The Supreme Court case New Jersey v. Delaware was recently decided by the Justices, who ruled in favor of Delaware in a 6-2 vote. The case was over the control of the riverbed that extends to the low-water mark on the New Jersey side (which is controlled by Delaware). A shoreline company in New Jersey wanted to build a 2,000 foot pier “that the plant would require in order for supertankers to unload their cargo of liquefied gas.” Delaware argued that such a plant would intrude 1,455 feet into Delaware’s territory.
Because this case was a dispute between two states, it went directly to the Supreme Court because of article III of the Constitution, and the Supreme Court also had original jurisdiction in this case. The two justices that voted in favor of New Jersey were, in fact, the two justices originally from New Jersey, Justice Scalia and Justice Alito. Justices Ginsburg, Roberts, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Stevens voted in favor of Delaware. Justice Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion, Justice Scalia wrote a dissenting opinion which Justice Alito signed, and Justice Stevens wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer did not participate in this case because he owns BP stock, which was the company that wanted to build the plant. Because of his absence, many people thought that there would be a 4-4 tie, and since the Supreme Court had original jurisdiction in this case, they could not go back and look at what other courts would have said about this case.
Work Cited
Greenhouse, Linda. “Supreme Court Rules for Delaware in River Dispute.” The New York Times. 1 Apr. 2008. 7 Apr. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/washington/01delaware.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>.
Posted in Connections Assignments April 7, 2008
Senator John McCain arrived in Iraq on Sunday morning for a trip that he said was not part of his campaign, but rather because he is part of the Armed Services Committee. He was accompanied by two of his closest political allies, Senator Joseph L. Lieberman, and Senator Lindsey Graham. None of his campaign advisers were with him on this trip.
Although he has claimed that this trip is not for his presidential campaign, some of the Iraqi people were very happy about his visit. Abdul Latif, an independent Shiite member of the Iraqi Parliament said that “This visit confirms that the Republicans believe that the Iraqi war is very important in the fight against terrorism in the Middle East. It’s a message to Iran that the United States will never leave, even after Bush is gone.”
Even though McCain says that this is not part of his plan to show his foreign policy as he campaigns for the White House, it still shows that he is aware of what is going on and that the military and this war means a lot to him. This also relates back to Barber’s Presidential Character because McCain grew up with the military, and having served in the armed forces during Vietnam, this really hits close to home for him. This shows that he will be an active Commander in Chief because the military is one of his strongest assets. This trip does in fact help his campaign indirectly because the American people see that he is going over there to help even when it is not demanded of him, which also shows that he will be an active-positive president.
Although some people criticize him by saying that his recent experience as a POW does not qualify him for the white house, in a way, it actually does because it shows that he is not only willing to go through torture for his country, but it also shows a lot of patriotism. John McCain is really playing this trip well because even though he is not meant to be an asset to his campaign, it looks like it is turning out to be just that.
Luo, Michael, and Richard A. Oppel. “Iraqis See a Candidate’S Agenda in McCain’S Visit.”
New York Times. 17 Mar. 2008. 17 Mar. 2008
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/17/world/middleeast/17mccain.html?_r=1&ref=politi
cs&oref=slogin>.
Posted in Connections Assignments March 17, 2008
One of the most remarkable things we did while on our trip to DC was to actually go in and see the different parts of the government in action. Although in order to see the Supreme Court in action, it required being frozen for 4 hours, it was all worth it in the end. Some people try to argue that our government is not very open, when as a matter of fact you can actually go in and see the different branches debating and such. This aspect of our government is huge; it makes the people feel as though they have more power to change things and that the government is open to their suggestions.
Watching the Senate taking a vote was a very astonishing experience. In a text book, you come to think that this process is very formal and all of the senators come in at once and take a seat then vote. However, it was quite bizarre seeing them all come and go and just wave their hand to acknowledge how they were going to vote on the bill. It was also very interesting to watch the floor debate, since the person debating was basically arguing to an empty room.
The Supreme Court was another favorite part of mine, partially because it was very interesting to see the 9 justices in action, which is something a lot of people can’t say they have seen. Although it is more difficult to see this branch of government in action, I thought that it was more extraordinary then seeing the senate take a vote. Also, although it is more difficult and takes more action on your part to see them, it also makes watching it more interesting because you know you had to put out an effort to see it.
All in all, I learned a lot more about the government by witnessing it first hand then reading about it in a text book. It makes you feel as though it is something more real when you actually see these senators pass you in the hallway. Being in Capital Hill and seeing the branches of government really made our government easier to understand and more realistic, and the fact that I can go back at any time and see it again is a great feeling of reassurance.
Posted in Connections Assignments March 3, 2008
On Wednesday, President Bush signed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. This “booster shot” for the American economy is going to be given to more than 130 million Americans in hopes of helping the faltering American economy. This act gives out more than $152 billion dollars (1% of the GDP) in rebates to many Americans. This bipartisan bill passed through the House and the Senate in a very short amount of time; less than 4 weeks to be exact. Although the author of this article is worried that this act will not help the American economy because he believes that most of this rebate money will be spent on products outside of the United States, I have to disagree. I feel like the people that are eligible for this rebate will spend it on reasonable things within the American economy because they don’t have the money to spend it on outside products. I think that the majority of these people will use it to pay off previous debts, which will in fact help the American economy. Part of the beauty of our economic system is that we can go into recessions but then we can still come out of them, for example, the Great Depression of 1929. President Bush explained this idea in his speech by saying, “In the past seven years, the system has absorbed shocks: recession, corporate scandals, terror attacks, global war; yet the genius of our system is that it can absorb such shocks and emerge even stronger. In a dynamic market economy, our economy will prosper and it will continue to be the marvel of the world.”
Levine, Adam. “Bush Signs Stimulus Bill; Rebate Checks Expected in May.” CNN. 13
Feb. 2008. 17 Feb. 2008
<http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/13/bush.stimulus/index.html>.
Posted in Connections Assignments February 17, 2008
Romney announced his exit from the presidential race at a convention on February 7, and although there were many unhappy conservatives, Romney said that he wanted to unite the party. He said that the war in Iraq and the terrorist threat were huge issues that required the party to unite. He said that staying in the race “would make it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win.” Although Romney did not officially endorse McCain, he did, however, say that he agrees with McCain on certain issues. At the convention, Romney said, “Now, I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues as you know, but I agree with him on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq.”
Although Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee are still in the race, they do not pose a real threat to the main Republican front runner, McCain. Personally, I think that it was a very bold move on Romney’s part to drop out of the race and make way for one strong candidate to unite the party. The only problem with McCain being the front runner is the fact that there are a lot of Republicans that do not like him, and have made groups such as “Republicans Against McCain”. This makes me wonder, if so many republicans are against McCain, and he is most likely going to be the Republican delegate, what is going to happen next? Will a lot of republicans not vote? Or will they vote for McCain anyway?
It seems that the democrats are now facing the same troubles that the republicans have just erased: Clinton and Obama are still splitting the votes. Although it is very unlikely that one of these candidates will drop out to help the other, something must be done. It is definitely obvious that for the months to come, the democratic race will become more brutal as Clinton and Obama battle it out for who will be the democratic delegate, while the republicans are most likely already through with that process.
Bumiller, Elisabeth, and David D. Kirkpatrick. “As Romney Exits, McCain Seeks Unity.” New
York Times. 8 Feb. 2008. 9 Feb. 2008
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/us/politics/08campaign.html?_r=1&ref=politics&o
ref=slogin>.
Posted in Connections Assignments February 11, 2008
There has been recent turmoil in Washington over the constitutionality of the new Voter ID Laws that have been enforced in 24 states, but have been even stricter in Indiana. The Republican Party brought the issue to the Supreme Court, arguing that there have been many frauds in the voting process. The Democratic Party said that this issue is reducing the turnout of the polls. Since a majority of the people that tend to vote Democratic are the poor, minorities, and elderly, the Democratic Party said that this issue is directly affecting them rather then the Republicans.
One of the major issues that has come out of this case is the Voter ID requirements in Indiana. These new rules have made other organizations, such as The League of Women Voters, become involved because they are arguing that in order for one woman, Kim Tillman, to get a new ID card, she would have to get her birth certificate from the state which requires her to pay $50. She is arguing that she is on a strict budget and has to send her kids to school, so this $50 is something that she cannot supply; this is why she is arguing that this new law is directly affecting people such as herself.
In class, we have been talking about the constitution, and how it created the three branches of government: judicial, executive, and legislative. This case, since it is going through the Supreme Court, is dealt with by the judicial branch. Also, the Supreme Court deals with cases dealing with the constitution, such as this case. The constitution has grown to become the bible of American government. Cases such as these are arguing against that idea, and although they are not saying that you should change the whole constitution, they are insisting that you add or revise one part of it. When the constitution was created, the country was dealing with different issues then it is today, so in order for the constitution to continue to be a sort of bible to the government, it too has to keep changing.
Totenberg, Nina. “Supreme Court Hears Indiana Voter ID Case.” NPR. 9 January 2008. NPR. 13 January 2008. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17970225>.
Posted in Connections Assignments January 23, 2008
City Parents Boycotting Added Tests at 2 Schools
Recently in New York City, there have been many parents that have been taking various pathways of action in order to show their beliefs. The issue they disagree with is the fact that certain children in grades 3-8 are chosen to take extra standardized tests in order for the testing company to make sure that their questions are still accurate and up-to-date. Many parents have decided that this is unacceptable and that the testing company should find another way to do this research that isn’t taking away from their children’s school time. The parents are not arguing against the tests, but rather that the kids already have to take so many standardized tests for the state, so why should they have to take extra tests for research?
Chapter one of Living Democracy talks about the various pathways of action, and this article deals with one form of these pathways: Grassroots Mobilization. The way these parents have shown this pathway is by having petitions and making their voices heard, non-violently. They have sent many letters to the schools principals and signed petitions, as well as planning boycotts for the extra tests.
The leaders of the testing company, Time Out from Testing, as well as the State Education Department are not complying with the wishes of these parents, and arguing that these tests have been administered since 2000 without any problems. Also, they are arguing that the No Child Left Behind Act has raised the number of standardized tests students have to take, so New York City children are taking more standardized tests then ever before. Although the outcome has not been decided for this issue, there is one thing that is certain: these parents have finally stood up for what they believe in, and they are not willing to give up now.
Gootman, Elissa. “City Parents Boycotting Added Tests At 2 Schools.” New York Times. 23
Jan. 2008. 23 Jan. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/nyregion/23boycott.html?scp=1&sq=City+Parents+Boycotting+Added+Tests+at+2+Schools&st=nyt>.
Posted in Connections Assignments January 23, 2008
Welcome to Edublogs.org. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!
Posted in Uncategorized January 6, 2008
