Category: President

Gun control

Gun control relates to administrative efforts to regulate sales, ownership, distribution, and use of guns. Gun control has divided the country into three with proponents, opponents, and neutral individuals. People who support strict and tough measures on guns believe that the laws would restrict access by criminals and children and limit injuries and deaths from guns. Conversely, people against gun control laws believe that such laws will not have any meaningful effect on criminals. Some of them have claimed that such laws violate their constitutional right.

In 2008, the Supreme Court made a fundamental ruling that upheld the right of US citizens to have arms for self-defense and hunting. It made a similar ruling in 2010 in which it expanded the right of people to bear arms in States and cities (Adams 1).

These rulings took place before the recent events of the Colorado shooting and the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has expressed its opposition to federal regulations against gun ownership, whereas other bodies and the public have favored federal gun control. Some of the gun control laws are in the Gun Control Act 1968 and the National Firearms Act 1934. These laws only accounted for sales, usage, ownership, and the spread of arms.

Since these two deadly events, American support for gun control has grown steadily. According to some survey results by Huff Post, 55 percent of Americans believed in strict gun control laws while 13 percent claimed that such laws should not be strict. Still, 27 percent of the respondents did not see the need to change gun control laws. Shootings in the recent past informed the decisions of most Americans to advocate for strong and strict gun control laws.

Activists and the public have supported strong and strict gun control laws for a while. There are many reasons for gun control, but the chief reason is to ensure the safety of individuals. Supporters have claimed that such laws would reduce cases of rampant shootings and firearm-related accidents and deaths.

These laws also aim to ensure that wrong people do not possess guns. Such people include people with questionable backgrounds, children, and mental health cases. Most gun related attacks relate to guns in the wrong hands of children and juveniles. The law will ensure that minors do not gain access to guns. The laws will restrict access to guns. Besides, supports believe that the implementation of a gun control policy would eliminate cases of criminals owning guns.

Most Americans use firearms for suicide too, especially people with mental problems. Gun control laws would make sure that people with mental trauma do not gain access to guns. Moreover, such people increase the chances of arming others with guns already in their possession.

The NRA and people who are against gun control laws also have valid reasons for their positions. They believe that such laws shall only put pressure on ordinary citizens who abide by the law, but not the targeted criminals. Therefore, such laws do not have any beneficial use. Based on such notions, we have to look at the pros and cons of gun controls and develop stringent solutions, which can reduce deaths and accidents from firearms by a significant number.

Gun is a dangerous weapon that only serves the purpose of killing. Therefore, it is only reasonable if few people possess guns. Still, criminals have gained access to guns because of weak laws. However, if laws ban people with criminal records from owning guns, then criminals would find it difficult to have guns. This would also restrict cases of children possessing guns.

Video games, sport shooting, hunting, or some advertisements have glamorized possession of guns and their roles in society. These activities fail to account for the fatal consequences of recklessness with guns. The policy should address the gun culture among the public, as well as desensitize unnecessary ownership of guns. Gun control laws would ensure that people account for all firearms in their possession. This act would reduce cases of violent crimes and gun-related accidents and deaths.

The most cited reasons for gun control laws are related to the number of deaths and accident-related to guns. Opponents of gun control laws claim that the implementation of gun control acts shall only affect law-abiding Americans. On the other hand, criminals will get their guns by other ways like smuggling, black market, or through theft from registered owners.

Given that the right to own a gun is a part of the American constitution and by extension, an individual’s right, it will be difficult to take that right away from citizens because gun owners will protest to protect their rights. While the law provides the provision to own a gun, the focus should be on the personal responsibility of the gun owner. In the past, people have engaged in violence involving guns, which lead to deaths.

The media have played their roles by claiming that such deaths result from a sense of the use of guns. We have to question the role and responsibility of the gun owner. Gun owners should take control of the places in which they keep their weapons. In other words, we have to keep guns away from people who should not gain access to them. In most cases, minors who cause deaths and injuries with guns normally get such guns from their homes. This shows that guns in homes do not have secure places to restrict accessibility.

Gun owners need adequate training on handling guns because many people own guns, but they do not observe gun safety and usage. People must spend time to learn about the proper usage and safety of guns. This is the only way to limit gun casualties. Training on the safety of guns should also extend to kids. Proper training can reduce the mystery surrounding guns, which children wish to explore. Such approaches can reduce cases of minor shooting others. We have to note that many people rushed to purchase guns in the recent past for protection. Consequently, the government reacted by introducing strict gun control laws.

On the other hand, gun control laws cannot eliminate guns from the public or reduce their lethal consequences. People need guns to protect themselves and their property. Besides, it is a legitimate right for Americans to have guns and other weapons. People are the sole culprit, and guns only act as weapons of murder or crime. In most cases, guns used in crimes are illegal, stolen, smuggled, or not registered. Gun control laws would make gun ownership difficult as opposed to the provision in the constitution. Therefore, many people will think that such controls deny them their rights.

Given the need to control gun ownership, usages, and distribution and the willingness of the citizens to do so, this policy advocate for strong and strict gun control laws. Guns in the wrong hands have turned out to be a disaster in America. It is also important to note that people who advocate for ownership of guns as a means of self-defense have increased, but we have to recognize that gun remains a dangerous invention to its users and non-users. Past events, figures, and literature can show us why guns need strict and strong control laws.

Education

Current America’s higher education system requires urgent reforms. Many students accrue an average debt of $23,000 for higher education upon their completion (Burke and Butler 1). Many students also leave college without adequate skills required in the job market. Despite these facts, there are no existing tangible policies to address the situation. However, some recent innovations have presented new opportunities for the American higher education system. Online education opportunities and a competency-based approach to learning have presented fresh grounds to improve the higher education system and change the traditional models. While these innovations present the best chances for reforming the higher education system, accreditation has remained a major challenge to any possible reforms.

Technology and innovations shall transform the American higher education system. The traditional form of education is expensive and there is a need to equip learners with adequate skills required in employees. Innovative institutions have embarked on promoting new methods of learning by using online platforms to reduce the costs of learning. These new approaches provide opportunities for restructuring higher education by reducing costs and providing students with great benefits of acquiring needed skills at low costs.

However, accreditation has remained the biggest obstacle to this restructuring of the higher education system. According to Burke and Butler, “accreditation is a feature of the traditional education system, accreditation is a “seal of approval” granted to institutions of higher education and is intended to assure students that colleges and universities meet certain standards of quality” (Burke and Butler 1).

It acts as a way of measuring education quality in American higher education. However, accreditation has some fundamental flaws that hinder the growth of American higher education. For instance, the system favors the expensive model of learning and hinders new forms of learning. Besides, the system provides a blanket approval to institutions i.e., it does not focus on a specific course. Therefore, accreditation is a poor system of determining skills that learners require.

Accreditation is voluntary to students. However, it limits students’ chances of gaining access to federal aid. Only students who attended accredited schools are eligible for such aid and grant. In the past few decades, federal aid and grants have formed the largest sources of financial support for universities. Most institutions have also sought accreditation to qualify for federal aid and grants.

No doubt, the system of higher education in the US requires urgent and long-lasting reforms. This will ensure that the higher education system keeps pace with the future demands of the economy. Therefore, the system for valuing the education system should use a specific course rather than an institution.

The role of the private sector is also fundamental in the transformation of the higher education system in the US. In this respect, institutions of higher learning must align their education system with skills that employers want. Therefore, lawmakers, policymakers, and all stakeholders in the education sector must collaborate to realize meaningful changes in the system.

The private sector shall facilitate competition and reform within the education system by ensuring that the federal government does not insist on the accreditation, which limits competition in the education sector. Critics of accreditation have not that accreditation is a barrier to competition in the education sector. It limits competition by creating a barrier to new entrants. Such government regulations have not been friendly to the education sector.

Institutions of higher learning have depended on accreditation for funding. The federal government has also used accreditation to limit aid to students in accredited colleges. In this respect, private stakeholders should encourage competition in the education system to increase accessibility and standards of higher education in the US. The business community should create various courses, which address the needs of the business environment. For instance, Microsoft has a certificate course in computer training. Such courses focus on specific needs in the market.

The main aim of accreditation is to guarantee learners that an institution of higher learning has met some standards of quality. This enhances confidence in the institution. Hence, students can be confident that they shall receive a professional standard of education. However, accreditation raises two fundamental issues of concern. First, critics have argued that accreditation does not guarantee a high quality of education. Second, some institutions may not stick to the standards of accreditation.

Policymakers and stakeholders in the education sector should facilitate innovation in the sector and support initiatives that shall make education accessible and affordable. Moreover, they must also support the education system that provides course-specific metrics so that learners can acquire specific skills required in their areas of specialization. Specifically, policymakers should also eliminate the policy, which requires that institutions of higher learning can only receive federal aid and grants when they have accreditation. This would introduce competition in the education sector and improve the quality of courses offered to students.

Federal policymakers must address the issue of accreditation so that meaningful reforms can take place in higher education. The policy should address Washington’s sanction on accreditation to provide opportunities for other institutions of higher learning to accredit courses. The system must also advocate for voluntary accreditation. At the same time, accrediting institutions should align their standards with forces of the market so that employers can get the right graduates with the right skills.

Policymakers must review the federal approach to accreditation. The new metric must measure “the output of colleges by criteria such as graduation rates, employability of graduates, and value for money” (Burke and Butler 1). This approach shall ensure that current institutions improve their standards and increase their outputs to achieve the best standards. The new scorecard should focus on outcomes that reflect the needs of both the private and public sectors.

The move towards a competency-based model can also transform the higher education system in the US. In this case, a degree award must focus on a specific area and not on time spent in a classroom. Such an approach can accelerate learning by reducing the time and money spent to complete a course. In this respect, policymakers should encourage States to adopt competency-based degrees, which facilitate learning.

Such changes would reduce the cost of higher education, enhance accessibility, and customize courses to fit the specific needs of the market and learners’ preferences. This policy in education reform aims to reduce the cost of higher education and improve quality and accessibility. This can only happen if policymakers and educators embrace the use of technology in higher education. Therefore, this policy must address the shortfalls of accreditation and replace it with a new policy that encourages competition, acquisition of skills, and reduces the cost of learning.

Welfare

Welfare is good for all citizens

Most Americans face difficult situations in the prevailing economic conditions. Therefore, welfare assistance has been a source of hope for many. For instance, many Americans lost their jobs and homes during the 2008 economic downturn. Moreover, several others lost their jobs and homes to the recent natural disaster. These people need welfare assistance. There should be government welfare programs at all levels to help victims of such unfortunate events.

The government must strengthen the right to welfare programs for all US citizens. In this case, policymakers must reinforce the role of welfare programs to all citizens. This suggests whenever the program fails to help citizens, it violates their rights to equal opportunity and fails its primary roles. Therefore, the welfare program must exist to serve people in need, who must utilize them fully. The government must ensure that people receive welfare at all levels.

It must provide such services at the local levels and make referrals to other programs simple. People must also have accessibility to emergency welfare programs that provide immediate needs to people who need help. The government should also review eligibility criteria from time to time based on the prevailing economic situations.

Unemployment

Grow the economy

The government should grow the economy through a stimulus plan to end the high rate of unemployment. The Obama stimulus plan of 2009 worked and so was the intervention plan of 1937. Therefore, such programs should not end prematurely. From the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009, we learned that the $787 billion stimulus package slowed down the recession and led to the recovery of the economy (Calmes and Cooper 1).

The package covered tax cuts, increments of unemployment insurance, and investments in green business, and other viable areas of the traditional business, which could stimulate the economy. However, some economists believe that the package raised the deficit (Madrick 1). However, the stimulus package increased the GDP in 2012 according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO noted that the package would slow the rate of unemployment by between “0.5 percent and 1.4 percent” (Madrick 1) in the fiscal year 2011. Even investors from Wall Street agreed that the package reduced unemployment and recession.

On the budget deficit, some economists found out that the package would increase the budget deficit in 2010, but would reduce the same deficit in subsequent years. Therefore, the government stimulus package slowed the recession and create jobs. Without the package, the recession would have continued into the year 2011 and raised the rate of unemployment to over 16.5 percent. Still, the effect would have affected the budget deficit and GDP. The program worked, reduced unemployment, and fixed the economy, but it was not enough to have long-term effects on the cumulative high rates of unemployment (Kirchhoff 1).

Works Cited

Adams, Jerry. Handgun Control Debate. 2013. Web.

Burke, Lindsey and Stuart Butler. Accreditation: Removing the Barrier to Higher Education Reform. 2012. Web.

Calmes, Jackie and Michael Cooper. New Consensus Sees Stimulus Package as Worthy Step. 2009. Web.

Kirchhoff, Sue. How will the $787 billion stimulus package affect you? 2009. Web.

Madrick, Jeff. Report And Recommendations Of The Citizens’ Commission On Jobs, Deficits And America’s Economic Future. 2010. Web.

Introduction

The issue of whether the Americans are ready to elect the first female president was immeasurably challenging in recent years. Women’s changing position in society, a developing feminist movement, the growing number of female candidates in politics, and their previous success encourage the re-evaluation of public opinion (Sharma 1). The purpose of this research paper is to investigate the current willingness of American society to elect a woman as the U.S. president.

During the examination of related materials, it was found out that the opposition to any woman as a president of the United States still exists (Corrington and Hebl 31). However, the major part of the society subsequently considers the idea of a female president in a positive way.

Historical Background

Throughout the course of the United States history, 33 female candidates had run for the presidency, and by this day, only men have been elected. In 1872, Victoria Woodhull was the first women candidate for the U.S. presidency. She was an activist for women’s and labor rights, a feminist, stockbroker, writer, and businesswoman (Kotz 589). She advocated the freedom for women to marry, divorce, and giving birth to children without the interference of the government (Kotz 589). 1992 was considered to be the “Year of the Woman” as a record number of women were elected to public office (Cook et al. 6).

Five female candidates won Senate seats, and twenty-four women were elected to the House of Representatives (Cook et al. 6). Over the years, female politicians built stable communication between each other for effective performance (Newton-Small 7). Women received the right to run equally competitive campaigns with male candidates and influence the political sphere of the country.

Gender Stereotypes

In 2008, the presidential election in the United States became a fundamental breakthrough for female candidates. Although Hillary Clinton had lost the Democratic nomination for president, according to Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, the candidate’s sex could play both positive and negative roles (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 1). Clinton was the first female Senator who had all chances to win a major party’s presidential nomination with 18 million votes (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 1).

Sarah Palin was chosen by Senator John McCain as his vice-presidential running mate is the first woman on the Republicans’ party ticket (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 1). Every woman who succeeded in the political sphere across the country demonstrated “how far American women have come in political life” (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 1). However, at the same time, they symbolized the inconsistent nature of the public perception of women’s role in politics.

Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton may be regarded as examples of how female candidates face and combat stereotypes and prejudice. The campaign of 2008 was characterized by negative and positive debates concerning the ability of female candidates “to serve in high-level office” (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 1). Moreover, subsequent elections proved that female candidates continued to be viewed from the perspective of gender stereotypes (Lizotte and Brunner 53). For instance, Kelly Ayotte, a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat and New Hampshire’s attorney general, faced public concerns that her election in 2010 would negatively influence her role as a good mother.

Being the candidate for the position of Oklahoma’s governor the same year, Jari Askins was pressed to respond whether a childless and single woman had sufficient life experience to consider the issues of average families (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 2). In 2011, Time magazine published an unpleasant and insulting picture of Michele Bachmann, the U.S. Representative, when she tried to be nominated as a candidate for presidency from the Republican party (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 2).

In 2012, during the election campaign for governor, Lisa Madigan, Illinois attorney general, similar to Kelly Ayotte, had to protect her right to be a mother and a respectable politician at the same time (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 2). These few examples represent merely a sample from a wide range of gender stereotypes against women candidates in the United States.

The substantial number of debates concerning the qualifications and characteristics of female candidates and officeholders were derived from society’s reactions and gender stereotypes. People were trying to evaluate whether the public role for women would be appropriate and beneficial for the country. Various political scientists examined the aspects and reasons for “women’s underrepresentation in political life” and discovered that American citizens frequently relied on prejudice and stereotyped thinking about men and women in politics (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 2). Voters made unreasonable negative assumptions about female abilities and traits that militated against their political success.

Changing Situation

Nevertheless, despite the fact that individual female candidates may currently experience inappropriate and misogynistic treatment from the public or mass media, the situation has substantively changed for the better. The evidence of a fatal influence of sexism on female candidates is insignificant (Dolan, Gender Stereotypes, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting for Women Candidates 96). Although Clinton’s failure during the 2008 elections could be connected with gender stereotypes by a substantial number of people, it was not her sex that provided an unsatisfying result.

The majority of female candidates succeeded despite primary concerns about their abilities. Ambitious female candidates became the role models for young women (Mariani et al. 716). Kelly Ayotte is currently a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, and Lisa Madigan has become Illinois attorney general three times (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 3). Kirsten Gillibrand, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, and many other women have successfully proved that they are able to combine the roles of mothers and the members of Congress (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 3).

Unfortunately, it is possible to say that all these candidates experienced negative attitudes caused by stereotyped thinking, however, it was not determinative (Sharrow et al. 394). According to the analysis of voting records, women win at the same rate as men being on an equal footing (Dolan, When Does Gender Matter? 3). These results demonstrate that the level of female candidates’ representation is not determined by public prejudice or antipathy. Moreover, in recent years, political analysts have noticed a changing attitude of the American public toward the possibility of the first female president’s election.

Public Support to a Female President: Survey of 2016

A woman has never been elected as the United States president since the country’s founding two centuries ago. The necessity of reconsidering whether the Americans are ready to vote for a women candidate arose when Hillary Clinton became “the nation’s first female major-party nominee for that position” (Burden et al. 1073). Burden et al. conducted a survey in 2016 to re-evaluate the attitude of American citizens to the election of the first female president (1073).

Modern multivariate statistical methods showed them that the electorate’s opposition significantly varies across subpopulations on the basis of the political parties’ experiences in recent years (Burden et al. 1073). However, in general, re-deployed conducted surveys indicated that public opposition to the U.S. female president “has been cut in half” since the last decade, from 26% to 13% (Burden et al. 1073). The method of a list experiment was chosen as the main method to conduct the survey as it allowed to avoid the effects of social desirability.

It is frequently challenging to get people’s honest answers by asking them directly. Respondents who do not want to see “a woman in the White House” may hide their sincere opinion and provide untruthful answers due to prevalent social norms (Burden et al. 1073). The list experiment is an alternative option to get unpopular opinions indirectly. The first list experiment that measured the acceptance of a woman as president by the Americans was used in 2006 (Burden et al. 1073). In a nationwide telephone survey, respondents were given a number of statements, and they were asked to choose the statements that made them disappointed or upset (Burden et al. 1073).

One of the positions was “a woman serving as president,” and it was discovered that 26% of respondents were upset with this idea (Burden et al. 1074). Moreover, the prevalence of disappointment concerning the U.S. female president was considerably stable across the country. In other words, people from different demographic groups shared the same opinion, regardless of their gender, level of education, socioeconomic status, and age.

The second study, organized in 2016, had the same framework as the previous one. However, respondents were asked via the Internet. The survey was conducted across specific subpopulations at separate times, while the study of 2006 examined all respondents simultaneously. In recent years, it became available due to the development of more sophisticated techniques that permitted multivariate modeling and an accurate estimation of various demographic or social groups’ influence on individual opinions (Burden et al. 1074).

This survey checked theoretical expectations concerning the public perception of people from various backgrounds who make a political career. The acceptability of different demographic characteristics eventually corresponds to actual experience. For instance, the election of an African American mayor reduces citizens’ opposition to African American candidates in the future as observing the person’s performance minimizes uncertainty or distrust of the people with the same characteristics.

In the case of the female presidency, several women have taken high political positions since 2006. As it was already mentioned, Sarah Palin was chosen as a vice-presidential running mate from the Republicans, and Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, was second in line to the presidency (Burden et al. 1074). Hillary Clinton could become the first presidential nominee from the major party in 2008 (Burden et al. 1074). That is why, in 2016, a substantial number of respondents could imagine a hypothetical female president in the White House as only 13% of them were disappointed with this idea (Burden et al. 1074). The women’s experience and success in the political sphere significantly changed public attitudes towards them.

Female Candidates and Voters

Electing women takes two main things – female candidates and people who vote for them. Multiple types of research conducted by political scientists have expanded public understanding of the reasons why women want to be elected, however, there are few works dedicated to the reasons why they are supported (Dolan, Voting for Women 3). These arguments should be regarded as highly essential due to the current disconnection between the voters’ comments and actions towards women candidates in politics of the United States.

Despite a high level of public support for the female presidency indicated by survey data, experimental researches discover that the biased approach to female candidates exists to the present day. There are specific limits on what the American society knows about women candidates due to restricted data and the undeveloped methods of information search about them. These limitations and a lack of support may be connected with an insignificant number of female candidates for the presidency in the past (Dolan, Voting for Women 4).

As more and more women currently run for office, voters are provided with “the option of choosing a woman candidate” (Dolan, Voting for Women 4). In this case, constituency gives political researchers an excellent opportunity to investigate the attitude toward women candidates without relying on hypothetical election situations.

The reasons for voting for a female nominee were estimated multiple times during the election campaign of 2016. The Pew Research Center conducted a survey and asked respondents about “ten possible motivations for voting for Hillary Clinton” (Blake par. 2). Survey participants predominately emphasized her leadership ability, experience in government, personality, and affiliation to the Democratic party (Blake). More than half of respondents admitted that they would vote for Clinton only because she is not Donald Trump (Blake).

One of the most peculiar features of public opinion reflected in this survey is the highly insignificant role of gender stereotypes. In general, voters were indifferent to the status of Hillary Clinton as a woman (Bracic et al. 281). They could eventually like the idea that the woman had a chance to become the U.S. president for the first time in the history of the country, however, it was “more of a bonus than a true motivator” for voting (Blake par. 6). Hillary Clinton’s qualifications and experience were the principal reasons why she was supported by a large number of American citizens.

Rejection of the First Female President’s Election

Despite the growing sympathy for the idea of the first female president’s election, a substantial number of American citizens reject this variant. However, their dissatisfaction is connected not with stereotyped thinking but with a potential candidate for the presidency in the next election. Donald Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, is supposed to run for president, and a part of the society does not appreciate her political ambitions (Mahdawi).

People do not agree that “a reality-TV star with no political experience” is ready to take the highest office of the country (Mahdawi par. 2). In less tolerant and more religious parts of American society, the level of misogyny is still significantly high, and the idea of the U.S. female president is highly unacceptable (Mahdawi). Nevertheless, there are Ivanka’s proponents who believe that this woman should become the U.S.’s first female president. Mahdawi admits that Ivanka Trump has already taken the president’s post in a figurative sense, as she entered the White House, influence political decisions, and attend international events. She proved that she is not only a caring mother, wife, and loving daughter but a hard-working overachiever with business skills and piercing intelligence. That is why the majority of arguments against Ivanka’s presidency seem unsustainable.

Personal Opinion

From a personal perspective, a woman will be elected as the U.S. president in subsequent decades as the majority of Americans are ready for it. In the present day, stereotyped thinking is losing its actuality as women proved that they could effectively combine the roles of mothers, wives, and leaders. During elections, they are judged as professionals regardless of their sex, and women’s experience, qualifications, individuality, and professional skills play the most significant role. The development of social nets and media technologies provide voters with all necessary information concerning women candidates that was limited in the past decades.

Conclusion

A woman has never been elected as the United States president since the country’s founding two centuries ago. Throughout the course of the United States history, 33 female candidates have run for the presidency, and by this day, only men have been elected. Despite their success, every woman symbolized the inconsistent nature of public perception of their role in politics. Multiple elections proved that female candidates were viewed from the perspective of gender stereotypes. Voters made unreasonable negative assumptions about female abilities and traits that militated against their political success.

Nevertheless, despite the fact that individual female candidates continued to experience inappropriate and misogynistic treatment from the public or mass media, the situation started to change for the better. The majority of female candidates succeeded despite primary concerns about their abilities and proved that they could effectively combine the roles of mothers, wives, and politicians. The level of female candidates’ representation stopped to be substantially determined by public prejudice or antipathy.

The participants of the 2016 survey concerning the reasons for voting for Hillary Clinton stayed indifferent to her gender and emphasized her leadership ability, experience in government, personality, and affiliation to the Democratic party. In general, re-deployed conducted surveys indicated that public opposition to the U.S. female president was substantively reduced. The woman’s qualifications, leadership skills, competence, individuality, and experience are currently the principal reasons why she may be supported by a large number of American citizens.

The findings of this work may be regarded as highly essential as they create the practical and theoretical basis for future researches. The attitude of Americans to the election of a female president will inevitably change with time. That is why the material of this research paper will be useful for the evaluation of public opinion in the next decades.

Works Cited

Blake, Aaron. “The First Female President? Voters Are Meh.” The Washington Post. 2016. Web.

Bracic, Ana, et al. “Is Sexism for White People? Gender Stereotypes, Race, and the 2016 Presidential Election.” Political Behavior, vol. 41, no. 2, 2019, pp. 281-307.

Burden, Barry C., et al. “Reassessing Public Support for a Female President.” The Journal of Politics, vol. 79, no. 3, 2017, pp. 1073-1078.

Cook, Elizabeth Adell, et al., editors. The Year of the Woman: Myths and Realities. Routledge, 2019.

Corrington, Abby, and Michelle Hebl. “America Clearly Is not Ready for a Female President: Why?” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, 2018, pp. 31-43.

Dolan, Kathleen A. “Gender Stereotypes, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting for Women Candidates: What Really Matters?” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 67, no. 1, 2014, pp. 96-107.

Dolan, Kathleen A. Voting for Women. How the Public Evaluates Women Candidates. Routledge, 2018.

Dolan, Kathleen A. When Does Gender Matter? Oxford University Press, 2014.

Kotz, Paul E. “Women Who Have Run for U.S. President—A Historical Look at Leadership From the 1870’s to the Present.” US-China Education Review, vol. 6, no. 10, 2016, pp. 587-599.

Lizotte, Mary-Kate, and Abigail Brunner. “Willingness to Vote for Hillary Clinton for President.” White House Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, 2014, pp. 53-66.

Mahdawi, Arwa. “Ivanka Trump wants to be the first female US president. Perhaps she already is.” The Guardian. 2018. Web.

Mariani, Mack, et al. “See Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Sarah Palin Run? Party, Ideology, and the Influence of Female Role Models on Young Women.” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 68, no. 4, 2015, pp. 716-731.

Newton-Small, Jay. Broad Influence: How Women Are Changing the Way Washington Works. Time Home Entertainment, 2016.

Sharma, Dinesh, editor. The Global Hillary. Women’s Political Leadership in Cultural Contexts. Routledge, 2016.

Sharrow, Elizabeth A. “Gender Attitudes, Gendered Partisanship: Feminism and Support for Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton among Party Activists.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, vol. 37, no. 4, 2016, pp. 394-416.

Introduction

The ascension of President Xi Jinping to the position of general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012 marked the turning point of China’s political and economic reforms. After clinching the presidency the following year, Jinping initiated radical and revolutionary transformations as the country sought to exert greater global influence and dominance. However, some of the policies Jinping embraced have been counterproductive, leading to a continued deceleration of China’s economic growth. Additionally, he orchestrated extensive and fundamental changes to CCP in 2018, effectively reinforcing his grip on the party, the succession process and initiated a crackdown on his potential heirs in CCP. This paper explores China’s economic and political transformation under President Xi Jinping by discussing the decelerated growth and the progressive intensification of authoritarian tendencies under his presidency. It also evaluates the evolution, the justification, and the challenges of this leadership approach.

Background and the Current Status of the Economic and Political Evolution

Before initiating the extensive economic reforms and trade liberalization policies nearly four decades ago, China maintained relatively relaxed economic and political policies. These schemes kept the country politically stable with no remarkable occurrences while the economy was stagnant, vastly inefficient, centrally controlled, and considerably isolated from the global stage. According to McNally (2017), the Maoist political and economic policies were conservative, essentially avoiding any radical changes. For instance, McNally (2017) notes that the aversion to economic liberalization was primarily influenced by the successes of such other state-controlled economies as Singapore. However, following Mao Zedong’s death in 1976, Deng Xiaoping gradually rose to become the Chinese communist leader, marking a critical point in the country’s history. Butt and Sajid (2018) and Hu and Wang (2020) contend that Xiaoping abandoned numerous orthodox policies and oversaw the implementation of far-reaching market-economy reforms, which defined his tenure. In this regard, Xiaoping laid the foundation on which China started to progress.

Additionally, Xiaoping sought to enhance the political stability and economic progress of China. For instance, he settled the constitutional term limits for state officers and led the departure from a planned economy to a model which encouraged foreign investment and innovation. Moreover, he introduced the country’s enormous labor force to the global market, shifted China’s focus to an export-led economy, and accelerated the modernization of the economy (Yeo, 2020). In subsequent years, China recorded major economic milestones, including an average annual GDP growth rate of 10% and hitting a peak of 14.2% in 2007 (Jabbour & Dantas, 2017). From this perspective, the economic policies envisioned and implemented by Xiaoping contributed to China’s decades of explosive growth. However, since 2013, the country’s outlook has been pessimistic, followed by the abrupt and consistent decline in the expansion of its political economy (Krolikowski, 2017). However, Zhao (2016) notes that Jinping has increasingly attempted to revive the Mao era’s ideologies, resulting in an economic slowdown, which has broadly defined his tenure. Notably, this deceleration has been attributed to Jinping’s focus on addressing the internal political vulnerabilities and is anticipated to continue declining.

March 2018 – Political Development in China

In recent years, President Xi Jinping has sought to steer China to play a greater leadership role in global affairs. Having experienced the fickleness of the CCP during the era of Mao Zedong, particularly the Cultural Revolution, he felt the need to reform the party, address the intraparty factionalism and forestall any further power fragmentation (Cabestan, 2020). However, this exercise has only served to assist Jinping in reinforcing his grip on CCP and the Chinese polity. For instance, in 2018, Jinping orchestrated the amendment of the country’s Constitution, effectively removing term limits and allowing him to stay in power indefinitely (Chen & Xue, 2018). According to Heike (2018), the consolidation of power in Xi’s hands allowed him to suppress any succession aspirations from high-ranking CCP individuals summarily. Notably, the repealing of the term limit constitutional provision and other critical safeguards adopted in 1982 to enhance China’s political stability was the most remarkable political event under Jinping’s presidency.

Additionally, the 2018 amendment underpinned the political rule of a one-party system and emasculated the essence of other state and party organs. The Constitution now includes the enshrinement of the Xi Jinping Thought, a fundamental doctrine adopted as one of China’s guiding ideologies. In this regard, Jinping now enjoys the distinction of being the first Chinese leader whose theories have been enshrined in the Constitution. Overall, these reviews effectively reset the Chinese political clock to pre-1978, entrenched one-party totalitarianism, and revived Mao-style personalist rule. Predictably, CCP will continue to tighten its grip on power following the systematic and methodical suppression and emasculation of any dissenting voices opposed to Xi’s policies. For instance, Jinping has overseen a ruthless anti-corruption purge on senior party officials, which has been described as a tactic for the president to wield more power with little or no opposition at all (Keliher & Wu, 2016). Notably, the anti-corruption drive targeted even military officers and has been distinctly characterized by the imposition of punitive penalties and long sentences.

Increased Governmental Surveillance

In recent years, the Chinese government has perfected a vast establishment of digital espionage networks and systems to exercise greater social control. Private companies in association with state actors trawl through enormous volumes of peoples’ data, social media activities, and shopping information to compute the citizen score. This implies that people who make political publications on social networking sites without a permit criticize the government, contradict the official narrative issued by the regime adversely affects a person’s score. According to Hou (2017), the increased surveillance and digitalized autocracy are designed to suppress opposition and enhance the smooth governance by the current regime by eliminating dissent and exercise of social order. Notably, this extensive surveillance system is practiced through internet police administering cyberspace oversight, millions of cameras distributed across the country, and social credit award system.

The Justification of the Autocratic Rule

Following the growing castigation of the CCP’s rule, the country has responded to the critics by justifying the essence of tightened grip on the administration to enhance the country’s unification and realize nationalism. Jinping has also reiterated that China should embrace his vision if the country is to avoid another century of West-initiated humiliation and enable the country to play a greater role in global affairs. However, this ideology of nationalism is thinly veiled political fear emerging from a considerably unstable internal environment, promoting the desire to suppress freedoms and democracy (Luo et al., 2017). Additionally, it is coupled with numerous instances of ethnically motivated policies, such as the concentration of Kazakhs and Uyghurs in reeducation camps.

Capitalism

China’s crony capitalism and the associated challenges can be traced to the various incomplete reforms of yesteryears, allowing influential individuals connected to the government to extract wealth from the system. According to Tsokhas (2019), the CCP and the state are infiltrated by predatory and deeply entrenched people who perpetrate systematic graft and fraud through collusive networks in China’s economic and public institutions. However, the country can still develop economically by diverting its focus from investment and production to consumption. Indeed, China’s population provides an excellent platform for initiating a consumption-driven economy.

Communism

Although perceived to be a communist country, the government reflects a hybrid of authoritarian communism. Notably, communist regimes are inherently inclined to exercise dictatorial tendencies to realize full compliance and absolute obedience to authority. However, the Chinese model has increasingly explored options of eroding and limiting peoples’ freedoms and entrenching a one-party system. This implies that communisms often have authoritarian elements, but the Chinese structure significantly departs from that and adopts an authoritarian image. However, the impression of the country’s economic aspects reflects a capitalist system. This disqualifies the country from a complete communist, making it a capitalist state with an authoritarian political structure.

Challenges to the Current Regime

The current Chinese regime faces various challenges from steadily declining economic growth, the successful erosion of indoctrination through education, and unsustainable policies, such as extensive surveillance. Additionally, Xi Jinping is progressively consolidating power around himself, which is indicative of the political instability and uneasiness within the party and the country. Moreover, his heavy-handedness and ruthless suppression of people he deems a threat is an unsustainable political approach. The emphasis on nationalism is also likely to fail at some point, especially in the absence of governmental accountability.

Conclusion

China under President Xi Jinping has seen a tremendous transformation of the country’s political terrain, which reached its peak in 2018 when he championed the amendment of the Constitution. Notably, Jinping’s focus on the country’s polity has adversely impacted China’s economic growth, which has been declining steadily during his tenure. This is illustrated by the enormous investment in surveillance systems and ruthless purge on the people he deems potential heirs.

References

Butt, K. M., & Sajid, S. (2018). Chinese economy under Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. Journal of Political Studies, 169. Web.

Cabestan, J. (2020). China’s foreign and security policy institutions and decision-making under Xi Jinping. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. Web.

Chen, G., & Xue, J. (2018). Constitutional change allows Xi Jinping to rule beyond 2023.East Asia Policy, 10(02), 16−28. Web.

Heike, H. (2018). China after reform: The ideological, constitutional, and organizational makings of a new era. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 47(3), 187−207.

Hou, R. (2017). Neoliberal governance or digitalized autocracy? The rising market for online opinion surveillance in China. Surveillance & Society, 15(3/4), 418−424.

Hu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2020). Marketing research in China during the 40-year reform and opening.Frontiers of Business Research in China, 14(1), 1−29. Web.

Jabbour, E., & Dantas, A. (2017). The political economy of reforms and the present Chinese transition.Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, 37(4), 789−807. Web.

Keliher, M., & Wu, H. (2016). Corruption, anti-corruption, and the transformation of political culture in contemporary China. The Journal of Asian Studies, 75(1), 5−18. Web.

Krolikowski, A. (2017). Brittle China? Economic and political fragility with global implications.Global Policy, 8(S4), 42−53. Web.

Luo, D., Chen, K., & Wu, L. (2017). Political uncertainty and firm risk in China.Review Of Development Finance, 7(2), 85−94. Web.

Tsokhas, K. (2019). China’s crony capitalism: The dynamics of regime decay. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 49(2), 338−342. Web.

Yeo, Y. (2020). The origins of China’s distinctive tiered economy.China Information, 34(1), 88−108. Web.

Zhao, S. (2016). The ideological campaign of Xi’s China. Asian Survey, 56(6), 1168−1193. Web.

Agendas, Programs, and Proposals

Joe Biden’s speech outlined such agendas as the stressful situation in Ukraine and the course of military actions by Russian President Vladimir Putin against the neighboring country. Moreover, in his speech, the US President highlighted the program to save America due to conflicting circumstances with Russian partners. He also proposed adopting a Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Bipartisan Innovation Act, Paycheck Fairness Act, and Unity Agenda to eradicate the precarious condition of the internal system and processes of the state. The measures taken to date will help reduce the share of unresolved problems and give some impetus to the development of the well-being of America and its citizens.

Addressing to Several Issues

Joe Biden outlined the urgent problems in the following way. First, the US President noted that COVID-19 is not a hindrance in executing the intended goals. He plans to fight the terrible virus and create special measures to protect the health of the country’s residents (The White House 01:00-01:06). The President assures that the coronavirus has not gone into the “unknown” but continuously mutates and develops (The White House 01:00-01:06). During such a period, citizens must be more vigilant and attentive to such moments.

Secondly, according to Joe Biden, one of the most urgent and most acute problems is the war between Russia and Ukraine, directly affecting the United States. He calls Putin’s decision a “mistake” and seeks to “strangle” the Russian people by all means through various restrictions (The White House 27:40-28:00). The President stresses that he will continue to support Ukraine as a NATO territory and help the ally in critical situations.

Thirdly, the US President also mentioned the growing inflation and ways to combat it. To solve this critical problem, he suggests “lower your costs, not your wages” (The White House 47:43). Biden recalls that the COVID-19 pandemic previously caused significant damage to the country’s economy, but this is not a reason to give up. In his opinion, this year is the starting point for creating a better future in which America does not depend on foreign supply chains but creates products with its labor.

The Importance of Government

Based on the experience of observing the course and process of the assembly, the following conclusions can be drawn about the importance and “usefulness” of government. Firstly, the activities of the government are extremely important for society since this “core” of the state controls practically all spheres of the economy and solves complex, difficult tasks. Secondly, the need for the government is also since this supreme collegial regulatory body adopts precisely the laws that could ensure the welfare of citizens. An essential task of the government, in this case, is to ensure order in communities and protect the rights of people.

US Constitutional Authorities

Referring to the content and context of SOTU, Joe Biden draws attention to the following US constitutional authorities. First of all, Biden often mentions the US armed forces and their deployment on the territory of Ukraine while referring to Article 2, State 2. Secondly, the President also touches on the topic of taxes, benefits, fees, and duties; thus, he directs to Article 1, Section 8.

Consideration of Important Issues in SOTU Speech

Undoubtedly, Joe Biden tried to touch on those aspects in SOTU speech that could interest citizens. For example, the most critical issue for me is an attempt to restore the state and strive to create a better future. Consequently, I believe and hope that a good, stable time will come soon. The President noted that he would do everything possible to improve the well-being of citizens without resorting to drastic methods such as reducing residents’ incomes or raising taxes.

Work Cited

“President Biden’s State of the Union Address.” YouTube, uploaded by The White House, Web.

The US president wields a lot of power both domestically and in the international scene. These powers are granted by a number of statutes, amendments, the Constitution, powers granted through congressional acts, and numerous influence and soft power by virtue of his position as the leader. On the other hand, Canada does not have a president and is instead led by a prime minister. Although the two countries are almost equal in size, their leaders exhibit vast differences in the amount of power they hold domestically (Dickerson, Flanagan, and O’Neill 58; Neustadt 47). General knowledge alone appears to affirm that the US president is the most powerful person among the world’s democratically ruled nations as he is the commander-in-chief of the world’s most modern and most powerful military by any standards and also heads the world’s largest economy. But does he exert the same level of power domestically? The Canadian Prime Minister, on the other hand, is not easily recognizable due to the little role Canada plays on international affairs. Even though the role of the PM is not explained by any legislation or legal document, it is easily the most influential position in Canada’s political system.

The President of the US makes several appointments by virtue of his position (Charlton 22). Prior to being sworn in, the elected President is mandated with making more than 6,000 appointments ranging from top officials at national agencies, senior employees at the White House, and top-level ambassadors. In a number of these appointments, he consults with the US Senate. The President is also accorded the power to nominate judges at all levels of the judiciary system. However, the nominees must first be confirmed by Senate, and this can be an obstacle if the Presidents want to work with officials he thinks will share his ideologies. For instance, in January 2012, Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey objected to President Obama’s nomination of judge Patty Shwartz to the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. However, an agreement was later reached, and the nomination sailed through (Zernike, par. 2). As the leader of the executive, the President must appoint the top officials in all of the major federal agencies such as the CIA, NASA, and the Federal Reserve Board. Previously, the President was mandated to appoint all members of the US civil service. However, the officers are now appointed on merit (Dahl 12).

The Canadian Prime Minister, similar to his American counterpart equivalent, also holds several appointment powers. Besides holding the highest role in the Canadian government, the PM has the power to appoint or remove officials from the cabinet and other positions. He holds power to appoint, without review, persons to fill important positions in the country’s parliament, judiciary, diplomatic corps, and a large number of crown corporations (Bickerton 63).

As an example, Jean Chrétien, the immediate former holder of this position, made more than 50 percent of all appointments in the Senate, a majority of judges at all levels of the judiciary, and the chief justices in various courts around the country. The PM also appoints the governor and the entire board of major corporate organizations, including the CBC and the Bank of Canada, and in addition, he appoints top diplomatic heads, the head of the Constitution (the Governor-General) and even sets a date for the next election. Unlike the US president’s appointments that sometimes require consultation or approval of the Senate. These appointments are made without any official consultation with the Senate or the monarchy. Since the PM picks the entire cabinet, he automatically becomes the head of the cabinet, decides on its size, chairs its meetings, and controls the agenda.

In America, becoming the President gives one a great deal of power, authority and receives much protection from Congress. When Clinton faced accusations during the Lewinsky scandal, he was supposed to take charge of his own irresponsibility. However, the Senate failed to effect an impeachment which had so widely been discussed; this move was undertaken to protect the presidency from being tarnished (Neustadt 8). Similar reasoning can be applied in the case of President Nixon and the Watergate Scandal. However, in Canada, parliament checks on the PM’s conduct, and it may withdraw its confidence in the PM. Cabinet or regional revolts can quickly bring down a PM, and even mere threats of such action can influence the post-holder to step down, as happened with Jean Chrétien (Bickerton 78). In fact, the monarch is superior to the position of the PM that holds full executive power.

The US President’s hands are tied on matters pertaining to the passage of laws. The Constitution dictates that the President can only formulate domestic laws, but the ultimate decision on whether to accept or reject the proposals is made by Congress. However, the President can use his pocket veto to increase his power, but its overuse might degrade not only his position but also that of the entire American political system. However, the President still has power over Congress in that he must put his signature to all legislation before they become law. The same applies to the budget: the President only prepares the budget, but its passage rests entirely on Congress. Since the President is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces of the United States, he makes a lot of decisions, especially during a war or national emergency.

During such times, Congress may give him additional power to manage the economy and undertake any move aimed at protecting the US and its interests. However, these powers are not granted by the Constitution as the President must seek Congress’ approval on major warfare decisions. Similarly, the Canadian PM is bound by the Senate and the monarch that functions as the head of state. Consequently, the Senate may block legislation forwarded by the cabinet. The PM is appointed by the monarchy and is free to hold this position until death or until parliament is dissolved. Since the PM is appointed by the monarch, every decision made by the PM is subject to scrutiny by the Crown (Savoie 260; Charlton 204). The PM’s power is also curtailed by Congress in times of War.

It is quite evident that Canada’s Prime Minister enjoys more power when it comes to making appointments. Apart from having the power to make numerous powerful appointments, he does not have to make any formal consultations or seek the approval of his cabinet. The input of the PM into the judiciary further surpasses that of the President. The US President also has a limited number of decisions that he can make without going through Congress. The PM also has checks placed on it both by the monarchy and Congress. However, the PM is seen to have more power than the President. Consequently, the Canadian PM is more powerful than the US President domestically.

Works Cited

Bickerton, James. Canadian politics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009. Print.

Charlton, Paul Barker. Contemporary Political Issues, 6th ed. (Edited By Mark Charlton and Paul Barker), Toronto: Thompson- Nelson, 1998. Print.

Dahl, Robert Allan. Who governs?: Democracy and power in an American city, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2005. Print.

Dickerson, Mark O., Flanagan, Thomas, and O‘Neill, Brenda. An Introduction to Government and Politics: A Conceptual Approach, 8th ed., Toronto: Thompson- Nelson, 2009. Print.

Neustadt, Richard E. Presidential power and the modern presidents: the politics of leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan, NY: Free Press, 1991. Print.

Savoie, Donald. Governing from the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Print.

Zernike, Kate. “In Act of Defiance, Democrat Stalls Obama Choice for Court.” The New York Times. 2012. Web.

The author presents the theme through the character of Jerry. Jerry has three siblings, Armand his eldest brother and Yvette and Yolande who are his sisters. Their parents take care of them, although Armand and Jerry work part time to supplement their father’s income (p 1).

As the story begins, Jerry does not understand the importance of the family when compared to material possessions. He saves money meant for his fare to the movies so that he can buy chewing gums and get the picture of Ken Maynard. His hard work and savings earn him thirty five cents which he intends to spend on the purchase of the chewing gums.

At the same time, his father’s birthday is near, and they are to contribute a small amount so that they can buy their father a gift. The other siblings contribute a dime each, but Jerry is stubborn and obsessed with the pictures, he contributes a nickel. This is not enough and thus, after much pressure from Armand, he contributes a dime but still retains the extra twenty cents (p 2).

Jerry describes his elder brother has a stranger because he always makes his own rules and regulations and even sides with both mum and dad in decision making. Jerry proceeds to purchase the chewing gum but finds out that the company will no longer manufacture them. Disappointed, he hurries back home and finds his brother and sisters have already gone uptown to purchase a gift for their father.

He peddles his bike fast, but he is still late and finds they have already bought their father a tie for a present. Jerry feels naked and exposed since he has betrayed his brother and father. Armand is dignified when talking to him. He tells him that at least he has learnt a lesson (p 3).

The lesson he learns is valuing his family more than material possessions. The same way their dad paid and took his sisters for piano lessons even though, it was during the depression.

Jerry becomes more caring and considerate to his family. He even begins to understand his elder brother whom he had earlier referred to as a stranger.

Jerry changes both in character and emotionally; character wise he becomes determined to find the complete set of the presidents’ picture, and he is willing to cycle to a new town to find the pictures missing in his set, emotionally he understands his brother’s feelings of love after finding the letter addressed to Sally and wonders why people actually fall in love. Although he is young, he argues that love is just a folly, and he hates it as it makes someone depressed (p 4).

Different family woes take place, for example the father and brother lose their jobs; furthermore, his brother falls in love. It is during this time that Jerry discovers from his brother that the next town has lots of President Cleveland pictures. He hurriedly cycles there to find the picture; after which, he does not complete his own set but sells it to Rollin Tremaine for five dollars. Hence, Rollie is the one who gets the glove and shows it off to everyone.

He gives the money to his brother who purchases a corsage for Sally and a new black shoe for the dance. He also helps his dad clear out some of his debts (p 6). Thus, as the story ends, Jerry has changed and got matured; he now understands the meaning of family compared to material possessions, and he does not regret his deeds but rather calls them fine and noble (p 9).

Works Cited

Cormier, Robert. President Cleveland, Where Are You? New York: Jamestown, 1998. Print.

Abstract

This study sets out to examine the constitutional roles of the Italian and German presidents, with the aim of drawing conclusions based on the differences or semblance in the duties or powers granted to and played by each.

The President Of Italy

The President of the Italian Republic (Italian: Presidente della Repubblica Italiana) is the head of the State and represents the unity of the Nation. He or she is intended to represent national unity rather than a particular political tendency in his term of seven years in office;

The duties and powers of the President of the Republic are as laid down in the Italian constitution. He calls elections of the Chambers and fixes their meetings. In discharging his legislative functions he authorizes the presentation of proposed laws in Parliament on the part of the government; promulgates the laws approved in Parliament and issues decrees having the same force of law and regulations. He has the right to call a referendum in such cases as are laid down by the Constitution and in case the referenda are popular with the voters.

The president is responsible for accrediting and receiving diplomatic dignitaries as required by state laws. He is the commander of the armed forces, presides over the Supreme Council of Defence and upon authorization of Parliament he can ratify international treaties and declare a state of war, if the sovereignty of the state is threatened by any external forces and may order them to perform such military duties as, in his opinion, are necessary or appropriate for the defense of the State. He presides over the High Council of the Judiciary. He may grant pardons and institute punishments. He also confers honours of the Republic to individuals.

In relation to the administrative acts and regulations of the government; the president also appoints State officials in such cases as are laid down by the law. For instance he appoints the President of the Council of ministers, ambassadors, special envoys among other state officials.

President Of Germany

The President of Germany (German: Bundespräsident, literally: federal president) is the head of state of the Federal Republic of Germany. His functions are mostly representative. The constitution created a semi-presidential system in which these powers were divided between the President, a cabinet and the parliament (Reichstag).

The German Reich (government) ceased to exist in 1945. After a period of Allied occupation, two German states were created in 1949: the federal republic of Germany (West Germany) and the German democratic republic (East Germany). Each republic had a head of state with the title of President, although in 1960, East Germany abandoned the title. There continued to be two heads of state in German until the in 1991 when there was reunification. At that point the President of the Federal Republic became the president of the whole of Germany.

The President then, enjoyed far greater powers than the current president and had an active political role, rather than a largely ceremonial one. The influence of the President also increased greatly as a result of the instability of the Weimar period. From the constitution, the President has authority to appoint any Chancellor he wishes and could dismiss the entire cabinet at any time

All bills have to receive ratification from the president to become statutory law and at times the president could insist that a law be submitted for the approval of voters in a referendum.

The president also has authority to dissolve the Reichstag, conduct foreign affairs, and command the armed forces. The constitution also provided the president with powers in the event of a crisis. For instance, if there was a threat to public order and security.

Comparisons

In the German practice, holders of the office of the head of state treated the role of president as a ceremonial, non-political one, and acted in accordance with the advice and directives of the Federal Government. Unlike Italy, the German president is not designated as the commander-in-chief of the military (ceremonially or otherwise). This role is vested in times of peace in the Minister of Defence, going to the Chancellor rather than the President in times of war,

The head of states are the Chief appointments officers. They appoint most or all the key officials in the government and civil service including members of the cabinet, the Prime minister or an equivalent like the chancellor;, key judicial figures, and all major appointments of the federal government: The Presidents have the mandate to propose individuals and then appoint them to the office. In Italy the president could appoint the Prime Minister while the German president appoints the Chancellor.

Dissolution of the Bundestagor the council of ministers: In the event of electing an individual for office, it is at the discretion of the Presidents to, either appoint or dismiss them. The Presidents may also, at his discretion; dissolve the governing bodies or let them stay The head of state may also dismiss office-holders. In presidential systems, the president often has the power to fire ministers at his sole discretion.

Promulgation of the law of all laws is done by the presidents before they can come into effect according to the order mandated by the constitution and/or if the content of the law is constitutional. If not, they have the right (and, some argue, the duty) to refuse to sign the law. The signing of a bill into law is called promulgation

Foreign relations of these states demand that the Presidents visit and receive foreign dignitaries. They draw and conclude treaties with foreign nations, accredit diplomats and receive the letters of accreditation of foreign diplomats. They also grant pardons and give state honours to individuals. In the event of a national crisis, the emergency laws in the countries designate the President as a mediator.

At home, they are expected to grace various occasions by their presence, such as by attending sports or artistic performances or competitions, celebrations, military parades and remembrances, prominent funerals,

Their other prerogatives include delegation of duties to other officials especially In cases where one person is head of state of two or more sovereign countries, like in Germany, there may be need to appoint a permanent representative in each (except in the head of state’s country of primary residence). Usually one of the senior leaders of the largest party and the country the president is nonetheless expected to be nonpartisan after assuming office.

There is a serious disagreement about whether the presidents, in fact, have greater powers than the above description would suggest. Some argue that nothing in the Basic Law suggests that a president must follow government directives. For instance, the president could refuse to sign legislation, thus vetoing it, or refuse to approve certain cabinet appointments. In very rare cases has this happened.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is clear that the Constitutions in both countries grant all federal executive power in the President to ensure a unity in purpose and energy in action. The centralization of authority in the Presidency is crucial in matters of national defense, diplomatic rows and foreign policy, where a unitary executive can evaluate threats, consider policy choices, and mobilize national resources with a speed and energy that is far superior to any other branch.

Reference

Berlin: Reich Government, (1934), Reichgesetzblatt part 1 p. 747.

Introduction

Fiscal policies can be described as policies that governments implement to stimulate their economies. Every government tries to spend within its revenue limit. In fact, rarely do governments spend beyond their income. However, United States has been spending more than its revenue since 1969.

This is mainly because it pays interest on the loans. This paper will explore its spending and tax legislation. It will also explore the country’s fiscal policy and evaluate whether this is expansionary or contractionary. Finally, it will explore how American population can influence decision makers on fiscal policy (CCH Group, 2011).

Summary of government spending and tax legislation

The United States government has experienced increased government spending annually, as they try to settle both their international and internal commitments. This has led to increased spending, which exceeds its annual income. Since 1969, Congress has continued to make appropriations, which are way beyond its income.

This has forced treasury to borrow a huge debt, which earns interest. The current national debt is estimated at $14.7 Trillion. This is quite massive. In fact, the president signed a new legislation in August that raised its debt limit. At the same time, he constituted a bipartisan committee, whose aim is to reduce deficit (Heakal, 2009).

United States fiscal policy

United States fiscal policy came into play after the great depression of 1930s. This led the government into managing its economic policies. During this period, US economy expanded. However, wars such as World War II caused great deficits to economy and the huge spending continued after 1969.

Current fiscal policy forces the government to spend more that it earns. This is mainly because of factors such as military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, among others. Other factors include tax cut, and September attacks, as well as the dot-com bubbles (The Library of Congress, 2011).

Is US fiscal policy “expansionary” or “contractionary”?

US fiscal policy can be considered as expansionary. This is mainly because most of its expenses go to defense. Otherwise, the market is expanding. In fact, its performance during peaceful years has been impressive (The Library of Congress, 2011).

How American consumers can influence decision makers on fiscal policies

American consumers have continued to increase budget deficit. This is mainly because they opt for cheap products from China. This has forced most manufacturers to seek cheap labor in china and India, among others. The result is low income for the government and increased unemployment. In order to influence decision-making, consumers should buy American products to improve government income. This will influence change in fiscal policy as more revenue is received (The Library of Congress, 2011).

Has it has changed over the past 5 years

Consumers are continually cutting on their expenses. This is mainly because of high health insurance, recession and cheap products from China, which provide alternatives to American products. This boosted China’s economy while the US deficit increases (The Library of Congress, 2011).

Conclusion

Every government tries to spend within its limits. In fact, rarely do governments spend beyond their revenues. Since 1969, Congress has continued to make appropriations, which are way beyond its income. This has forced treasury to borrow a huge debt, which earns interest. Moreover, American consumers continue to increase budget deficit.

This is mainly because they opt for cheap products from China. In order to influence decision-making, consumers should buy American products. This will improve government revenue (The White House Emblem, 2011).

Reference List

CCH Group. (2011). CCH Tax Briefing: Budget Control Act of 2011. Web.

Heakal, R. (2009). What Is Fiscal Policy? investopedia. Web.

The Library of Congress. (2011). Bill Text Versions 112th Congress (2011-2012) S.365. thomas.loc.gov. Web.

The White House Emblem. (2011). White House. Web.

Fighting COVID-19 has become one of Joe Biden’s top priorities since taking office as president. The memorandum, signed in the winter of 2021, was initiated by the presidential administration to determine 100% responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the costs aimed at combating the pandemic (The White House, 2021). FEMA is not part of the executive branch, and orders from the president reflecting work priorities are binding on that body (FEMA, 2021). Therefore, the signed memorandum obliged FEMA to follow the terms of this document.

At the same time, since FEMA is not a non-profit organization and is included in the list of national agencies, its revenues are completely dependent on the federal budget. In this regard, the conditions of the previous presidential administration, which assumed the imposition of a quarter of the total costs on administrative units (states), were objective and reasonable. A relevant bill could be ratified so that the costs of fighting the pandemic could be shared between the states and the federal government. This will reduce the financial burden on FEMA and help keep a portion of the treasury while maintaining a course to counter the consequences of COVID-19.

The decision to ratify such a bill will be considered at the Congress level. As the standing committees to introduce the bill to, the budget committees of the House and the Senate will be involved (Congress.gov., n.d.). This bill is likely to go through each chamber as its passage requires the approval of various authorities and includes an assessment of budgetary funds at several levels, including both state and federal governments. In such conditions, this is impossible to coordinate activities within one chamber, and the bill has to be considered in Congress to propose a corresponding initiative to the presidential administration.

The likelihood of the bill being vetoed would exist if it were passed. Failure to pass the law by any of the standing committees would mean the need to create a special commission and prepare the bill to report directly to the president. However, decisions of this level require coordination with national agencies since, in addition to FEMA, other parts of the Department of Homeland Security might be opposed to such an initiative. Moreover, an appeal to the Supreme Court is mandatory, which also does not guarantee a positive outcome.

As the factors determining whether the Supreme Court is acting with restraint or not, one can examine the legal background of a particular decision, as well as cite precedents from judicial practice. According to Millhiser (2021), the Supreme Court can challenge any president’s decision since federal judges are not accountable to the electorate and are guided solely by legislative factors when making a decision.

In other words, if the memorandum contradicts constitutional norms and the Supreme Court takes this into account, this is an indicator of restraint. However, the precedents in judicial practice show that the highest judicial board is unlikely to challenge the president’s decision, which, as Millhiser (2021), met in practice and was based on a conservative decision-making principle. Severe restrictions on the activities of federal agencies took place in national legislative practice. In addition, Biden’s memorandum is based on the principle of reducing the burden on state governments to strengthen preventive security measures locally. Therefore, there are factors that would lead the Supreme Court to be unlikely to take a challenge to the presidential decision.

References

Congress.gov. (n.d.). Committees of the U.S. Congress. Web.

FEMA. (2021). Biden-Harris administration: First 100 days. Web.

Millhiser, I. (2021). The Supreme Court’s coming war with Joe Biden, explained. Vox. Web.

The White House. (2021). Memorandum on maximizing assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Web.

Introduction

Leadership is the definite role assigned to each and every president/country. The most common and wrong presumption by most presidents is that since their job title puts them in a position of leadership, the individuals who work under them will automatically be subject to their every word. In actual sense, however, the title presidency is not necessarily directly linked to leadership. In order for effectiveness to be achieved in leadership, the person in charge must constantly ensure that his/her influence to the people subordinate to him/her is always positive and intended to achieve the unique goals of the country. Furthermore, it has been proven that the leadership style adopted can make make people in governmental control either excellent or terrible leaders.

This report is an analysis of the leadership Egypt’s three presidents. The contribution of leadership style of each of the presidents to the economy of the country shall be identified and then discussed in detail with an effort of isolating its strengths, and weaknesses. This report shall also draw parallels between the leadership style of each of the three presidents in the wake of economic policy changes.

Evolution in the Egyptian Political system

Egypt has been operating under the law of emergency for the past 43 years. Even though this law was supposed to have come to be amended by the 1980s, it has continually been extended to suit the needs of the state. The law strongly dictates the limits of all non-governmental activities and it has banned all forms of street demonstrations and the reception of unregistered financial donations (Bowker, 2010). However, with the entry of the new millennium, the radicals of the country have become bolder and have time and again trampled on these restrictions.

For instance, in the year 2003 all the independent democratic parties advocated for local democratic reforms with some of them categorically disputing the planned transfer of the presidency from Hosni Mubarak to his son Gamal Mubarak (Fahmy, 2002). Advocacy groups such as the Egyption Movement for Change (Kefaya) have also come around to completely reject the usage of violence by the government’s security agencies. When in it comes to issues affecting the local citizenry, peasant farmers have also come out to demand more openness when it comes to land issues and land reform (Fahmy, 2002). For instance, in 1997 the Nasser-era land reform policies touching fixed rents and the security of inherited land tenure were revoked after they were subjected to pressure from peasant activists (Bowker, 2010).

Gamal Abdel Nasser was one of the kingpins of the Free Officers rebellion group which strategized for taking over country leadership from the monarchy. In the year 1950, Nasser and his covert formation plotted a coup which would come to be known as the revolution (Fahmy, 2002). With the success of the upheaval, Mohamed Naguib was given the position of commander in chief while six other Free Officers leaders were appointed principles. The new authorities announced that their reign would be characterized by the end of occupation, feudalism and monopoly (Bowker, 2010). The principles also declared that they would aim at curtailing social injustices coupled with making efforts towards the democratization of Egypt.

In 1953 the monarchy was abolished and Mohamed Naguib declared president and Gamal Abdel Nasser was crowned prime minister. The Free Officers executive was renamed the RCC and leadership came with promises of agrarian reforms (Bowker, 2010). There was more liberalism as disbanded groups such as the Moslem Brotherhood were allowed to partake in their non-political activities. Even though the leadership of the RCC was smooth in the earlier days, there was constant wrangling between the top leaders Gamal Abdel Nasser and Mohamed Naguib leading to the 1955 overthrowing of Naguib by Nasser who was officially elected president leading to a disbandment of the RCC. Nasser’s leadership led to an abolition of the martial law and censorship (Fahmy, 2002).

In 1956 Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal with an aim of using the revenues obtained in building the Aswan High Dam. This move angered both Britain and France with the two countries leading attacks in the Canal. The Security Council was however pressured to call for the withdrawal of the French and British armies from the region leaving Abdel Nasser to be seen as a hero (Fahmy, 2002). This is because both the Soviet Union and the United States opposed the British, French and Israeli actions.

After Abdel Nasser’s death in 1970, his vice president Anwar El-Sadat took over as president of Egypt (Bowker, 2010). He was confirmed as president by a referendum in 1970. His entry into state leadership was marked by attempts to overthrow him by some political opponent. Being members of his cabinet, he managed to come up with a strategy termed as the corrective revolution and which he used to expel them from government (Fahmy, 2002).

El-Sadat’s political strategy was to win the approval of the masses by capturing neighboring territories. To this end, he managed to secure arms from the Soviet Union and in 1973 he combined forces with Syria to attack Israel. The plot was initially successful but soon military aid was dispatched to Israel from America leading to a retreat of El-Sadat’s troops (Bowker, 2010). The following year a disengagement treaty was signed which gave Egypt a narrow strip along the Suez Canal. This victory was seen as Egypt’s way of regaining national pride and it gave Sadat the green light to carry on with his strategy of economic reform.

Sadat’s reign came with the open-door economic policy which unfortunately only served to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. This was because it encouraged more importing of products as compared to the usage of locally manufactured goods. Consequently inflation rates soared and the country had to depend on aid from the USA (Fahmy, 2002).

In 1976, a bill for the formation of independent parties was signed into law and this marked the beginning of multiparty politics in Egypt. In the same year a referendum was held and Sadat retained his presidency. Seeing the economic challenges plaguing his country, he held talks with International Monetary Fund and he was forced by the institution to do away with all the subsidies (Bowker, 2010). The economic struggles coupled with the removal of subsidies led to protests by the citizens- demonstrations which were marked by several deaths and injuries to scores of people. Sadat was forced to come up with a new economic strategy. In 1978, Sadat held talks with Israel and a peace deal was signed between the two countries. This move angered most of Egypt’s Arabic allies leading to Sadat’s assassination in 1981 (Bowker, 2010).

Following Sadat’s death, his vice president Hosni Mubarak took over after a formal election. Mubarak promised to continue with Sadat’s peaceful legacy and he started on this path by releasing political captives that had been imprisoned by his predecessor (Bowker, 2010). Mubarak strived to ensure peaceful relations with the USA, the Soviet Union and other Arab states. As far as the economy was concerned, Mubarak initiated economic reforms and it was during his early years in office that Egyptians began to appreciate the freedom of expression especially through guarantees of press freedom (Fahmy, 2002). One factor that has contributed to his political supremacy is the setting up of a privatization scheme as a way of getting the economy back on the growth track.

Of the Egyptian president’s Mubarak has been the one who has made conscious efforts to ensure peaceful relations with other nations. He for instance actively contributed to the peace talks between Palestine and Israel and he also came out to speak against the September 11^th 2001 attacks on the United States (Fahmy, 2002). His popularity with the people has also reflected well on his political career judging from his constant reelection with landslide wins (Bowker, 2010). This is however despite the fact that most people think that elections in Egypt are neither free nor fair.

Evolution in the Egyptian economic policy

The Egyptian economy has in recent days grown from strength to strength owing to reforms in the country’s economic policy. The actual changes began during the first half of the 1990s with the initiators of the change working towards the attainment of a free market economy. The strategy has yielded positive results with Egypt’s inflation going down to as low as 3% (Harik and Naguib, 2006). The country’s budget has also witnessed a significant deficit reduction. With the government not being able to comfortable hire all the college graduates, the Egyptian labor force has gradually been encouraged to be entrepreneurial.

The economic policy currently in place in the country has been designed to encourage private investment as well as the competitiveness of locally made products (Harik and Naguib, 2006). When Hosni Mubarak took over he made a promise to ensure that the employment rate went up as well as to increase the Gross Domestic Product. As a matter of fact, one of the items on his campaign manifestos is to grow the economy to such a level whereby all the country’s income is well shared among the citizenry. This is a concept borrowed from the developing world where the governments exercise minimal control in matters pertaining to the economic logistics with an aim of promoting individual growth which compounds to make the country economy grow even further (Harik and Naguib, 2006).

Another element of the economic policy that has contributed to Egypt’s growth spurt is the modification of the state’s incentive system. This has been done in order to encourage the citizens to go for entrepreneurship after successfully completing their education as opposed to seeing employment (Harik and Naguib, 2006). The economic policy reform in Egypt touched on a number of areas including privatization, custom legislation, and the corporate tax system. The reasons for changes in these three regions have been briefly described below:

Privatization

While coming up with economic reform strategies, the government’s main target was creating an appeal to and retaining both local foreign investment (Harik and Naguib, 2006). This has been achieved through maintaining activity in the stock market as well as coming up with innovative ways of handling the public business sector such that it can incorporate the input of the private business. Consequently, an increase has been reported as far as remittances are concerned with most of the monies sent back being used to fund new investments.

Customs legislations

When it came to custom legislations, the reforms came about in order to reduce commodity prices and make tariff structure even more simplified (Harik and Naguib, 2006). To this end, the state brought in policies that encouraged export trade through a reduction in the duties charged at the borders particularly on spare parts and capital products. The reforms also strived at getting trade in the local market operational by dealing with all disputes relating to tariff categorization. The number of different tariff categorizations were reduced from 36 to five (Harik and Naguib, 2006).

Corporate tax

As far as the corporate tax setup is concerned, the reforms were mainly structured to ensure that fairness was maintained in the taxation system (Harik and Naguib, 2006). Hosni Mubarak’s government has been particularly keen on this element of reforms which has resulted in the promotion of investment as well as keeping down the cost of technology transfer.

Evolution in the Egyptian economy

Once the revolution began in Egypt the regime that brought in the changes started giving more priority to the economic development than its predecessor. The growth of the economy has been a prime area of focus for the government over the years. The Egyptian economy has been on a stable growth path since the revolutionary regime took over though on occasion some slight fluctuations have been experienced (Kienle, 2001). Egypt has had more than slight fluctuations. These periods of instability in the economy coupled with difficulty in accessing statistical data makes analysis of the economic growth a challenge.

The figures to illustrate economic progress released by one section of government are more often than not subjected to disputes and experts have always concluded that the estimates are greatly skewed owing to the informal nature of the economy as well as the lack of proper structures for collecting workers remittances (Kienle, 2001). It is estimated that between 1955 and 1975 the Egyptian economy underwent a steady Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate of over four percent. With the population at the time growing at 2.5 percent, the economy had grown over 1.7 times the population.

In the years between 1967-1974, during the sunset years of Gamal Abdul Nasser’s reign and the ushering in of Anwar Sadat’s presidency, the economy grew at an average rate of approximately 3.3 percent (Kienle, 2001). This slow down in was occasioned by a number of factors top on the list being a stagnation of agricultural and industrial production linked to the June 1967 war (Kienle, 2001). During this period of instability all the investments which had contributed to earlier economic growth in both the agricultural and industrial sectors went through a period of instability.

However, in 1975, the economy went through a dramatic rise occasioned by a sudden increase in oil prices two years earlier. Egypt, like other nations in the Middle East, reaped heavily from the oil boom of the1975 to 1980 with the annual GDP peaking at 11% in 1980 (Kienle, 2001). However, Egypt later suffered a setback from the same oil trade in the mid 80s when the oil prices crashed between 1985 and 1986. During this period, the annual economic growth rate did not go beyond 2.9 percent. The investment ratio also dropped to 22 percent in 1987, down from 30percent in 1985 (Kienle, 2001).

After the Second World War the Egyptian economy went through intense diversification. In the early 1950s agriculture contributed approximately 30 percent to the GDP, the industrial sector was approximately 15 percent while the services industry was in the region of 53percent (Kienle, 2001). This diversification was necessitated by a decline in the contribution of agriculture to the economy and a rapid growth of the industrial sector as well as government services.

The decline in agricultural contribution to the GDP continued all through the 1960s-1970s stabilizing at an all time low of 15 percent in the 1980s (Kienle, 2001). During this period, the Gross National Product (GNP) contribution of the industrial sector went up as occasioned by the growth of the electric grid and the setting up of oil rigs. In the mid to late 1980s and the early 1990s the manufacturing sector in Egypt failed to impress causing the country to be entirely dependent on oil export and outside financing (Kienle, 2001).

As the agricultural and industrial sectors were going through periods of fluctuation, the service industry maintained a stable ascent particularly because of the government’s clarion call to guarantee jobs to all university graduates. This was the trend under Sadat’s reign but due to saturation, recruitment of graduates became an impossibility when Hosni Mubarak took over owing to the inability of the state to financially fund this venture (Kienle, 2001). However after the 1990s and turning into the twenty first century, the government’s move to encourage service in the public industry became an impediment to growth as the payment of civil servants competed for funds with state investments (Kienle, 2001). In this regard the state could not afford to hire more civil servants and the guaranteeing of public sector jobs to college graduates declined.

Conclusion

This essay has analyzed both the political and structural leadership strategies of Egypt’s three presidents in the light of the country’s economic development. It has been well established that the transformational leadership style embraced by Mubarak and Nasser is best suited for the type of economic activities that the country is involved in. This strategy should therefore be maintained even in the wake of the paradigm shift facing the country. The report has elaborated on the various features of the strategies adopted by all the three presidents, using extensive literature drawing from the works of various scholars. In conclusion, it is important to note that a strategy that works for the economy of a country such as the one adopted by Mubarak and Nasser should be reinforced as opposed to being abandoned due to the current transformational changes facing the country.

Reference List

Bowker, R. (2010). Egypt and the Politics of Change in the Arab Middle East. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Fahmy, N.S. (2002).The politics of Egypt: state-society relationship. London: Routledge.

Harik, I & Naguib, A. (2006). Economic Policy reform in Egypt. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.

Kienle, E. (2001). A grand delusion: democracy and economic reform in Egypt. London: I.B.Tauris.