Final Exam #2

             My original definition of a well informed 21st century citizen was "A well informed 21st century citizen is not just someone who is technologically advanced but also well informed politically and understands how society is changing rapidly and can adapt to the changes." I still mostly agree with this statement very strongly. A well informed 21st century citizen has their own political opinions based off true facts and not whether they received a free "I Stand With Walker" t-shirt. They are also very adapting to all of the changes that happen, whether it be technology or laws. That is where I do not believe that my last definition went far enough, was with the laws. Knowing laws, your rights, and how your government works is such a huge part in the life that we live. Without knowing these you may accidentally self incriminate themselves, or allow an unjust search of their person or home. Even if they are not hiding anything or doing anything illegal, it is just the principal of the matter.
           In short, a well informed 21st century citizen is not just someone who is technologically advanced, but also well informed politically, about our government, and has a strong understanding of how society changes rapidly and is able to adapt quickly and my views on this basically stayed the same but, I had to add one key principal.

Exam Question

Is there a need for an Education reform in America?

From my experiences, and experiences at other schools that I have hear about, I have come to a conclusion that we need to improve public education. This includes increasing the quality of teachers, increasing the quality of schools, and create parent motivation.

Quality of teachers is one of the most key ways to increase productivity and learning in the classroom. With a better teacher, kids should learn more and become smarter. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, only 29% of students were at or above the Proficient level in grades 4 and 8 while the percentage was only 21% for grade 12. These numbers are astonishing but what is even more astonishing is the percentage of those who were below the Basic level. 30% of 4th graders failed to reach the basic level, and it jumps to 40% for 8th and 12th grade. This means that 40% of those who are in their final year of public school are not at the basic level and are most likely entering the working world with very little education. Increasing the quality of teachers should improve these percentages and help improve the quality of students and give those students potential for a better quality life.

Who would want to learn in an old, beat up school that has outdated equipment? Keeping a school updated on technology and making it look nice would easily improve the students experience at the school. Also included in this, is smaller class sizes. These are very important for learning and has been proven time and time again. One of these examples was shown on ClassSizeMatters.org where class sizes were reduced in a New Jersey middle school and the failure rate dropped from 3-6% to only 1% and 80% of students had higher test scores. This is just one of the many cases that show similar statistics. With smaller class sizes, teachers are able to connect to the students better along with being able to spend more 1 on 1 time with the students if they need the help. By keeping the school up to date and looking good they can increase a students want to learn and make it as best as possible with smaller class sizes.

Parent motivation is important with anything kids want to do in life. Whether it is school, athletics, a career choice, or anything else in life, it is important to know someone is pushing you to be the best student or person you can be. A little motivation can go a long way. By giving kids goals for their grades, you can practically bribe them to do better. Rick Ackerly, a nationally recognized educator and speaker, strongly believes that giving the child a sense of entitlement and accomplishment is very important. He believes that combining fun with things that can actively stimulate the brain are some of the best things for them as well. Most important of all of his ideas, All challenges are gifts. Overcoming challenges is one of life's most important skills and learning that early will help with everything in life. Hara and Burke did an experiment in an inner city. In a short time, with parent involvement, they were able to increasing the third graders reading level by 4 months and increase the vocabulary and reading levels of all students. One specific reading test showed an 85% improvement for the students whose parents took part in this program. Parent involvement is incredibly important to everyone, especially young kids and it should be used to increase the school experience and help them learn better.

An education reform is exactly what this nation needs to improve the quality of students that we produce. This would therefore improve the quality of applicants for jobs and make people more efficient at their jobs and becoming more useful in society and able to live with a higher quality of life and have the opportunity for the American Dream. With an education reform, the United States, can truly become the country that it should and improve to its full potential.

http://nces.ed.gov/pressrelease/reform/
http://www.classsizematters.org/research-and-links-2/
http://www.parentinvolvementmatters.org/articles/the-right-to-happiness-the-root-cause-of-entitlement-116.html
http://www.adi.org/journal/ss01/chapters/Chapter16-Hara&Burke.pdf

Super PAC's political cartoon

The political cartoon accurately describes how politics are affected by 527's, lobbyists, and bailouts.

It correctly lists the 527's (Super PACs) under the money aisle. Super PACs are that are huge suppliers of money even though it is strictly indirect. Super PACs cannot directly support a candidate but often will run a slander ad towards a rival candidate to make that specific candidate lose votes. 527's are unnecessary for elections and instead those groups should be aloud just to directly support a candidate with however much money they want. There is only so much that they can say positive about one candidate and negative about the other so that the large sums of money would become greatly inefficient later on.


Lobbyists have become a huge part in politics and the political cartoon shows the PA system alerting them about a banking committee senators. Lobbyists are groups of people (interest groups) or just one person known to put ideas in people ears and convince politics one way or the other. These are prevalent in politics but there is no real way to eliminate them. They are wrong but will always be there one way or the other and if there was a way to prevent or eliminate them, I would not mind but that seems to be impossible


Only right that the bailout sign is right above the treasury. The treasury is of course in control of the money system and the bailout has become a huge topic in the political race for president between Obama and Romney. The Stimulus package from Obama was necessary due to the debt caused by the treasury for not tightening restrictions to get loans like they normally do. This made the Stimulus Plan needed even though many people don't believe so.

The Perfect Running mate for Mitt Romney would either be a Hispanic or a woman. These are demographics that are untapped by Obama's Administration. Also, the running mate would have to have plenty of political experience and be from a vital state. Plenty of experience shows that they know what they are doing and if the state they are from has a good amount of electoral votes, it is even better. With Romney being a "moderate conservative" you really have to keep the interest of the "extreme conservatives" which is the Tea Party. These are important votes that normally always vote Republican, that cannot be lost.

Who is the perfect candidate for Romney to run with that matches all of these categories?
Marco Rubio. A man with Latino roots and someone who would actually be able to give their acceptance speech in Spanish, would give great interest for Latinos and could very well win them some important votes. Currently he is the Speaker (and member) of the Florida House of Representatives. This is good experience for later on. His good ties with the Tea Party just practically guarantees votes that might not have been won since he is seen as a "conservative" Republican. These are a lot of positives that would go in favor of Romney by choosing Marco Rubio.

Marco Rubio

The worst choice for Romney to run with would have to be John Thune.
Thune is a 50+ year old white male, which demographic majorly votes Republican as it is. Romney also fits into that same category which would seem redundant to have Thune as his running mate. He is considered "safe," he doesn't anger anyone really but does not really get anyone excited either which would hurt the Romney campaign. This seems like a useless choice to me and there are a lot better of choices that could be made to help the Romney Campaign.

John Thune

Electoral College

With a new system the Electoral College could cut out the "faulty" wins, allow for a more exciting campaign race, and allow for a smaller party to greater effect on the election.

The current system of the Electoral College is effective but not to the highest level of effectiveness that is possible. The system could be changed so that Elector votes would be proportional to the public votes. With this system the Electoral College could cut out "faulty" wins, allows for a more exciting and fair campaign race, and allow for smaller parties to make more of a dent.

 As an example, Wisconsin has 10 votes, say 70% of Wisconsin voters vote for Obama. With this, Wisconsin electors would vote 7 for Obama and 3 for Romney (If it was not even then the winning party rounds up). This would make it more accurate and cut out the chances of having Presidents who win the Electoral votes but not the popular votes. This has happened 3 times in the past and most recently in the 2000 election where Bush beat Gore not in popular vote but just Electoral College. This system would allow for a more fair way and not allow for these "faulty" wins.

There are states that always vote Republican or Democratic. Texas is nearly always Republican, so democrats know they will not win Texas and do not really fight for it. But, what if they could gain up to a third of Texas' votes and gain an extra 10 votes that they would not normally get. This would allow for a more exciting campaign race and allow for some states to get attention from the candidates that they normally never see. This would create a more exciting race from a political stand point and a public stand point and would in general get more people interested in the election.

Small parties make little to no difference in most recent elections. If the system was changed, it could promote these parties and potentially put one of these candidates into office. With Ralph Nader, the Green Party noise every single year and got some of their policies put into the Democratic or Republican plan, but since he is gone there has been nothing about the Green Party in any election news that I have seen. With the proportional system, they could turn out to be huge factors because they would certainly win some votes that they wouldn't have been won prior. A party as small as the Green Party is not likely to win the majority of the votes in a state but they can just make dents into the Republican or Democrat votes by winning a few votes in each state.

Improvements to the Presidential Election

The presidential election is currently in a good state. There are some areas that could use some improvements. One improvement that I would suggest is to have the process to get on the ballots be more similar or even be one nation-wide ballot that all 50 states would use instead of having to invest so much time and money into each and every state. This would make it easier, and cheaper, for all and could encourage more people to run for president. Secondly, I would hope for some improvements by adding a third party. This would create more options for the citizens to vote for. This would create more competition between the three parties and more competition normally creates better quality. This would then create better candidates for presidents and then help the United States even more. Finally, I would like to see a mandatory exit poll in place. This would allow for the candidates to see who favors them and who they need to attract the attention of. With this they could either change their policies to slightly attract the groups that they need to attract in order to get more views. This would also go along the lines of creating more competition and then still create better candidates. It would also be more interesting, from my point of view, to watch candidates sort of "duke it out" for certain demographics. With these changes, the presidential election would improve by the means of entertainment value, allowing more people to run, and creating better candidates.

Romney's Political Advisor

     As Romney's political advisor i would focus heavily on the 30-44 age range, and suburban living citizens. These are two categories that are always divided and could be huge categories to win for the Republicans. With those wins they could push themselves into the oval office. Focusing the majority of the campaign on these two groups would be wise. Offering events, such as parties or question and answer sessions, in order to persuade these voters and get them to vote Republican
     They would only have to focus a small amount of the campaign on whites, religious people (besides the jewish community), and the 60+ age group because those groups normally always heavily vote Republican so they are practically shoe ins as long as they see some advertising. Driving people from nursing homes or churches to the polling areas could help greatly secure these groups.
     It would be smart to put a little bit of campaigning into heavily Democratic groups to hopefully sway part of those groups back towards evenly split or even to the Republican side. First-Time voters, 18-29 age groups because those are mainly Democratic groups that could easily be partly persuaded. Going to colleges and talking to college students would really effect the votes and potentially persuade them.

     Following these plans, the Republicans and Romney could gain crucial voters and find his way into the oval office. This is a very reasonable plan and could very easily be accomplished with the funding given to the party. These gestures are simple but would go a long way in helping swing the votes to the Republican side.

Political Parties Graphic Analysis

Similarities Between Libertarians and the 2 Parties

Democrats:
           - Both the Libertarian Party and the Democrats support the right of Pro-Choice and have the right to abortion. Government should not intervene with someones rights to abort.

           -Both the Libertarian Party and the Democrats support the freedom of sexual preference. They believe that it is a choice and that government should not be able to interfere or give certain rights to married people compared to same-sex couples.


Republican:
           - Both, the Libertarians and the Republicans, support less gun restrictions and the right to have a weapon in order to defend yourself. They state that millions of gun owners have never used their gun in a harmful way and that ending gun ownership will not actually end gun ownership.

           - Both, the Libertarians and the Republicans, support tax cuts. The Libertarians even want to go as far as to remove the income tax and then rid of the IRS.

Presidential Powers

The powers of the President have strayed very far from the original Constitution but I believe that they would still be comfortable with their current state of power.

With President Nixon and the Watergate Scandal, I believe that he did have to give up the tapes although everything said in the oval office is supposed to be secret because of the severity of the scenario. He told CREEP to break into the Democratic Headquarters and spy on them which is completely unethical and probably illegal. He did not have the right to do this or keep the tapes.

Another example is when Eisenhower brought the Military in to help the Little Rock Nine. This was a good example of the Executive Power because if Eisenhower did not use this power then schools might have never been desegregated. This was a key moment in American history and is shown by how many books and movies have been made on the subject and how much importance is put on it during history classes and the Founding Fathers would have been proud.

Lastly, George W Bush used the executive powers when it came to the war in Afghanistan. He used his executive power to kidnap people, use warrant-less wire taps, and use questionable interrogation tactics. He did all this to "Keep America safe." This seems like it has gone a little far from what the Founding Fathers would've wanted, but it was all important in keeping our country safe and therefore is normally helpful and successful.

In short, the Executive Power is exactly where it needs to be right now, there is no need for an increase or decrease in Executive Power and it has no strayed too far from the original content of the Constitution.

Congress and the Budget Proccess

After playing the simulation game I learned how hard it truly is to reach all of the goals of the union and lower the national debt. Every choice that progressed us as a nation just seemed to make the country more and more in debt. A congress member must truly think through every decision to make sure that it will not make the nation too far in debt and will help the nation in the long run enough so that the cost is worth the product.

One example is when I tried to make us self dependent on oil instead of relying on other countries to help us. This process cost us a fortune but in the long run I believed that it would help us as a nation and help our citizens and hopefully lower the gas prices for all.

In another example was when I tried to up the National Security. Everything I did seemed to have a negative effect tagged along with it which would cost America as a country a ton of money. If I wanted to seal up some of the borders, then we would not be able to import as much and then would not be able to export as much as well which would greatly hurt America which survives on.

In the final example, I tried to make America "Go Green." This was just an all around awful decision due to the fact that it just made someone angry no matter what the decision was but the decisions I did make seemed to cost about 1/4th the amount of the other decisions. When attempting to go green i wanted to increase funding for wildlife foundations which only costed $5 billion but that was less that we could use for  business and development.

In short, you can never truly win because it is completely impossible to make everybody happy at one time AND by lessening the national debt because decisions cost money and change costs money.

The Perfect Amount of Rights

As Americans, we are told that we have freedoms. These include the freedom of assembly, the freedom of press, and  privacy from unreasonable search and seizure. Many Americans claim that they do not have enough rights, while others claim the opposite, but there is no reason to complain when they truly have the correct amount of rights.

One example of this, is the right to the freedom of assembly. Groups of all kinds are able to assemble in public and hold meetings. These include the Westboro Baptist Church and the KKK, both which are widely disliked. The first amendment gives these groups along with the well liked groups and all in between. Some might ask why are the bad groups allowed to conjure together and meet in public? These groups are allowed to meet as long as they do not practice or directly discuss violence in public. Groups are allowed to meet but are not allowed to be violent which is the perfect equilibrium for groups every where.

Another example of the perfect amount of rights is also within the 1st amendment, the freedom of press. People have the freedom of speech but can exercise it in writing form. There are restrictions to this though, such as libel or slander. This is shown through the Supreme Court case Kuhlmeier vs Hazelwood where 2 articles written by students for a school newspaper were denied access into the paper because of their content. The articles were written about touchy subjects and the school did not want that publicity. They had the right to do this because it was an accredited class. This further pushes the argument that you do have freedom of the press but there is restrictions that can be taken when writing for certain things. This is the perfect amount of rights for this right and should not be changed.

Finally, Americans are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. But if there is reasonable suspicion then certain people, such as school officials can search a student when a police officer would need reasonable suspicion to be able to search that same student. If a school official was told that a student had something illegal then that student could be searched but a police officer could not search that student unless something is seen. This is shown in the case TLO vs New Jersey, where a 14 year old student was found smoking in the bathroom which created reasonable suspicion to search for cigarettes, when searching for cigarettes they found rolling papers, this created reasonable suspicion to search for marijuana. The student was found guilty correctly and the school demonstrated that people have their rights but only up to a certain point. Once you create reasonable suspicion you lose some rights which is completely reasonable and shows that Americans have the perfect amount of rights currently.

In short, Americans have the perfect amount of rights and most of the rights have been changed or justified so far as they see fit and so that America can be as good as possible

Most Important Principle of the Constitution

Checks and balances is the most important principle of the Constitution because it limits the powers of all three branches so that one branch can not become over powered. It is an important principle because it splits up the powers and makes sure that the branches keep each other in line.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

This shows that there are two houses inside of one branch which is sort of a checks and balances inside of its own branch. Then there is checks and balances with other branches as well. A double checks and balances makes sure that only the best laws will come out of this branch and will better the United States.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

In Article 1 Section 3 it combines the Executive and Legislative branches. The Vice President gets the final say of the Legislative if they cannot decide the tie in votes. This allows for the ruling to be more fair and is definitely an example of balancing the system

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

The mentioned section of the Constitution shows the greatest form of checks and balances. The Legislative creates bills and proposed laws and then send them to the Executive branch where the President checks the bills and proposed laws to see if they would work or not and then either veto or accept it. 


In short, checks and balances is the most important principle of the Constitution because it gives powers to all 3 branches and makes sure that one branch cannot take over the other branches and control the whole government.

Checks and Balances as seen in the United States government

Similarities and Differences Between the Constitution and Declaration

A huge similarity between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, is the fact that they were both written to create a fair and free government for the United States.

 In the Declaration it clearly states

 "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable-rights, that among these are life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

 This quote clearly shows how important that freedom and equality was to them. The colonists felt that human beings have certain rights that should not be taken away from them and they were willing to fight to protect these rights.


Later on in the Declaration there is quite a large section about how unfair and unjust the King of Great Britain was, it starts with

 "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world."

It was followed by a long list of all that "He", the King, had done wrong. Refusing to pass laws, quartering soldiers in American homes, protecting the British through mock trials are just some injustices from that long list. The colonists had enough of his tyranny and wanted to rid themselves of it.


In Article 3 section 2 of the constitution it focused on one of the freedoms of the citizens of the United States, being the freedom to a fair trial. It states, 

"The trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed"

This shows that citizens will not be unfairly tried and will be proven guilty only when they truly are with the use of a Jury. Using a jury allows for the most unbiased opinion possible and will allow for the best possible result of the trial. This is a great freedom at the time seeing as the trials in the past were unfair due to the trials being held in British courts and always leaning towards the British side.


The Declaration of Independence and Constitution worked greatly to create a fair and free government for the citizens of the United States, who were not used to a fair or free government at all from the British Empire in the past.

All About Me

My name is Jordan Nushart and I will be attending Western Kentucky University next year. I am going to study Accounting because I am good at math and may even go into the FBI with my accounting degree. I work at Westwood Health & Fitness through Co-op Program at school. I have played soccer my entire life and love sports in general. That is what I am all about

My Definition of a Well Informed 21st Century Citizen

A well informed 21st century citizen is not just someone who is technologically advanced but also well informed politically and understands how society is changing rapidly and can adapt to the changes.