Dinner or Run for Office? (Post by Friday, September 9 at 8:00 AM)

In order to ease everyone into writing on the blog this year, I thought I would use a couple rather creative questions to see what some of your political preferences might be.  Please answer 1 of the following questions:

A) If you could have dinner with 3 famous Americans from the world of politics, who would you choose and why?  Please be detailed in your response!

B) If you could serve in any elected or appointed position in the National government, which position would you choose and why? Please be detailed in your response!

Just as a reminder, here are some of the aspects of your responses I will be looking at at the end of each quarter when I assess your blog grade:

Excellent
-use of higher order thinking in response to the problems, statements, and/or questions listed in the assignment
-introduces a new perspective to the topic at hand
-concludes with application to the outside situation
-generates further analytical responses from class members

Basic
-articulates comprehension in response to the problem, statements and/or questions listed in the assignment
-compares posting to other posted messages, text material, or class content

Approaching Basic
-minimal response to problems, statements, and/or questions listed in the assignment
-restates central issues in context of content
-plainly states the authors beliefs and practices respect among classmates


Unacceptable
-discussion shows no understanding of problems, statements, and/or questions listed in the assignment

Concerned about America? (Post due by Friday, Sept 2 at 8:00 AM)

For our first blog post of the year, I wanted to start off with a basic question which seems to be in the news nearly everyday. My question to all of you is very simple: what is your biggest concern about the United States today? Please make sure your thoughts are insightful, yet also respectful to your fellow classmates.

Another Crisis on the Horizon?

As I was engaging in my normal Sunday morning routine of enjoying a fresh cup of coffee and reading The New York Times, I came across an article I thought would be interesting to use in our weekly blog. All of you are in the midst of searching for your ideal college that will best fit both your personality as well as your future interests. College’s are breaking the backs of students in an age where a college education is vital to finding a job. Tuition rates are rising faster than inflation and family incomes combined. Your generation is so incredibly vital to the future of our economy and workforce. After reading the following article, I want to hear your voice: who is responsible for the unbelievable tuition rates? Can this huge problem be fixed, or is it too late? How can an average high school student find ways to pay for a college tuition? Feel free to give suggestions!

Another Debt Crisis is Brewing

Analysis of the Presidential Race Thus Far (Please respond by Friday, May 20)

This NY Times video has an analysis of the four announced candidates so far for president as well as thoughts on how all the candidates (and not so sure candidates like Daniels) did this past week.'

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2011/05/13/us/politics/100000000818107/caucus--the-youtube-primary.html

What are your thoughts on the candidates? Any favorites in your mind? People who should just drop out of consideration right now?  How much of a chance do you give any of these individuals in defeating President Obama in 2012?

Foreign Intervention

With all of the talk in the news lately about U.S. involvement with foreign countries, I thought this would be an interesting question to get your input on.

If you were to choose 3 countries in which the United States should be involved in protecting or intervening to help/create peace/stability, which 3 would they be? Why?

Ohio 'Heartbeat' Abortion Bill

As the ongoing debate about abortion continues to divide Americans, there is a bill currently being debated in the Ohio House which will undoubtedly only cause further controversy. Ohio lawmakers are expected to vote on the issue this Wednesday, March 30. Please read the article below which was in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on Wednesday, February 9. This article will provide you with some background before you comment on this proposed legislation.

'Heartbeat' Bill Background

What are you thoughts on this proposal? Is this unconstitutional as some have claimed? Please be respectful in commenting on others comments.

Should we limit the power of the Supreme Court? (Please respond by Friday, March 18)

The Constitution allows Supreme Court Justices to serve for life in office "under good behavior." The Founders involved both the Executive and Legislative Branches in the choosing of the justices as a mean of a check on their capability and potential to serve. It was originally questionable about what "good behavior" meant, but it is now largely defined as anything but an impeachable offense. Despite this constitutional provision, only 1 state (Rhode Island) has placed it in their own state constitution. From 1789 to 1970, justices stayed on the Supreme Court for an average of 15 years, retiring at the average age of 68; during this time, vacancies arose about every two years. From 1970 to today, justices have been serving for an average of 25 years and retiring at an average age of 78; now, vacancies typically arise only every 3+ years.

Both liberal and conservative groups have expressed dismay at different points in history at decisions made by the Supreme Court and the perceived "eliteness" of life tenure. This anger is often manifested in calls for more checks on the Supreme Court. Thomas Jefferson has questioned the power of the Court by bringing forth the notion that judicial review undermines the democratic process. FDR felt that the legislative process was threatened by the Court and proposed what became known as the "Court packing scheme."

However, on the other side, the ability to serve for life as well as to not be elected frees the Justices from common political pressures, such as deciding cases to please the public. Some believe that setting limits on time served will cause too much frequent change in the Court bringing an instability to precedent and legal interpretations.

What is the best means of ensuring that the Supreme Court remains accountable for their decisions?