What is the future of democracy? Is it a realistic option?

What is the future of democracy? Is it a realistic option?

What is the future of democracy? Is it a realistic option?

What a loaded question. I think that to begin digging, we need to look at whether or not we are even functioning in a democracy right now. Is it we the people, or we the corporation?


I can feel comfortable in saying that they way democracy has historically been, that that "pure form" of democracy, we will never see again.

I think the belief behind democracy is a realistic option. But as with everything else in our world, it's changing. People are no longer the only "things" that matter, the role of corporations has really affected the political system. Democracy will need to be re-defined. But I feel strongly in saying that the purpose behind democracy, the thought of people have an opinion in the government will continue to be an American value. I think that us as Americans, that we are too strong to watch the future of democracy to become totally deteriorate, or have we already passed that point?

What is the process to develop an economic policy that provides services and sustainability?

Week Thirteen - What is the process to develop an economic policy that provides services and sustainability?

There needs to be compromise involved in any process that develops an economic policy that provides service and sustainability. Everyone needs to give a little bit.  As with any successful relationship, there is a give-take compromise. Both sides need to make things want to work out. The people giving the services and the people receiving the services need to make agreements. In my opinion, for something to be sustainable, you have to give a little bit up; you have to apply to delayed gratification.





I think that there also needs to be an understanding that you cannot get something for nothing. If people are expecting services and sustainability from the government, then they need to provide funds to the government that allows the to have a decent budget. It's a balance!


I have recently been working with a charity called Lift Up America. I was invited to speak at their most recent event in Phoenix earlier this month. It was such an incredible experience. Though Lift Up America doesn't directly receive funds from the government, they work directly with organizations that do. In my opinion, the cool thing about LUA is that they go to different cities and work with the pre-existing non-profit organizations in the city. They work with empowerment programs for under-privileged youth.  But they empower these children by, among other things and taskts, asking them to go out into their community and to make it better. The first hand out they get is an expecation to give someone else a hand up. To make someone else's world better. And it was amazing to witness the change in the children when they are given the power and the control to make a positive change in their community. It was so re-assuring for me to see an organization like this that functions on the give-take relationship. That acknowledges that life is a compromise. (for more information and for a full picture of what LUA does, please! visit www.liftupamerica.com)

If I make a grocery list that has apples, bread, and milk on it. And if I know that the apples cost three dollars, the bread costs two and the milk five, that I need to go to the store with at least ten dollars or I won't be able to get what I need. It's unrealistic for me to go to the store with eight and expect to still get the same "services" from the store. People can't do that with the government.



There is a cost to living in America. There is a cost to drive on the highways, to have our food inspected, to have police officers. It's not free. People need to realize if they want to function as a member of society, that they need to pay into the pot before they can take out of it.

People need to sort out their priorities, what does the economic policy need to include? Then they need to bite the bullet and front the money to support the economic policy that used to be that of the American Dream.

How does a government facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity?

How does a government facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity?


I think that, to put it simply, a government should facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity by living the same way a family should. By living well within your means. The more money that you have, the more comprehensive care you are able to provide. When people pay more into the government through means like taxes, then the government is able to provide more.

In my opinion, comprehensive care is more than just medicare and medicaid, it includes emergency response vehicles, police officers, the FDA, Postal Service, anything like that to me, is comprehensive care. And if people don't pay into the pot, they shouldn't expect anything in return.

A government needs to be responsible in making sure that they are staying stable and strong for their people.

From my understanding of the question, I think that s a government should facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity by only handing out what is coming in. If people are paying into social security, only deliver it at the level that is coming in. The government can only give what they have. But at the same time, the government has some responsibility to give to it's people.

How should a nation-state develop its foreign policy in accordance to its values and in connection to the development of its domestic policy?

How should a nation-state develop its foreign policy in accordance to its values and in connection to the development of its domestic policy?

I have been very fortunate in my life that I've had great opportunity to travel. I've spent time in Europe, Canada, and Latin America mainly. But in addition to my international travel, I've had great opportunity to travel within our nation as well. I'm lucky to say that I've been in all but five US States (and don't worry...I will get to those!)

Through my traveling I've seen political interactions between countries and other countries, and even political correspondence between the states. I still struggle with articulating how I truly feel that domestic and foregin policy should be developed.

I think that, simply put,  a nation-state should develop it's foreign policy in correlation with the values and health of their domestic policy.

For example, if a country believes in helping their under-privileged and providing things like social security and medicare, than the country should be more willing to provide aid for other countries especially after natural disasters. Also, if a nation-state has a domestic policy of freedom of religion, freedom of speech then that nation should never impose their religion or political values on another nation.

But on the same hand, there should be a correlation between foreign and domestic policy. If the country is struggling with their domestic policy, then they should hold a more conservative foreign policy until the issues at home are resolved.

What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

The Judges I feel do a pretty good job balancing and supporting freedom in our country. I think the fact that we do not elect them officially, allows money and corruption to play different roles in there stance.

I think having the number of Judges that we have in the Supreme Court allow for good balance within our country. And the fact the presidents appoint thee judges, allow for the presidents to have a lasting legacy.

However, the legal system as a whole appears to be flawed. It doesn't support our freedom in some ways, because as with many of parts of the government, money plays a role. Though the money may not have as big of an impact directly on the judges, money affects the lawyers and lower level state courts.

Two years ago I flew out to the east coast to see who was, at the time, my boyfriend. He was excited I was in town, and while we were driving into New York City he was showing off a little bit in his car. He was speeding, down the center of the road, and when the cop turned around to arrest him, he ran from the cops. Aggressive Driving, In-ability to maintain lane, 20+ MPH over the limit, and running from the cops were on the list of charges.  Luckily for him though, his Daddy had a big wallet and by the end of the lawyer ordeal he got charged with running a stop sign. How is that supporting my freedom? When someone who obviously made the wrong choices, who probably has no right to be on the road. He bought himself a drivers license. I ask, how is that protecting and supporting my freedom.

As with most political systems, the judicial systems support and limit freedom in our country.

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

I think that many of the best arguments showcasing how the U.S. Congress both supports and limits authentic representation. Early into my high school career, I had the opportunity to sit down and speak with our district representatives who sat in the Colorado Congress. I really was able to feel like she took me seriously as a citizen and that my opinions had some impact on at least the conversations that were had in congress. I do, however, fear that the same opportunities do not stand for the U.S. Congress. What's the difference between the two?

I think that there is a need to think about the change that our society is facing. Is the current set up of congress still effective for the goals of our country? I am disturbed by the role that money has taken on in our government. The recent events in Wisconsin make me sick. How do the Koch brothers have so much influence over a government, and in turn; with their checkbook they are able to affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. There is still good in the government, but the good is getting harder to find.

I think that one of the most evident differences is the amount of money in the two. U.S. Congress' current structure is influenced quite a bit by the capitalistic structure of our society. As the regulations on funding of political campaigns have radically shifted, I feel that the structure of the U.S. Congress has as well.

There is definitely a representative bias currently in our congress, being that the diversity in Congress is not proportional to the vast diversity of our country. I have to wonder if there is a way that the power can be more equally distributed and in turn less corrupted in our government. How can we make it that that when a party gains a majority in congress that they don't gain a full, almost monopoly, over the government.

I feel that the U.S. Congress in it's current structure, often finds itself in almost a stalemate. They sit there in filibusters arguing. The senate with write and pass a bill that then the house will throw down. Then the house will pass a bill that the senate will throw down. It's sometimes a very viscous cycle that fails to accomplish things.

In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy?

The President. He's the leading man. The one that everyone in the country talks about. He's the one that has the biggest campaign, and he's the one with the most respect. Especially in these tough times, people find it easiest to blame the President. It is his fault that the employment rates are so high. It's his fault that I have to pay so much for gas. It's his fault that my aunt cannot afford medical insurance. It's his fault.

How much control does the president really have? In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy? What is the role of the President and how does it affect each of us on a daily basis?

I remember when I was first learning about government, I thought that the President was our government. I've obviously learned more about American Government since then, and I'm grateful the President isn't the only figure in our government.

The President does; however, serve a very important role in the formation of our government. He is able to support the formation of an ideal government, he is able to propose and support ideas and function. He is able to agree with congress, or disagree with their thoughts. The President is also able to limit the formation of a democracy. The president is just one figure in our multi-level government and he is able to use his power of veto, and his power of authority to influence the people over the work of the congress.

I guess now that my opinion has shifted to the thoughts that the congress has the most power in our government. It is that group of people that we can select and elect to make the majority of the choices and to hold the majority of the power.

I think more than anything in America, the president represents an ideal democracy. Now, don't get me wrong. I understand that the President has an immense amount of stress on him, but I think at times he serves almost as a figure head as well. He travels, speaks, and influences people all around the world. But at the end of the day, he is just that one figure in our multi-level government.

How do individuals and groups of people influence the political process?

People have the vote which I think is the most simple example of how people can influence the political process and work with their politicians.

Beyond the vote; ideally, politicians listen to the people about what they want from their government. Unfortunately, these days it seems that groups of individuals who have the most money seem to have the loudest voice in our government. I feel that many have found it quite possible to influence the political process by using their check books.

Aside from voting and spending, people also have the ability to protest and petition. These two resources I feel are very helpful in communication the message of large groups of people effectively. Though they may sometimes serve dually as disturbances as well, no matter what side they are on, they make a point.

I think that it is a very interesting time to be talking about all of this, especially with all of the political un-rest that is occurring all around us. From the troubles in Egypt to Libya, to even Wisconsin we need think about how individuals and groups of individuals influence the political process.

We can look at how much influence the people of Egypt had in their political process. Ultimately, the leader stepped down changing the future of the country forever. This group of individuals stood together to influence the political process, and to create the changes that they wanted to see in their government.


Looking at even a more local level, we can analyze the trouble in Wisconsin. Not only is the power of the individuals evident through the protests, the petitions, and the conversation that is occurring across the nation in response; but the power of the individual is also evident through the Koch family's involvement in this process. They were able to contribute enough money to the campaign to get Tea Party representative Scott Walker elected to office. They used their individual power to ultimately influence the way government operated in Wisconsin, starting with the freedom of the unions within the state. Individuals within the Wisconsin government planned a vote in the middle of the night, not even given most of the democrats an opportunity to vote. Talk about individuals influencing the political process!

The situation in Wisconsin is an excellent example of how individuals and groups of individuals have the power to influence our political process.

People's Opinions

People are always talking. There are always going to be people who get angry, upset, frustrated, and irritated with the leaders in the government. People have a tendency to think that they can do it better....yet a very small percentage of the people actual step up and run for public office. So where does that leave the rest of us? We who sit at home and blog about the things we see as the world turns. What role do us "whiners" have? In what ways does public opinion influence the formation of a democratic society?

I think that the people who live within a democratic society have immense power. Often times, they've more power than they realize and more power than they know how to handle responsibly. People are always talking. It's our human nature to communicate, to discuss, to thrive off of one another. You hear people discuss current events in grocery stores, at the gym, and through office buildings across America. Husbands and wives bicker about public policy while the youth struggles to grapple just what exactly government is and what it means for them.

In America, we are extremely lucky. I think that especially this past month, we all have become extremely aware of our luck. The world appears to be at a troubled point. There is immense up roar and protest occurring as I write this. I, like many others, can't help but question what the tipping point was for all of these events. What pushed the people to say "enough is enough".

But that's the thing, I get to question, I get to contemplate, and I get to freely discuss anything as I please. In the next election, for the first time in my life, I'll be able to cast a vote. I'll be able to stand up and proudly say, "this is who I am choosing to support." I can, at any time, volunteer my labor to a political campaign or a political movement. I can protest and boycott things that I am against or that I don't agree with. I can write about my feelings without fearing oppression. And I can, as I have before, sit down to breakfast with my state legislators and say "this is how I feel, what can you do to change it."

That is the power of my public opinion in our democratic society. That's what I can and that's what I choose to do. Some people may do more their power, and others may do less. But we have the power to shape our government. America prides itself on being a country that is "for the people, by the people". Theoretically, it is, or it should be, public opinion that shapes everything in our government.

The Relationship Between Government and Private Sector

Today, it seems that everyone has their own opinion about the relationship between private sector and the government. It has been in headlines recently because of the HealthCare reform. The conversations about what changes would be brought to the healthcare industry and it switched from private hands, to government control. It's not uncommon to hear people complaining about post office and department of motor vehicle services. Is it really true that the Private Sector can run more effective operations than the government?

In my opinion, the back-bone of the private sector is the element of competition. Competition is the driving force of so much. It's interesting to discuss situations where the private sector is influenced by government.

For example, the gas companies are all run individually, Shell, Conoco, BP, Sunoco, but the government relations has a large influence on the prices. I think that for a most part, people have turned against the gas companies. Let's face it, none of us are happy about the rising gas prices. But who is really to blame? The government.... or the Private sectors?

The government and the private intersect on many levels? But where should they intersect? Should it be allowed for the government to be able to have this much control...and how does it compare historically?

The Power of Power

This weekend my family had the opportunity to travel to New York City. It was interesting reading everyone's idea of power in a different setting. Being out of Colorado gave me the chance to look at things through a slightly different lens.

We were taking a city tour of New York City, and our tour guide Heather was explaining that though New York City is capital of nothing, that it still is the center of the world. New York is a perfect example of power. The people who live on Fifth Avenue facing Central Park...they have immense economic power. As we explored neighborhoods where Katherine Hepburn and Yoko Ono lived, I thought about the political power that Yoko and her husband, John Lennon, had. Where did the power that there people have come from? What granted them the right to influence the world as they did? Is it because something about them was special, or is it just that the rest of us choose not to take the opportunity.


Target stores could easily be described as one of my favorite places in this world. I'm notorious for spending hours is Target spending more money than I have to be spending. But in the last election when Target Corporation gave $150,000 to MN Forward, an organization in Minnesota that is notorious for their public view on anti-gay behavior. This generous donation was given shortly after the United States Supreme Court overturned an law that originally had prohibited actions like these for the last 63 years. As hard as it was for me, I quit shopping at Target for over six months. As a YouTube video protesting the super-chain explained that because Target isn't a person, so why should they have the power or ability to influence our democracy? Was it right for the United States Government to give the power of our government to such a larger corporation who's interests didn't reflect those of most of their shoppers.

Power is everywhere around us. People seek out power. This country, among others, thrives on power. When did power become about sides, about personal agendas. As I had mentioned in my weekly response post, Power is a selfish, egotistical thing. On occassion, power can be sought for the better of a whole nation. I think that great political thinkers like Aristotle sought power truly to benefit all who lived in his community.


Target Video on YouTube:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FhMMmqzbD8

Article on Target's Contributions:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/27/target-emmer-donate/

Opportunities and Challenges of Demoncracy

From the perspective of Generation Y, there are many challenges and opportunities that come with living in a democratic nation. As we were all growing up we were told, "You can be anything you want to be." How cool is that? We live in a nation where we truly can grow up and amount to be almost anything that we desire. I had a blast picking out my major because it was the thought that at this point I can be a doctor, a teacher, a marine biologist, a physicist, and maybe even a race car driver.

That freedom to amount to anything you want to be is most definitely an opportunity that comes with living in America. When African Americans were freed from the chains of slavery they fought for the opportunities that came with living in a democracy, the opportunities that most of us take for granted every day. As Americans, every day we have the opportunity to go to work and make a living for ourselves. To reap the fruit of our own labor. We have the opportunity to attend institutions of public education, we have the opportunity to vote, the opportunity to protest, we've the opportunity to bare arms, and among other things, we have the opportunity to practice our own religion.

Since we were young we have been taught about all the things that make America great. All of the opportunities we have. The challenges are spoken about on a less public level. The challenges aren't taught in school and they are not sung in our national anthem. In my opinion, the challenges of a democracy can be summed up in six words. One size does not fit all.


America celebrates it diversity. But that diversity serves equally as a challenge. We all have different religions, different morals, different income levels, different standards of health, different views on politics, and different ways of life. The country is made up of people of different generations. Right now, for the first time, there are four different generations in the American work force. How can these four generations who have all been raised differently, continue to work towards a common goal?

It's become obvious that big business is playing more and more of a role in American government each day. "When a Big Mac or a Starbucks cappuccino in New York tastes the same as its counterpart in Texas, it's easy to conclude that regional differences have been smoothed out by the leveling hand of American commercialism" (Baker). In my opinion, the commercialization of the country has provided more challenges for our country. We assume the San Fransisco is just like Houston. We assume that the laws we make for the people living in San Fransisco will be applicable and helpful to the residents of Houston. While our country has worked to acknowledge this by creating both state and national governments it still serves as a challenge.

I think that ego also plays a part in creating challenges within a democracy. Business leaders work hard to create business that are successful and profitable. They have a hard time giving away that money to someone who hasn't build their own company. To someone who hasn't put the effort in. People want to think that their way is the right way. No body wants to be told that they are wrong. And when people don't want to be wrong, it is hard to see things from another perspective. Politicians strive to damage their competitors egos just to get a stronger platform, to get more votes, and to get the step up.

Baker, Ross K. "In U.S. Politics, One Size Doesn't Fit All - USATODAY.com." News, Travel, Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. 19 Oct. 2010. Web. 30 Jan. 2011. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-20-column20_ST_N.htm>.

Katznelson, Ira, Mark Kesselman, and Alan Draper. The Politics of Power. 6h ed. Belmont: Thomson Higher Education, 2011. Print.

Founding Fathers vs. Generation Y

I'll be honest. When we first received the assignment to write and maintain a political blog, it made me extremely apprehensive.  I am currently working towards a career as a professional race car driver. The idea of having my political thoughts published makes me hesitant. I'm worried that my views will affect sponsor relationships, my prospective future with certain race teams as well as with certain race series' as well.

However, in addition to being a race car driver, I'm a college student who is facing the problem of rising tuition in America. My parents are both retired government employees who are dependent on their investments. I dream of one day seeing my older brother legally get married to the man of his dreams. Politics are something that affect me and my lifestyle on a daily basis. It's something that I should be able to speak openly about. In recent years politics have become a topic that has immense emotional charge for most people. Present day politicians talk about the future of the country, and the future of Generation Y. 

I update my Facebook status and surf the net from my Macbook. I sip Starbucks in between my text messages and my tweets.  I am Generation Y. Though the exact years are arguably, most agree that Generation Y encompasses people who were born in the range of years between 1980 and 1995. Concerns about Generation Y, or the Peter Pan Generation, are something that we have all heard before. The media says that we don't believe in God, that we don't want to grow up, that we are living with our parents longer, we immerse ourselves in virtual worlds to find acceptance, and we are more open to LGBT relationships. 

Generation Y is in constant contact with the world surrounding us. I would like to see this blog become a place where people can draw conclusions between modern communication and present day politics. How has America gotten to the point where one fears putting their opinions online, and where controlled conversations are almost unheard of. What role has Facebook and Smart Phones, among other things, played in this? It is also worth looking at how a foundation that was laid before modern technology can still support our ever-changing society. Are the ideals of our Founding Fathers still valid in the eyes of Generation Y?