Society | Political Science News

Generation X in Politics

As Generation X—those born between the mid-1960s and early 1980—begins getting older and begin making their way into politics, changes may be coming. Generation X has always had a different view on life than the baby boomers did.

The early parts of this generation have already started influencing politics, with a greater focus on scientific research and less worrying about political differences. Fortunately, we are just scratching the surface of the Generation X political movement.

As the later members of this generation—late 1970s and early 1980s—things will begin to change. Many outdated and archaic laws will be stricken from the books. The real question is, can this generation turn the economy around? Will the pot smoking, television addicted generation be able to run the U.S. Government?

The answer is yes to both questions. This generation is a more free thinking generation than the baby boomers. They tend to rely more on scientific fact and research than the previous generation. This is only going to get more intense as we get later into generation X. We will see more technological movement than we ever have and this new generation is more eco-friendly than ever. So we may actually see a greatly improved earth and less of a dependence on fossil fuels.

Many older generations are probably shaking as they think about us “Legalizing It.” That, however, has fallen by the wayside in favor of another green, the plant! If anyone is going to turn this around it is Generation X. We have seen about enough of stuffy politicians saying whatever they need to get into office and never living up to their promises.

These young politicians still have about 10 years before they become the majority, but hopefully they hold true to their roots and demand change in an increasingly corrupted field.

2012 Election: Potential Candidates

The 2012 polls are getting closer and closer and we have yet to see any real clear cut candidates for either party. Everyone knows that Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton will run, but what are the other possibilities?

Democrats:

Barack Obama is of course an option to run for reelection in 2012. His approval rating has shot up recently, with some showing it over 50%. He took over a mess and a lot of U.S. Citizens are starting to see that most of the problems are not from his policies. The unemployment rate began dropping in December 2010, falling nearly 0.5%. Not much, but an improvement. The other thing is that a Presidents’ policies usually do not show effect for about four years.

Hillary Clinton is the other legitimate competition for the Democratic nomination. She once rode the coattail of Bill, but has really shown that she is a political force. If Obama declines to run in 2012, look for Clinton to come out as the Democratic nominee.

Republican:

Newt Gingrich has come forward as a potential—and most likely–Republican candidate. The former speaker of the house has a long resume in politics, dating back to 1979 as a member of the House of Representatives.

Sarah Palin will again toss her name in the republican bucket. She is a long shot to make it as a nominee, mostly due to her extreme tactics and frequent bad press. Her affiliation with the Tea party is another downfall for her.

Independent:

While the Independent party is typically a second though, we may have our most influential and qualified Independent candidate since Ross Perot. Charley Crist, the current Governor of Florida has done wonders for the state he governs. He has lowered taxes and addressed the state’s high property tax rate. He has also created a healthcare plan that offered insurance to thousands of uninsured Floridians.

Filed Under: Politics, Society Tagged With: Barack Obama, Sarah Palin

Religion in the White House: Time for change?

In the 44 Presidents in the United States’ history, a vast majority have been, in one form or another, Christian. The remaining Presidents were considered irreligious of Unitarian. As Generation X and Y are getting older and more involved in Politics, may we see a President of a different religion? Let’s have a look at the major religions in the U.S. and see which are likely and which still need time.

Unaffiliated:

The second largest “religion” consists of those that are unaffiliated with any religion. This group makes up 16.1% of the U.S. population. This includes Atheists, Agnostics and those that just choose not to practice religion. This is by far the most likely of alternative religions to make it into the White House, mostly based on gross numbers and its acceptance by Generation X and Y.

Jewish:

Judaism is the third largest religion after Christianity at about 4.7% of the U.S. population. Simply because it is the third largest, and readily accepted, it is most likely that a Jewish president would be likely.

Buddhist:

Buddhism is a religion of peace and may be a great influence on the country, but do not hold your breath waiting for one. The Buddhist religion makes up only 0.7% of the U.S. population. With numbers that low, it is unlikely a potential President is in the works. It is possible, just unlikely.

Islam:

The religion of Islam, whose followers are called Muslims, is the wildcard of the race to change the White House’s religion. Islam is growing fast throughout the world and is the second largest in the world. Islam is—to some people’s surprise—much like Christianity, so it wouldn’t be a huge change in the personality of the White House. However, since 9/11 and people incorrectly tabbing all Muslims as terrorists, it is unlikely to see this. Also, the number do not add up, as they only make up 0.6% of the United States’ population.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: United States

The Green Party, Here to Stay

The Green Party was founded in 2001 with the intent to change the way our government elects officials and how it makes decisions. Four main principles anchor the party in it’s focus including: ecology, social justice, grassroots democracy and non-violence.

The focus on ecology is to ensure that our environment is protected. This including the land that we live on and sustains us, the air that we breath and the water that supports us all. The party focuses on electing officials and enacting laws that continues to support the species of the planet, including the human race. This is important in a growing industrial nation where success is measured by dollars instead of a healthy and happy society.

Social Justice is also important to the Green Party. The list is long of persons in America that need protection and justice or an equal chance in a discriminating society. Included in the focus are woman’s rights, social equality, reproductive rights, economic equality, sexual orientation, rights of the disabled, and the list continues. There seems to be no shortage of persons who are forgotten in the American society.

The word grassroots develops interesting images but the concept is simple. Grassroots democracy is a political group composed of individuals in the society. It is not an organization backed by corporate sponsorship, of which the green party is opposed. Everyone deserves a voice.

Another focus is non violence, which simply refers to attaining goals without hurting others. If it hurts others, how can we really see it as a positive outcome?

Recent action by the Green Party other than activity in recent elections was attending the 16th session of the Conference of Parties, a meeting to discuss Global warming and possible actions. The Green Party is also reported to actively oppose President Obama’s interest in cutbacks to Medicare and Social Security.

Filed Under: Politics, Society Tagged With: Barack Obama, Green, Medicare, United States

The tax cuts agreement between President Obama and Republicans

Decisions in the current Congress seem to be going nowhere fast. More debates seem to lead to less progress on any issue including the discussion over tax cuts. If it isn’t the Republican party requiring one concession it is the Democrats that won’t agree to something else. One thing is for certain, without a clear goal and focused action, it is doubtful that the American economy will change for the better soon. Everywhere we turn, in so many news reports we hear constantly about all the doubt concerning each plan and why it won’t work.

According to a news briefing held by both President Obama and former President Clinton at the White House on December 10, 2010, the agreement with Republicans includes much more than just a continuation of the current tax cuts put into place by former President Bush. Also included is a middle class tax cut, tax credits for college students, a child tax credit, a credit for manufacturing companies in the energy market and the extension of unemployment insurance.

Although he does not agree with the continuation of tax cuts alone, Former President Clinton agrees that this a good plan. He also stated that for Democrats that don’t think it is a good deal, that it is important to remember that there will be less interest from the Republican party to continue unemployment benefits after the new Congress is seated next year.

It seems one political party or the other is ready to stop any solution to the American economic instability. Learning to get along and be reasonable is something kids are supposed to learn in grade school. It seems that making the concessions and finding an agreement is the solution. Immediate action is the only way to help the economy and is of importance to everyone in the country. The unemployed have bills to pay as well and with out a job opportunity, what option are we leaving them?

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: Republican, Tax cut, White House

United States Debt and Deficit

The United States Government continues to create budgets that do not balance out, increasing our national debt and continuing to operate under a budget deficit. The Obama administration took office with a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit dropped into their laps. According to the Obama administration this debt will continue to rise as negotiations for continued tax cuts and increased spending are required. The average person needs help in the current U.S. economy and unemployment rates are too high. It is important that the average person understands more fully how budgets and the economy of our nation functions.

It is important to understand there is a difference between the national debt and the national deficit. Stated on the U.S. National Debt Clock the debt is bills that have gone unpaid and the deficit is the difference in what the nation is currently spending and what taxes are being collected. So it is important to see the difference. When government officials talk about reducing the deficit they are only referring to reducing our accumulated debt, not reducing our actual debt. According to the debt clock on December 13, 2010, the current debt per tax payer is over $125,000 and that is climbing.

Something has to change. Everything one learns in economics is that paying interest and accumulating debt will catch up with you one day. Americans are born into this world in debt. Honestly, this is no way to treat or teach our children the importance of responsibility.

The United States government continues to fight costly wars overseas and it appears we will continue tax cuts that helped cause the national debt to rise since the most recent Bush administration. Of course, a functional economy is important and that is a tough decision for the current administration and Congress. No private individual would be lawfully allowed to carry debt like our government continues to do.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: Deficit, Obama administration, United States

National Healthcare, Should Everyone Have Easy Access to a Doctor?

The United States continues to struggle with the debate over health care and how to regulate it. To many Americans the importance of health care refers to two key concerns: Cost and Access. Any reform that exists must to respond to both of these. With the Republican gaining control of the House, the opportunity for repeal of recent reforms grows.

According to a statement from Republican National Chairman, Michael Steele the Republican position is that the reform of health care passed this year was “unpopular” and a “2.5 trillion dollar mistake”. With a position like this it seems the Republican lead House will require attempts to repeal the reforms. Meanwhile the White House attempts to remind the American people about the positive aspects of the reform, included on the White House website. According to former President Clinton, in a recent White House press briefing, the health care reforms are worth fighting for if Republicans attempt repeal.

For the American there seems to be interest that health care costs are brought to an affordable level. Because of the high cost of care and insurance, care is out of reach for too many people. It seems reasonable that if one needs care they should be able to see a doctor. Why would anyone fight against any legislation that would make this a possibility?

The second part of the requirement to reform is Access. Currently, this is very closely related to bringing down costs because that is the factor limiting access for those that aren’t receiving care. Under current standards those without insurance pay the full bill. A full bill that is often a larger amount than what is charged to an insurance company that may have bargained for a lower rate. It appears there are discrepancies in the equality of American people. Those that can’t afford insurance end up paying a higher bill that they couldn’t pay anyway. It seems reform remains a requirement not an option.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: Republican Party (United States), United States, White House

Whose Responsibility Is It?

: Image via Wikipedia

President Obama says it is the responsibility of the United States government and he wants Arizona to drop efforts to try and control the flow of illegals across American borders. The federal government has filed a lawsuit against the state over a controversial law that requires local police to make inquiries about immigration status when they suspect that someone they have arrested may be in the country illegally. Despite the lawsuit, Arizona shows no indication that it will back down. The governor says since lawmakers in Washington are not addressing the problem, they have to.

The lawsuit alleges that the state of Arizona has violated the constitution in passing a law that is clearly out of their jurisdiction. Latino groups across America are applauding the move by the federal government because they believe that the Arizona law will lead to harassment of all Latinos, even those who have entered the United States legally.

The President agrees that immigration reform is needed in the United States but he says it is up to the Congress to approve any changes not individual states. The debate over what to do about illegals living in America has been a source of a great deal of controversy because most of the proposals have included some type of amnesty plan. While many believe that the illegals here should be given a chance to become American citizens others argue that is not fair to all the people who played by the rules and followed the law in entering the U.S.

The longer the debate drags on without any solution to the problem, the more frustrated states like Arizona become trying to deal with large numbers of illegals. If Congress continues to block efforts at reform, reports say the President may act on his own. White House lawyers are reportedly studying the legality of issuing an executive order granting amnesty to illegals.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: Barack Obama, Federal government of the United States, United States

Is the real intent of Wikileaks transparency?

It seems unclear whether the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, released recent U.S. diplomatic cables as part of a political agenda or specifically to promote transparency of government. According to Reuters, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, has left his post at Wikileaks to start a new website called Openleaks because he wants to promote transparency, which he didn’t feel was happening any longer with Wikileaks.

Currently at the Wikileaks website, one is redirected to a mirror site that hosts the content of Wikileaks. The front page of the Wikileaks website, along with quotes and and simple text format is the statement, “We are of assistance to peoples of all countries who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and institutions. We aim for maximum political impact.” The question remains whether releasing documents previously not released to the public will fulfill this aim. It also remains to be seen, whether the release of these documents will end with possible harm to individuals or other entities. What happened to discretion and the aim to help people and to do so in a direct way. Indiscriminately releasing information may not come close to this effect?

According to Merriam-Websters Dictionary transparency refers in part to helping someone better understand something. It is not apparent that the release of censored or classified documents will ever achieve the goal. The newly created website Openleaks, does not appear to have any content other than a message “Coming Soon” at this point. Is leaking documents to the public the path to transparency? It may lead to government officials becoming more careful in what they say, it may even lead to stronger security over classified documents, but greater transparency is questionable.

The U.S. Press Secretary made a statement a couple of weeks ago condemning the recent release of documents by Wikileaks. He also stated the risks outweigh the interest of the possible support to transparency in the government.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: Julian Assange, Reuters, Wikileaks

Kids Shouldn’t Go Hungry

Living in a society as rich as ours its a little hard to understand why anyone should go hungry, especially the children of the United States. The Healthy, Hungry Free Kids Act was signed by President Obama on December 13, 2010 at Harriet Tubman Elementary School in Washington D.C. The bill was supported by both Democrats and Republicans, during a time it seems like the two parties aren’t willing to agree on much. We should all be thankful for the willingness of both parties to work together on this issue.

The bill, now a signed Act was created with the great efforts of both the President and the First Lady because school lunches should be available to all kids and they haven’t been. According to President Obama the act will make it possible for 115,000 kids to get school lunches that previous did not. The fact that there are at least that many kids in this country that don’t get a reasonable lunch is scary. It is easy to see the need for an Act such as the Healthy, Hungry Free Kids Act.

The act doesn’t stop at just making meals more available but also focuses efforts on the nutritional content of the meals that are available. The President also commented on how the Act will connect schools with local farmers and that the funding for the Act will come from a rollback of the SNAP food stamp temporary increase. In this era where the deficit is large and the national debt continues to grow everyday, it’s important to find ways to pay for programs without increasing spending. Although it is concerning to have money taken from food stamp programs, at least it is directed to another food program that will ensure kids are getting fed. Feeding our next generations is an important cause, with out healthy kids, it is hard to imagine strong leaders of the future.

Filed Under: Society Tagged With: First Lady, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, United States