military and economy.

Instead of learning a lesson, the concerned people will assign blames to each other and allocate more funds towards the military budget.

This particular trend prevalent among American politicians and other concerned people is evident from President Obama’s directions which, despite the financial crisis of 2008, do not allow any decrease in funds for national security.

American principles are based on the supposition that the country is unique and can mold the world in whichever manner they desire.

The incidents that happened over the past couple of years don’t support this idea.

American claims of being a peace-loving country are refuted by incidents such as the bombing of Hiroshima, mass torture, and assassination plots.

Such incidents have refuted the power and economic excellence of America.

America’s history, since World War II, has been a mix of great acumen, foolishness, sightlessness, commendable accomplishments, and irresponsible judgments.

Future policies of America should be formulated while considering the implications and global rebellion.

America’s annual expenditure of maintaining its armed forces runs into billions of dollars.

The money is also used to fund election campaigns and is distributed among constituencies by way of lucrative contracts.

Retired military personnel is offered well-paid jobs in weapons manufacturing units and/or consulting firms that are normally referred to as ‘Beltway Bandits’.

In the past, a feeling of pride of Americans led them to follow John Winthrop’s idea of creating a ‘city upon a hill’ (about Massachusetts Bay Colony).

President Washington also advised Americans to follow an exceptional path to excellence that had traits of ‘justice and benevolence’.

European-style imperialism started planting its roots in America and gradually its principles started losing their impact.

America participated in World War I at the behest of President Woodrow Wilson.

Both World Wars further disgraced American principles of being benevolent and a peace-loving nation.

Several people such as George Kennan, William Fulbright, Christopher Lasch, and Martin Luther King criticized the American government for adopting an anti-peace and apartheid approach in its policies.

Senator Fulbright refuted an earlier idea that to ascertain its wellbeing America needed to interfere in the affairs of other nations.

References

Bacevich, A. J. (2010). Washington rules: America’s path to permanent war. Metropolitan Books.

Abstract

This paper provides an explicit comparison and contrast of Iran, Turkey, and Israel regarding their political institutions and context. It extracts and critically compares various dominant domains; the political institutions and context, political cultures, civil relations and behavior, and governance system. Besides, it shows the difference in the political science of the nations since they offer a shared type of historical background. The change of compared cultures has enabled this research by providing a platform where individuals with a shared history can be reviewed.

Introduction

In regards to geographic proximity and geopolitical aspects, Turkey, Israel, and Iran have a wide range of political ties, including conflicts. The research of these countries is a topic of great concern that requires detailed review. This comparative paper focuses on the republic of Turkey, the state of Israel, and Iran due to two critical reasons. First, the countries share a common geopolitical location, and, secondly, they have had long-term and historical-political ties. The two reasons above have brought the necessary attention needed to have a shaped and better-understood comparison of the political institution in the three nations. Geopolitical position refers to the Middle East, where the states are located. However, Turkey is not entirely perceived to be in the Middle East. The Middle East is diverse on political science grounds, and alterations of any kind in the region affect the countries positioned in this region geographically.

Besides, the relationship ties among these three nations are another reason to draw attention and interest in matters of political institution understanding. The transformation from the old Ottoman Government system into a modernized newly nation of Turkey, stabilization of Iran, and establishment of the state of Israel with the political values along irrevocable political cultures and behavior are vital and essential elements to consider while comparing and contrasting the states in terms of Political Institutionalism and context. This paper will demonstrate the various diverse domains of political science. In this comparative analysis, a special focus is on the political context and institution, political culture and behavior, system of governance, and the political economies of the three states.

Political Institution; historical background

This section of the paper compares the political system of the three states and seeks to reconcile diverse domains in the complex Middle East region. The validity of the use of comparative aspects in political science is well-grounded; comparative political science is one of the most effective ways of having a better understanding of political contexts. By comparing and contrasting political contexts, people gain meaningful information hence facilitating explanation and interpretation of the experiences in the three states. In the early period of the Middle East, Iranian, Turkish, and Israeli cultures were informed and thus took part in the establishment of various states by acting together. For instance, Iran and Turkey share a common system of governance, the Ottoman system of governance before modernization. The two political cultures were also Islamized; however, the Islamic sects set their paths and diversified. The similarities in culture and system of governance continued, and they became states of their respective Islamic sects. Modern Turkey and Modern Iran share political context in this respect. Iran and Turkey transferred their system of governance from the Ottoman form of the monarchy to constitutionalism. On the other hand, before being recognized as a state, the UN recommended the apportioning of the area into the Jewish and Arab states giving birth to the Israel /Palestine political conflicts.

Political Institution and context; present

From the historical-political background, Iran and Turkey share the most through the adaption of their respective sects. The distinction between these sects forms the key lines of differences in regard to political traditions. Presently, elections are held after a term of five years in Turkey Based on proportional representation and the majority vote. Thus, a party is necessitated to get 10% of the popular vote; if not, the party’s votes are divided among the other parties that attain the verge of 10%. Members of parliament are tasked with nominating a prime minister who is in charge of the dominant party in the Assembly and whose responsibility will be appointing ministers. However, there is a powerful president that makes key government decisions. The general assembly members elect the President to serve a 7-year term. The president is head of the executive as he heads the state and makes certain of constitution implementation and government policies.

The Judiciary arm of the government has a Supreme Court headed by the chief justice as the apex court mandate to pronounce the passed laws as legitimate or illegitimate. Therefore, this necessitates the general assembly to consult the Supreme Court on bills on constitutionalism grounds. In summary, these institutions play a significant role in making key decisions, however liable to the political system in the country and for this reason, secularism comes to play. Turkey is completely a secular society with a complete secular parliament as compared to Israel. Turkey’s government is secular and democratic as in its constitution. Modernization has, however, improved the current circumstance of turkey in regards to political secularism as compared to the previous years and this change on the platform of the ruling party ideologies.

Iran became an Islamic republic after the monarchial system of governance was overthrown in 1979. The Supreme Guide is the most powerful authority in Iran, and largely secular authorities ought to seek his approval in the law-making process. The Supreme Guide controls most assets of the government, including the army, the Bureau of Justice, and the intelligence facilities. Various religious institutions have powerful functions; the expediency council, the council of Guardians, and the assembly of experts. The assembly of experts is tasked to choose an appropriate Supreme Guide and hence facilitates the transfer of power. The Expediency Council, on the other hand, is tasked with analyzing and reviewing the legislation and facilitates smooth integration among the branches of power hence smooth running of the state. The Supreme guide has its president and council who represent the secular law.

Presently, Iran has two conservative and reformative engagements: extremists seek to maintain the prevalence of religion in law legislation and sustenance of a socialist economy. The extremists seek to propagate the Islamic revolution aspect to foreign countries and are largely supported by the working class. Conversely, the conservatives seek a conversation with the extremists on the religious ground. Still, they are favored by the government and have an insignificant intervention of government both economically and politically. The conservatives are supported by the supreme guide and the various religious institutions. Liberals of Iran have much of their focus on human rights. They highlight the significance of human rights and social justice and attempt to reduce the influence of religious law.

Israel and Palestine form fascinating political conflicts in the current world. Foremost, Israel is a democratic state that gives it the supremacy to dictate the political environment. Even though the outdated complexity of the coalition government includes various parties, each of which has its respective religious or rather political ideologies. Israel is governed by a parliamentary through a democratic system that has 120 members assigned based on the national wide proportion illustration. Electorates do not elect political candidates however they vote in a closed list of candidates unwavering by respective parties. A political party that attains more than 2% of the statewide vote is allotted a proportional number of seats in the assembly.

After the assembly’s elections, a president or prime minister is selected as the head of government business who can be a party leader formidable to form a government. The term of a prime minister is four years; however, this can be shortened by a vote of no confidence, and a new government is established to replace the candidate. The Knesset is the legislative arm of the Israeli government. It is mandated to enact laws, oversee government business, and is authorized to remove the head of state. The Knesset is separate from the judicial arm of the government, which includes the religious and secular courts. The judges are civil servants that are obligated to espouse the general law, and the High Court of Justice is the apex court for all courts. The apex court is active and leans towards superior intervention compared to other states.

Civil Relations among Iran, Turkey, and Israel

This section gives the comparison and analysis of civil relations within the political science domain. Over the past decades, Israel, Turkey, and Iran have been strained. However, there have been positive relations presently. Currently, civil relations have been improved especially in regard to civil-military relations. The military plays a significant role in the politics and economics of a country. For instance, Israel and Iran have military interventions with differing consequences for democracy in each instance. There is an open animosity between Israel and Iran. Disparate Israel’s longstanding disagreements with its neighbor countries in the Middle East, Iran and Israel had close ties before the Iranian revolution.

The Islamic republic is viewed with a negative attitude by the Israeli government due to the regime governing it. Issues that touch the Israeli national security are significant and regarded as high profile. Iran’s involvement in acts of terrorism and conventional conflicts in contradiction with Israel has sparked animosity. Nevertheless, it is vital though limited on the variations that exist among the Israeli policy creators in regards to the challenges postured by the Iranian administration and the strategies Israel can use to counter the troubles brought by the regime. There are expressive variances among the mainstream Israeli policyholders about how to create and deal with the nuclear program. There are differences in opinion; however, the spectrum is narrow, and the variation is insignificant. Therefore, there is a need for the states to have a roundtable to discuss their relations.

One of the most momentous developments was the inception of tactical relations between Turkey and Israel. The civil relations between these countries culminated in the late 1990s in a multifaceted liaison that includes the political, cultural, and economic dimensions. These countries’ bilateral relations are up and were on the verge of forming an informal alliance against Iran owing to the fact there are mutual threat acuities. Besides, as a concern of the warming relations between the Turkish and Israeli governments, the citizens of both countries enjoy mutually owned facilities. However, the countries have also had negative developments in their civil relations following the recent storming of an aid flotilla attempting to break the barricade that the Israeli government had imposed on the Hamas-run Gaza. The growing power of turkey and its security operation with Israeli to deal with Iran has improved the civil relations between these countries.

Political Behaviors and Cultures

The various changes cutting across the Middle East, especially through; Turkey, Israel, and Iran, in regards to political cultures and behaviors are vibrant and evident. For instance, Turkey has established a version of Islamist democracy. These developments are making a new culture and behavior in the political arena, which can be emulated by other Islamists in the Middle East regions. The new political cultures among the states sought to bring peace and good relations among the countries and help those sign agreements. The complete political rebar-gaining of the social contract in the Middle East states this has improved the domestic political balance of authority.

Conclusion

The comparative relations between the Arab country’s political contexts and institutions are essential for a better understanding of the political developments in the region. In this regard, it is evident that there exist various similarities in terms of political developments among the countries due to the geopolitical positions and proximity. The system of government differs a bit in a few aspects in comparison. Civil relations are significant, especially in political development. In comparison, there are similar initiatives carried out by the various countries to make relations with the countries and neighbors better. The aspect of civil-military cut across all the discussed and analyzed countries shows the animosities between the countries and the countries of the initiative have taken to solve the challenges faced among the countries.

James Daniel Jordan is a United States republican representing Ohio’s fourth congressional district for the last three years. I am particularly drawn by his authenticity in his politics, as demonstrated by his stand on matters affecting the people he represents. Upon visiting his website, the first thing that attracts you is its theme. The websites have contrasting shades of black and red colors to illuminate his art awareness. Additionally, there is an inclusion of articulately-written articles tracking down his work, which sheds light on who Jim Jordan is and what he stands for. I also loved that his website has been segmented into his manifestos, making it easier to navigate through the website. To me, this is worth recognition as it makes people, especially the younger generation, connected to their representative and can follow through his work’s journey.

Jim Jordan has a soft spot for children and the human race in general. He mostly champions the rights and freedom of the people of Ohio, which has at times left him in hot seats. One of the issues that Jordan holds at heart is that of immigrants in Ohio. He was the one who raised the alarm on how immigrant children are oppressed in the supposedly safe shelters. Personally, I have been to one of the shelters in the line of my work, and it is surprisingly authentic that a shelter supposed to host thirty children has over five hundred children. Jordan campaigned that the operational policies in the immigrant’s department should be reinforced to prevent the numbers from swelling. What amazes me about this great man is his eye on matters affecting his people. The fact that he was on the facility tour was enough to catch his attention is an accurate indication of what he stands for. More details on this issue are available in the blogs segment of his website. There is also an immigrant segment that sheds light on related matters.

It is indeed a great pleasure you having the time to read this email, acknowledging that you are a busy man. Your commitment and persuasive leadership have left visible prints on many people’s lives, who at one point had given up on the systems of justice. I must also recognize and appreciate your tremendous efforts in fighting for the voiceless in the community. My family and I reside in Duck district and can courageously testify of the fruits reaped from your leadership, exceptionally when you are persuading hard to offer justice to the immigrant children in Ohio State. It is in full realization that I have read your Biography on your website; you seem to understand the need for making the state feel home to everyone. Despite the state having a wide range of job opportunities and low cost of living, it is a hotbed for immigrants whose significance is in uplifting the number of skilled labor, diversifying culture, and growing the city both economically and culturally.

Despite the benefit of immigrants, as mentioned above, they face discrimination against the law, denying them various social rights like scholarships at public Institutions and inadequate working opportunities. Consequently, this injustice brings about intentional inflation of income in respect to food stamp eligibility. The documentation process of these immigrants takes an extended period due to complexities in the current system (National immigration forum, 2019). Therefore, many immigrants give up on the way and become Ohio’s residents illegally. I, for instance, have a neighbor who went through all the legal steps of documentation, and till today, she is yet to be documented.

I understand that you are a man of diligence and wisdom, thus comprehends the implications of justice denied. There are vlogs and blogs that Ohio State will and maybe redistricted according to census results. These undocumented immigrants are excluded from the statistics. Thus the data may be considered inaccurate to be used in this process. If the districts are divided using this data, there are likely deficits in each district’s budget that will constrain public resources. I also fully understand your proposals on this persistent issue of immigrants. However, the proposals may be implemented way long after redistricting, which will be too late. I suggest that you use your utmost power to leverage the current systems and make them simpler and faster.

Like how your campaign for immigrant children is being placed in hostile and overcrowded environments, I believe your voice in abridging the documentation procedures will positively challenge the government to adjust it. I am optimistic that this move will enhance your legacy in Duck District and Ohio in general, years after your leadership. It will also create a clear path for the young leaders who look up to you in governance matters. If there is any way I can assist and support this project, you can use this email address to let me know. Again, I am honored by your humble act of time to read my mail and have a fantastic day.

Reference

National immigration forum. (2019). Fact sheet: Immigrants in Ohio. National Immigration Forum. Web.