http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/02/arizona-governor-tweets-photo-of-herself-vetoing-bill/
Summary
Arizonia Governor, Jan Brewer has the power to veto legislation which was exactly what she did. It was her responsibility to veto or accept an extremley controversial bill that would allow business owners to deny service to homosexuals; not only did she veto the bill but she took a picture of herself doing so and even tweeted it!
Twitter was not only used to show people that she vetoed the law but was also used to convince her to veto the legislation. John McCain tweeted "I hope Governor Brewer will veto #SB1062" and Mitt Romney tweeted, .@GovBrewer: veto of #SB1062 is right.
This article shows us the power of social networking and it can sway our opinions.
How does this relate to APGoPo
This article discussing the governors power to veto legislation which we disucussed while learning anout the Constitution, it is also an example of how the federal government leaves controversial issues to the states.
My Opinion
I think that is amazing how fast social networking is, just seconds after she vetoed it the whole world knew! And I am very glad that she decided to veto this legislation, denying rights to gays is just honestly horrible, you go girl! And go Romney and McCain for your tweets, who knows they may have actually changed her mind as well as thousands of other twitter users.
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Spanking bill in Kansas sparks controversy
"Spanking bill in Kansas sparks controversy"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/19/spanking-bill-in-kansas-sparks-controversy/
About the Article
This article is about a Kansas lawmaker, Gail Finney, who introduced a bill that would expand on the right that allows teachers to spank children in class. She claims that the introduction of this bill is not to legalize child abuse but to allow teachers to maintain authority over the misbehaving student. In her statement she states that the legislation would allow "up to ten forceful applications in succession of a bare, open-hand palm against the clothed buttocks of a child and any such reasonable physical force on the child as may be necessary to hold, restrain or control the child in the course of maintaining authority over the child, acknowledging that redness or bruising may occur on the tender skin of a child as a result." Finney says that the purpose of the bill is to " (i) provide guidance to state officials in the administrative and judicial branches; (ii) serve as a guideline to parents; and (iii) protect Kansas children from abuse." There are multiple people in Kansas opposing this bill though. A pediatric nurse at Children's Mercy hospital stated that spanking is not as effective as timeout and only usually leads to aggressive behaviors within the child.
How does this relate to APGOPO
In AP Government we are learning about the constitution by doing worksheets and playing a competitive constitutional game. This is an example of states being able to make laws which is stated in the constitution. It also talks about legislation and we know what is required to get a bill passed and we can infer as to whether or not this bill will be passed. It also gives us an example of how the government leaves controversial issues to the states; such as spanking.
My Opinion
I feel as if this bill should not and will not be passed. It is not a teachers responsibility to spank children's but the parents. I also do not agree with Finney's statement on how this is not intended child abuse. Spanking a kid hard enough to leave a bruise or mark is child abuse. Like the nurse at Children's Mercy hospital stated, spanking does lead to future aggression in children, read http://www.parenting.com/blogs/show-and-tell/elina-parenting/study-spanking-can-lead-aggressive-behavior-children for more info on how it can lead to future aggression.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/19/spanking-bill-in-kansas-sparks-controversy/
About the Article
This article is about a Kansas lawmaker, Gail Finney, who introduced a bill that would expand on the right that allows teachers to spank children in class. She claims that the introduction of this bill is not to legalize child abuse but to allow teachers to maintain authority over the misbehaving student. In her statement she states that the legislation would allow "up to ten forceful applications in succession of a bare, open-hand palm against the clothed buttocks of a child and any such reasonable physical force on the child as may be necessary to hold, restrain or control the child in the course of maintaining authority over the child, acknowledging that redness or bruising may occur on the tender skin of a child as a result." Finney says that the purpose of the bill is to " (i) provide guidance to state officials in the administrative and judicial branches; (ii) serve as a guideline to parents; and (iii) protect Kansas children from abuse." There are multiple people in Kansas opposing this bill though. A pediatric nurse at Children's Mercy hospital stated that spanking is not as effective as timeout and only usually leads to aggressive behaviors within the child.
How does this relate to APGOPO
In AP Government we are learning about the constitution by doing worksheets and playing a competitive constitutional game. This is an example of states being able to make laws which is stated in the constitution. It also talks about legislation and we know what is required to get a bill passed and we can infer as to whether or not this bill will be passed. It also gives us an example of how the government leaves controversial issues to the states; such as spanking.
My Opinion
I feel as if this bill should not and will not be passed. It is not a teachers responsibility to spank children's but the parents. I also do not agree with Finney's statement on how this is not intended child abuse. Spanking a kid hard enough to leave a bruise or mark is child abuse. Like the nurse at Children's Mercy hospital stated, spanking does lead to future aggression in children, read http://www.parenting.com/blogs/show-and-tell/elina-parenting/study-spanking-can-lead-aggressive-behavior-children for more info on how it can lead to future aggression.
Woman Kills Best Frined
"Woman sentenced to life for killing friend, cutting baby from womb:"
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/18/justice/massachusetts-sentence/index.html?hpt=ju_c2
Summary
This article discusses how a women from Massachusetts killed her pregnant best friend by strangling her and then proceeded to cut the baby out of her womb. Julie Corey was convicted for this crime back in 2009. Her murdered friend- Daniel Haynes-was found in her apartment on July 27, 2009. She was 8 months pregnant at the time of the murder and Julie Corey was found in Hampshire with Haynes' baby. DNA testing was done on a bottle at the scene of the crime that linked Julie Corey to the murder. The woman was found guilty in Worcester Superior Court and was sentenced tom life. "The life sentence was mandatory under Massachusetts statutory law" but Julie Corey has decided to appeal.
How this article applies to APGOPO
This article applies to Article 3 of the Constitution which we are reviewing in class by doing worksheets and playing a competitive constitutional game. Article 3 talks about the different levels of court, she was tried and sentenced in a trials court with original jurisdiction and is appealing to a higher court. It also talks about statutory law. And even though it is not directly talked about in the article is also shows how cruel and unusual punishment is unconstitutional, even though the crime she committed was cruel and unusual she is not receiving the same type of treatment.
My Opinion
My opinion is that the crime she committed was very cruel and gruesome and that she does deserve to be put away for life in a maximum security prison. I also believe that she can appeal hundreds of times and still be found guilty; after all she was found with the baby of Haynes and DNA evidenced linked her the scene of the crime.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/18/justice/massachusetts-sentence/index.html?hpt=ju_c2
Summary
This article discusses how a women from Massachusetts killed her pregnant best friend by strangling her and then proceeded to cut the baby out of her womb. Julie Corey was convicted for this crime back in 2009. Her murdered friend- Daniel Haynes-was found in her apartment on July 27, 2009. She was 8 months pregnant at the time of the murder and Julie Corey was found in Hampshire with Haynes' baby. DNA testing was done on a bottle at the scene of the crime that linked Julie Corey to the murder. The woman was found guilty in Worcester Superior Court and was sentenced tom life. "The life sentence was mandatory under Massachusetts statutory law" but Julie Corey has decided to appeal.
How this article applies to APGOPO
This article applies to Article 3 of the Constitution which we are reviewing in class by doing worksheets and playing a competitive constitutional game. Article 3 talks about the different levels of court, she was tried and sentenced in a trials court with original jurisdiction and is appealing to a higher court. It also talks about statutory law. And even though it is not directly talked about in the article is also shows how cruel and unusual punishment is unconstitutional, even though the crime she committed was cruel and unusual she is not receiving the same type of treatment.
My Opinion
My opinion is that the crime she committed was very cruel and gruesome and that she does deserve to be put away for life in a maximum security prison. I also believe that she can appeal hundreds of times and still be found guilty; after all she was found with the baby of Haynes and DNA evidenced linked her the scene of the crime.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
The Year Of Change
There is a huge gap today between the rich and the poor, and in Obama's State of the Union Speech he announced that this year would be "the year of change" and discussed attempting to reduce the income gap which many Americans (mostly Democrats) agreed with.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/05/poll-majority-of-americans-want-government-to-reduce-income-gap/
Overview of Article
This article discusses how about 6 out of 10 Americans, according to a national poll, believe that the government should try to reduce the income gap between the rich and the poor. During Obama's State of the Union speech, he announced that he would try to reduce this gap, after all it is "the year of change." This sounds like a great thing right? And it is, to Democrats, nine out of ten Democrats favored the change as well as two-thirds of independents but majority of Republicans disagreed.
The opinion's on the income gap have not changed much over time; during Reagan's presidency, 68 percent of Americans favored the change, while today 66 percent still agree that reducing the income gap is necessary. Even people who earn higher incomes believe that the gap should be reduced. Surprisingly more women favor the issue as opposed to men; 70 percent of women are more likely to favor the change while on 62 percent of men are likely favor the change.
"The CNN survey was conducted by ORC International from January 31 to February 2, with 1,010 adults nationwide questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points" (CNN)
How I Feel
I have mixed feelings about the change of the income gap, while it may help the economy to reduce the gap, the people who do earn high incomes worked hard for that and to decrease the gap may make them feel as if they are at a disadvantage
How is this relevant to Mrs. Ashley's Class?
During Mrs. Ashley's class we listened and discussed Obama's State of the Union Address which is discussed in the article. Also in chapter 1 of our text book it discussed how some people believe that social classes govern our country which is referred to in this article.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/05/poll-majority-of-americans-want-government-to-reduce-income-gap/
Overview of Article
This article discusses how about 6 out of 10 Americans, according to a national poll, believe that the government should try to reduce the income gap between the rich and the poor. During Obama's State of the Union speech, he announced that he would try to reduce this gap, after all it is "the year of change." This sounds like a great thing right? And it is, to Democrats, nine out of ten Democrats favored the change as well as two-thirds of independents but majority of Republicans disagreed.
The opinion's on the income gap have not changed much over time; during Reagan's presidency, 68 percent of Americans favored the change, while today 66 percent still agree that reducing the income gap is necessary. Even people who earn higher incomes believe that the gap should be reduced. Surprisingly more women favor the issue as opposed to men; 70 percent of women are more likely to favor the change while on 62 percent of men are likely favor the change.
"The CNN survey was conducted by ORC International from January 31 to February 2, with 1,010 adults nationwide questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points" (CNN)
How I Feel
I have mixed feelings about the change of the income gap, while it may help the economy to reduce the gap, the people who do earn high incomes worked hard for that and to decrease the gap may make them feel as if they are at a disadvantage
How is this relevant to Mrs. Ashley's Class?
During Mrs. Ashley's class we listened and discussed Obama's State of the Union Address which is discussed in the article. Also in chapter 1 of our text book it discussed how some people believe that social classes govern our country which is referred to in this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)