Getting Elected in the United States

In today's society, I think that it is democratic but there are a lot of different things that influence people to vote one way or another- many of which are unfair to canidates with less money or political power. Money is a major influence in politics, because politicians are able to sway voters one way or another with ads and campaigns. All of the things that politicians do to promote themselves cost money and whether it is soft money, or hard money, it is still unfair. Because individuals cannot donate more than a certain amount to a specific canidate, they donate money to a support the programs or projects a canidate supports. This is called soft money, and it is less regulated than the hard money usually donated to a canidate. PAC's, or Political Action Committees, are what allows people to donate soft money to a canidate. Because these organizations do not support the specific canidate, but rather the beliefs he or she supports, they are allowed to donate as much money as they want to the canidate's cause. Oftentimes, the media influences voters to vote one way or another because they are biased. Whether the reporter means to or not, they sometimes allow their personal opinions to affect the story. As we saw in the video in class, reporters are not always allowed to be there when the news is happening, so they rely on other reporters to tell them what happened. This sometimes causes news to get twisted, as facts often do when they are transferred through various people. Another reason that voting today may be less democratic is low voter turnout. I think that everyone should come out to vote, because it is their right as an American and they should be proud of it. However, the government cannot force people to vote, because this would lead to people voting just for the sake of voting. If too many people vote randomly because they are not educated on the canidates, the people who actually have strong opinions will not be heard.
The two political parties, republicans and democrates, both have very different opinions. Republicans generally want the government to be less involved in people's lives, and the democrates tend to believe that the government should help people who need it. To me, democrates lean toward the socialist side of things, because they think that the government should be allowed to use money to help those who are not as well off. Although these parties have very different beliefs, they both use the same techniques to get elected. Hopefully, money does not influence voters to the point where they vote for the candidate based on what they see on tv- although I am sure this happens. I think that in order to have a truely fair election, people must be educated on the candidates and think for themselves rather than listen to what others say. However, this would be almost impossible because money is always an influence and the campaign would be impossible without it.

Civil Liberties Test

In schools, freedoms and protections often collide because students are considered to be under the schools control while they are there. The way things are handled within a school is different from outside of a school because schools deal with minors who are under their protection. However in and out of school, people must sometimes give up their freedoms for the protection of others. Sometimes, the government must do things to protect the rights of the citizens, and sometimes citizens have to give up their rights in order to protect the rights of those around them.

There is a law called in loco parentis that states that the school can act as the students’ parents. In Hazelwood v. Kohlmeir, students argued that they had freedom of the press and could write about anything that they wanted. However, because the paper was being published in a school and the school needed to be able to protect the students, they won and the students were not able to publish the article about teen pregnancy and divorce. However the same rules do not apply to newspapers outside of a school. In the case Near v. Minnesota, the state shut down a newspaper that was about to publish an embarrassing story. The court ruled that the paper could not be shut down because of the first amendment and that the Minnesota law (that a paper could not publish malicious content) violated this amendment. The Government cannot stop you from publishing if what you are writing does not pose clear and present danger to the country or citizens. The case of Engel v. Vitale dealt with the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and also the establishment clause. The establishment clause said that the government cannot support or endorse a national religion. The free exercise clause also says that the government cannot stop you from practicing your religion. In this case, there was a mandated school prayer issued by New York. The Supreme Court agreed that because it was a public school in which students did not have a choice whether or not they went there, they could not force them to say a prayer because it was supporting a religion. In New Jersey v. TLO, a girl was accused of smoking in a school bathroom and her purse was searched. The issue was whether or not this violated the 4th amendment which discussed reasonable searches/ seizures. The court concluded that if there was probable cause, the school could search her purse. Furthermore, because she was in the school, all belongings were subject to search because the school was responsible for her. The case of Gideon v. Wainright, the suspects were charged with breaking and entering and were unable to afford a lawyer. Because the judge said that it was a minor offense, no lawyer was appointed and the suspect was found guilty. This violated the 6th amendment because it was not a fair trial. Also in Miranda v. Arizona suspects were questioned without warnings of their right to remain silent, exc. This violated the 5th amendment because you must give warning of rights so that the suspect is aware that anything they say will be used against them in the court of law.

There are many laws that limit what we can and cannot do or say. However, these laws are put into place in order to protect the freedoms of other people. If there were no laws restricting people's freedoms, we would live in a society where no one had any freedoms at all because there would be no rules as to what you can and cannot do. Because I do not want someone else to do something that would interefere with my freedoms, I am willing to give up some things in order to be protected by my government.

Test Post

This is my test post