Category: Political Science Assignment Help

Gun Rights

It is a legitimate right for persons to own guns. With the recent rise in insecurity worldwide, people have the right to private guns for self-protection in their homes and community spaces. However, gun homicides are also to the rights that question the 2nd Amendment allowing individuals to own their guns and whether this was a good move for the federal and state governments. America experienced many changes during President Barrack Obama’s reign when these Amendments were made that allowed US citizens to own firearms. Therefore, this paper will focus on the individual and community rights to own firearms.

First, the Supreme Court Amendment protects all American citizens and gives them the right to own firearms. The law only allows citizens to use firearms for lawful purposes, such as protecting them from burglars and thieves in their homes when attacked. However, it is important to note that in the past years, owning a firearm was a collective right where only individuals who served in the military were allowed to own guns. This later changed with the amendments to the constitution that gave people the right to own their guns, which is now an individual right. Fortunately, some states had different laws concerning this issue of gun ownership, where people were denied the right to own personal arms due to issues concerning firearm safety (U.S. News, 2017). For instance, in Columbia, carrying unregistered guns was a major crime. This was a movement whose aim was to reduce gun violence incidences in Columbia.

Secondly, the 2^nd Amendment states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (Totenberg & Montagne, 2008). This means that the law system defends the right to own guns that are used correctly. There are some restrictions to regulate firearms from an individual level. For example, all firearms must be equipped with trigger locks to ensure the safety of all people. This amendment received lots of support from the Republicans and the Democrats as it guided all jurisdictions on how they should handle all issues relating to gun ownership.

Further, public gun rights changed and improved during the reign of President Barrack Obama. However, gun control is still an issue due to the increased rate of gun violence in most communities across the country (Pew Research Center, 2017). This created lots of different opinions from the presidential candidates in 2016 general elections. The Democrats and the Republicans supported the idea of mandatory checks during the sale of guns to ensure that the owners have knowledge on the safety measures. In my opinion, I highly support individual rights to own guns for self-defense in their households. With the recent increase in gun violence, people should protect themselves correctly.

References

Totenberg, N., & Montagne, R. (2008). Supreme Court: Gun ownership an individual right. Retrieved from: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91913260

Pew Research Center. (2017). Gun control. Retrieved from: http://www.pewresearch.org/topics/gun-control/

US News. (2017), Gun control and gun rights. Retrieved from: https://www.usnews.com/topics/subjects/gun-control-and-gun-rights

The Doctrine of Separation of Powers in the US

Introduction

Separation of Power can be described as a political doctrine whose main origin is the ‘writings of Montesquieu’ in the famous ‘The Spirit of the Laws.’ The author of the writings advised all the federal governments guided by a constitution to ensure that they separate different branches of the government to enhance governance and equitable distribution of power and resources in their countries. These branches are the Legislature, Executive, and the Judiciary (Zeinberg 2013). Each of these branches has the powers and the capabilities to oversee other branches within the federal government. This is what is referred to as the ‘Separation of Power.’ It is important to note that these writings played an important role in the writing of the United States of America Constitution. All the branches of the federal government are well managed to avoid any instance of abuse of power by those who are in the office. The US system is normally associated with checks as well as balances. Therefore, this paper will focus on the doctrine of separation of power in the United States of America.

To start with, renowned philosophers such as John Locked highly advocated for the separation of powers due to the advantages and efficiency that came with it in the federal governments across the world. Montesquieu was one of the main supporters of the separation of powers as his writings on the topic highly influence the opinions of those who were involved in the formulation of the Constitution of the United States of America (Orego 2014). The separation of power in the national constitution advocates for the legislature, executive, and the judiciary, which will be discussed below in the paper.

The legislature has a lot of powers in the US government. This is because the national congress can determine which laws and bills should be passed and for what reasons within a given period. This also influences how the federal government is run and how much is achieved within a given period. To ensure a smooth running of the federal government, the US president must ensure that he or she has enough support of the majority of the national Congress to minimize the opposition from opposing every idea and development, which the federal government proposes (Jones & Marini 1988). In the US Congress, this is where the Republicans and the Democrats can determine which bills should be passed into law. One of the contradicting topics that shaped the decision of the Congress during the tenure of President Barrack Obama is the issue of Gun Control where each of the political divides had a different opinion on how the issue should be handled to ensure the safety of all citizens in the country.

The Congress is not supposed to delegate any of its duties to a different branch of the federal government. Rather, it is supposed to oversee all its duties to ensure that all the proposed bills are passed into law after a comprehensive analysis of how they will impact positively on the lives of the American people (Sin 2015). This is according to a ruling by the Supreme Court in 1998 that ensured that the Congress did not delegate any of its duties or powers as indicated in the constitution. In the past, this issue of delegation has created conflicts between the legislature and the congress in the US government. In 1825, the US Congress delegated some of its powers and duties to the courts with the aim of prescribing the judicial procedures. The court later argued that the Congress had given unconstitutional powers to the judiciary. John Marshall who was the chief justice of the US concluded that this was entirely a legislative function. He also advocated that the Congress should provide a provision on the powers of the legislature and what powers it should delegate.

Two main factors determine the executive powers. All the people nominate din the executive offices to serve the American people must have the required qualifications or what is commonly termed as the experience in the fields where they are serving the people (Storey 2007). There are also exceptions, which the federal government should make to ensure that these people have the support of the majority of the National Congress and influence the law making process. The US Constitution states that the President is the commander-in-chief who has been given powers to make treaties with other government and countries across the world with the Consent of the national Senate. This is because most of the decisions that affect the running of the federal government are determined and made by the Senate.

According to the constitution, the elected president is not supposed to in any way execute any for the laws that are made by the Congress (Bailey 1989). It is also important to note that the National Congress has the ability and the powers to terminate any presidential appointments through impeachment where they give a vote of no confidence on the concerned appointees. In most cases, this arises from the two main political divided in the US: the Republicans and the Democrats. The executive also plays the role of restraining the government appointees from performing various duties as described by the law. The Congress vests all the powers before they are passed into law. This is later presented to the President whom with his counsel determined whether the bill should be signed into law. This is an integral part of the national constitution, which dictates the separation of powers.

Further, the judiciary has the powers to make a ruling on the most controversial cases in the history of the US government. The Supreme Court has been given powers by the Congress to make decisions on cases that affect national unity and security (Groot-Van & Rambouts 2010). It is important to note that the president normally appoints all judges in these courts with the counsel of the Senate. Those people who are appointed must have a record of good behaviour in their service to the American people and despise corruption among other illegal behaviours that will ruin the reputation of the federal government. They also receive considerable amounts of compensation from the federal government in their tenure in the office. Courts that have been given the powers to exercise their judicial powers are mostly referred to as the constitutional courts.

It is also important to note that the Congress can establish a ‘legislative court’ for various reasons and when the need be. These courts do not exercise any form of judicial powers like the other courts. This means it cannot decide and rule on issues relating to common laws. Their main role is to only adjudicate for the issues and rights affecting the members of the public. These are mostly the cases that affect individuals and the federal government, which is mostly under the influence of the political divides. There are various checks and balances in the three branches of the government as discussed above in the paper. The legislature is mandated to write and enact laws that should protect the rights and privileges of the America citizens. For instance, the issue of gun control has raised lots of controversy and debates on whether people should be allowed to own firearms. Some people may argue that this is a constitutional right for all Americans while others may argue that this has been the leading cause of gun related violence and homicides. Therefore, it is the role of the legislature to ensure that they formulate and enact laws that will protect and ensure the safety of all citizens. It also has the powers to enact taxes, formulate the national budget, and allow the national government to borrow from other countries to support the US budget and economy for a given period. It is also important to note that it is only the judiciary that has the powers to declare war in the US or in other countries where the US has interests. This branch of government has the powers to open any kinds of investigations against the executive or the judiciary when need be. Most people, however, consider this to be driven by political issues from the opposing parties. The legislature also plays an important role in determining the presidential appointees especially the judges of the supreme courts and the heads of various government agencies in the country. The Senate also has the powers to call for any treaties that have been made by the federal government. This is also the case when it wants to impeach any presidential appointees after questioning their authenticity and relevance of their roles and how they perform their duties.

On the other hand, the executive has a different set of checks and balances as a branch of the federal government. The US government’s vice president has all the powers to preside over the Senate and influences all its decisions. The Congress plays the role of making the laws that are followed by the military. All the actions that are taken by different government agencies are normally subject to approval by the executive (Hamburger 2002). Through this, the federal government can ensure the safety of the country and that of all it citizens in different parts of the world. The Senate has the powers to make different kinds of declarations in the country. For instance, it has the powers to declare a state of emergency in cases where there are national emergencies. A good example is a recent rise in the issues of terrorism across the world. Therefore, the US government through the Senate has issued a declaration that all people traveling from different countries of the world should be or not allowed into the country under the various condition to ensure the safety of the American people.

Additionally, the Senate can influence other branches of the national government in a positive way. This mostly happens in the State of the Union Address when the president is addressing some issues, which are important and relevant to the national security and peaceful co-existence of US and other countries in the world. The executive also appoints the judges of the American courts and other heads of the federal agencies. However, it must ensure the highest levels of transparency to prevent any form of corruption. The heads appointed must exhibit the highest levels of transparency and be qualified for the jobs, which they have been appointed to handle. One of the most recognized roles of the Executive is pardoning the prisoners who have been convicted for various reasons. Through this, the oppressed people can gain hope and happiness in their lives. This branch of government also executes orders of the courts on various issues, which are deemed crucial by the federal government.

The judiciary determines the kinds of laws that should be applied by the federal government when dealing with different situations. The Congress also determines whether the law was or is unconstitutional when dealing with various situations that arise within the federal governments especially in the disposition of prisoners. Apparently, the judiciary has the policies that allow it to one its members. The doctrine of separation of powers in the US has received different views and opinions from renowned political analysts and experts of different times. However, most of them agree that this is a decisive factor that should be considered by federal governments across the world. This is because to the development and success of an effective political structure and governance. The interest groups can know their roles and how they should influence the federal government when the need be. It is also important to note that the separation of powers is a complex affair, which does not involve the participation of the citizens in different levels. Thus, they normally question the working and credibility of these branches of the government.

References

Bailey, CJ 1990, The US Congress: An introductory bibliography. American Studies International, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 32-47.

Carolan, E 2009, The new separation of powers a theory for the modern state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Groot-van Leeuwen, LED, & Rombouts, W 2010, Separation of powers in theory and practice: An international perspective. Nijmegen, Wolf Legal Publishers.

Hamburger, P 2002, Separation of church and state. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Jones, GS & Marini, JA 1988, The Imperial Congress: Crisis in the separation of powers. New York: Pharos Books.

Oregon. (2014). Branches of government. Available at http://library.state.or.us/repository/2014/201409291442381. [11 April 2017].

Schwarz, FAO 2015, Democracy in the dark: The seduction of government secrecy. Available at http://public.eblib.com/choice/PublicFullRecord.aspx?p=1835945. [11 April 2017].

Sin, G 2015, Separation of powers and legislative organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Storey, W 2007, US government and politics. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.

Zeisberg, M. (2013). War powers: The politics of constitutional authority. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

To Harm or to Destroy

An article by Aljazeera showed that things eventually change with time. The article talks about Kristof, who stated that the Iranian state is richer than most neighbors. The article showed that the columnist relies on orientalist clichés in his writing about Iran, and that reveals his outdated assumptions (Dabashi). This argument is because Iran is a floundering nation; thus, his statement and thoughts are misguided (Dabashi). The issue of running stories without facts tends to make the story untrustworthy as well as the source.

The media plays a vital role in how things transgress with time. This article serves to show the importance of having factual articles. The bomb explosions in Dortmund showed the role the media could play if they speculated more, they would have caused the nation to go into a frenzy. The issue was an international matter as it affected players, and the media condemned that the two football teams set to play were only given twenty-four hours after the attack to commence their match (Fritsch). The issue was largely reported as the police tried to find the culprits behind the attack. On the other hand, the media tried to show that it was not right for the game to be postponed for only twenty-four hours. This is because the players could not be completely sure about their safety, and the situation had to be convinced first. This article shows how the media can be used to fight for what is right; the article about Kristof, on the other hand, shows that the media can also cause damage rather than good, especially if what is written is not factual.

Works Cited

Dabashi, Hamid. “Aljazeera.” 03 July 2012. Kristof: The Journalist as Tourist. Online. 12 April 2017. <http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/07/201271131925534684.html>.

Fritsch, Oliver. “The Guardian.” 11 April 2017. Borussia Dortmund Blasts: German Media Attack Game’s Hasty Rescheduling. Online. 12 April 2017. <http://www.thegurdian.com>.

Peace and Justice Studies

Briefing on a Situation

With the rising impacts of global warming across the world, most countries in Africa have been hard hit by drought in 2017. Precisely, have has been the most affected especially for countries living in North Eastern and Rift Valley parts of the country. This has increased conflict between communities living in these parts as they fight for the available natural resources for their animals and families to survive. Cattle rustling and fighting for water bodies have led to many people’s lives in these regions. Women and children are the most affected as they run from bandits who invade their homes.

 The situation on the ground calls for special attention as women and children continue to suffer due to lack of food and shelter. The communities continue to fight for these resources as the Kenyan government and the relevant stakeholders are providing fewer solutions to address this problem. This call for the attention of local, national and international stakeholders in addressing this menace to help save the lives of innocent citizens who are languishing in drought. It is important to note that these areas are hostile and social workers need to be escorted by law enforcers when they are availing their help. The Kenyan government has also deployed police and the military with the aim of fighting this bandit and stop killings in the region. However, the most urgent issue right now is to provide food and water for these drought stricken areas and improve security so that women and children can be able to return to their homes.

Changes in American Foreign Policy from Washington to Obama

American foreign policy has been essential in perpetuating American dominance in global governance. However, several changes have taken place in the US foreign strategy since the time of George Washington to the Obama regime (Milakovich, George 14). Foreign policy has been changing with time depending on American national interests worldwide.

George Washington was the first commander of the US. During the regime of President Washington, America was too young and had so many domestic issues (Kissinger 14). It had little military power and little wealth to engage actively in glamorous foreign policy (Matthewson 323). Therefore, Washington advocated for neutrality foreign policy where he did not want America to be actively engaged in a dangerous foreign policy that would put America’s future into destructive nature of politics (Mead 17). John Adams, the second president of the U.S., maintained Washington’s neutrality policy but was entangled into a war crisis with France, during the “Quasi-War.” The Quasi-War was ended through diplomatic relations. However, under President Jefferson, the American approach to foreign policy changed dramatically from neutrality to a more aggressive approach.

Jefferson committed the U.S. to the first military encounter in a foreign country. The U.S. strengthened its military power over time, and it became an important player in the world politics. In the 19^th century, America had begun to become more industrialized, and it was looking for markets oversee (Mead 76. The urge to find new markets for goods and services prompted America to change its foreign policy in a bid to fit perfectly in the global market. Engagement in trade had made America become a minor imperial power, and it engaged in a war with Spain for control of Cuba (Nye 14). The World War I increased America engagement with other nations especially most of the European nations (Hook 16). The war provided an important platform for America to engage in trade with most of the warring European nations. However, America declined to become a member of the League of Nations. A lot of economic prosperity, which was hallmarked by increased military strength and increased affairs in the global affairs marked the period between 1920 and 1930 (Hook 16). The second War II marked a new alignment in the America’s foreign policy.

 The reverberation of the World War II America emerged as a strong, sole superpower in the world (Hook 19). America took a central role in establishing the United Nations directing crafting of most of the laws (Hook 19). America took a pivotal role in the reconstruction of most of the war-torn the European nation through the marshal plan. That helped America to shape its foreign relationships through treaties and alliances that were aimed at protecting the interests of America overseas. Moreover, the cold war played a significant in shaping America’s foreign policy. America and its allies engaged in military, economic, and ideological competition with the Soviet Union. After the end of the cold war, America remained as the only super power in the globe.

The American policy favored self-independence of nations, democracy, market liberalization, and peaceful co-existence of nations. However, in the recent past, America has become more aggressive in its foreign policy (Hook 43). The national interests such as national security, international economics, and international politics dictate most of their approaches. In some cases, the U.S. has supported dictatorial governments in a bid to achieve its interests. America has been involved in several military raids in the recent past including Iraq and Afghanistan (Jackson 399). In the Obama administration, the approach was more conventional, but military raids were used during the capture of Osama Bin Laden and overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi. The aggressive approach of the American policy was toned down during the Obama administration (Jackson 394). Withdrawal of military troops from Afghanistan, reduced military spending, lenient foreign relations with Cuba, China and Iran, increased foreign aid and trade agreements marked Obama’s conventional approach (Jackson 391)

The culmination of the Cold War was marked by a decline in the economic and military dominance of Russia. The decline of Russian dominance in the global governance has prompted different regimes to take different measures in a bid to restore the countries pride in the international platform. The changing dynamics in the modern world have been central in determining the direction of Russia’s foreign policies. One of the important tenets of the Russian foreign strategy is its ability to form a new world order by leveraging its resources and intensive relations with other nations (Nygren 4). The tenet is premised on controlling the influence of the unipolar structure of the world politics and economics led by America and its European allies. Therefore, Russia seeks to install a multipolar system of international relations through collective resolutions to the problems afflicting the world, democracy and the rule of law (Donaldson, Joseph 17). However, analysts suggest that Russia will change the unipolar structure through subversion, destabilization, and disinformation by use of Russia’s special services (Dunlop 41)

Another important tenet of Russia foreign policy is intensified role in international institutions, economics, and politics (Donaldson, Joseph 27). This is intended to create new allies in a bid to tame the unipolar structure perpetuated by America. Therefore, Russia would acquire significance in the world economics and politics. Globalization will integrate Russia into the system of world economic ties that are vital to the economic growth of the nation (Tsygankov 6). Moreover, involvement in the international economics will help Russia promote fair international trade system that has been lacking for a long time due to the dominance of the U.S.

Strengthening international security is another is another tenet of the Russia’s foreign policy. Russia supports the removal of a unipolar power in determining the direction of international relations (Tsygankov 14). Russia supports the stabilization of regional security in a bid to achieve its national interests and economic interests. Russia supports the creation of a global system of control to counter the proliferation of nuclear weapons and destructive technologies (Shultz 15). Evidently, the global system will subject the U.S. to international control thus curtailing its unipolar role in global governance. Most of the foreign policies adopted by Russia are intended to put it in a polar position that is sufficient to tame the hegemony of the U.S. and European nations in global governance.

Works Cited

Donaldson, Robert H., and Joseph L. Nogee. The Foreign Policy of Russia: Changing Systems, Enduring Interests, 2014. Routledge, 2014.

Dunlop, John B. “Aleksandr Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics.” Demokratizatsiya, vol. 12, no. 1, 2004, 41.

Hook, Steven W., and John Spanier. American Foreign Policy since World War II. Cq Press, 2015.

Jackson, Richard. “Culture, identity and hegemony: Continuity and (the lack of) change in US counterterrorism policy from Bush to Obama.” International Politics, vol. 48, no. 2-3, 2011, 390-411.

Kissinger, Henry. Does America Need A Foreign Policy? Toward A Diplomacy for the 21st Century. Simon and Schuster, 2002.

Matthewson, Timothy M. “George Washington’s Policy toward the Haitian Revolution.” Diplomatic History, vol. 3, no. 3, 1979, 321-336.

Mead, Walter Russell. Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and how it changed the World. Routledge, 2013.

Milakovich, Michael E., and George J. Gordon. Public Administration in America. Cengage Learning, 2013.

Nye, Joseph S. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Cannot go it alone. Oxford University Press, USA, 2003.

Nygren, Bertil. The Rebuilding of Greater Russia: Putin’s Foreign Policy towards the CIS Countries, vol. 4. Routledge, 2007.

Tsygankov, Andrei P. Russia’s foreign policy: change and continuity in national identity. Rowman & Littlefield, 2016.

.

Shultz, George P., et al. “Toward a nuclear-free world.” Wall Street Journal 15 (2008): 2008

Compose one twelve to fifteen-page research; students will submit their research that includes a thesis statement, a list of sources (primary and secondary) to be used, and a breakdown of the themes to be developed through the. Besides having a title and footnotes, the assignment should include a bibliography. Title pages and bibliographies do not count toward the twelve-page minimum requirement.

In times of political and economic crisis, charismatic politicians are able to rise to higher status through promises of economic prosperity. One such politician was Juan Peron, former president of Argentina. Peron gained massive popularity in Argentina during his rule, and even after his death, his political party still functions under his name. I want to explore how and why people like Peron are able to captivate people so well and how a country’s instability can push people to support highly controversial and polarizing figures.

Charismatic And Personalistic Politicians In Latin America

I hypothesize that personalistic leaders like Juan Peron are able to gain majority public support and create large-scale class mobilization because they capitalize on the lack of trust the general public feels for their government. Peron utilized his connections and cult of personality to gain power, and his tight grip on the Argentine people was a direct result of the disenchantment and anger felt by the people due to economic and governmental instability.

Starting outline:

– Overview of the political lead up to Peron getting elected

– Detailing his time in power and actions he took

– Looking at his sphere of influence

– How he rose to power

– Defining the major factors in his win

– How did the public respond to his leadership vs. the government

– The state he left the country in after his leadership

– Looking at the Peron Party in Argentina today

Peronism in Argentina

Lula/ Bolsonaro in Brazil

APRA in Peru

Cult of personality

What is the lead up to Peronism, APRA and Bolsonaro? Instability in what way?

Proposal: When the middle class is ignored within unstable countries, the chances of a cult-like leader rising up politically becomes more likely.

I want to explore how and why people like Peron and Haya de la Torre are able to captivate people so well, how a country’s instability can push people to support a polarizing figure.

Outline Full:

Introduction

Background information on Juan Peron and his rise to power in Argentina

Brief overview of your hypothesis and research questions

Thesis statement

II. The Political Lead-Up to Peron’s Election

Overview of the political climate in Argentina prior to Peron’s election

Key events and factors that led to Peron’s rise to power

III. Peron’s Time in Power

Description of Peron’s political agenda and actions during his time in office

Analysis of his economic policies and their effects on the Argentine people

Examination of his influence on various sectors of society, including labor unions, the military, and the middle class

IV. The Cult of Personality

Definition of the concept of the cult of personality

Explanation of how Peron used his charisma and personal connections to gain power

Discussion of the ways in which Peron’s personality cult impacted Argentine society

V. The Legacy of Peronism

Overview of the Peronist Party in Argentina today

Analysis of the ongoing impact of Peronism on Argentine politics and society

VI. The Rise of Personalistic Leaders in Latin America

Comparison of Peronism to other personalistic movements in Latin America, such as APRA in Peru and Lula/Bolsonaro in Brazil

Discussion of the factors that have led to the rise of personalistic leaders in these countries

Analysis of how economic and political instability contribute to the appeal of these leaders

VII. Conclusion

Recap of main points

Implications of the research for understanding the dynamics of political leadership and social movements in Latin America

Suggestions for future research

In times of political and economic crisis, charismatic politicians are able to rise to higher status through promises of economic prosperity. In Latin America, the same charismatic leader can be found in several politicians: Juan Peron of Argentina, Victor Raul Haya de la Torre of Peru and Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil. All three politicians rose to power during volatile times in their respective countries through capitalizing on citizens’ fear, distrust of the government and desire for better economic times. Peron was a former president of Argentina who came into power through the military coup of 1943 and maintained power through 1955 and again in 1973 due to his immense popularity with the Argentine working class. Torre was a politician who founded the American Popular Revolutionary Alliance political movement in 1924 while in political exile. Determined to make APRA a pan- Latin American movement, he pushed anti-oligarchal and anti-imperialist ideals when he formed the Aprista political party when he returned to Peru in 1930. Finally, Jair Bolsonaro is a politician who served as Brazil’s 38th president from 2019 to 2022. His influence has led to his former party (the Social Liberal Party) shifting ideologies into a nationalist, anti-communist and conservative party. After leaving this party, he went on to become a key figure

Part I (worth 50 points)

1. Read this article:   https://www.businessinsider.com/us-defense-military-budget-compared-federal-education-spending-2023-4

2. Compose an essay with at least a 200-word count detailing the following:

1. What news source is the article from?

2. Tell me what this article is about in your own words.

1. How much did the U.S. government spend on the military in 2022?

2. How much did the U. S. government spend on education in 2022?

3. What is Biden’s spending plan for education and military defense for year 2024?

3. Discuss how this article applies to the following chapters:

3. Chapter 1- discuss how this article connects with chapter 1.

3. Chapter 6- discuss how this article connects with chapter 6.

3. Chapter 7- discuss how this article connects with chapter 7.

3. Chapter 14- what does chapter 14 discuss regarding the U.S. education policies?

4. List at least one example from each chapter and provide specific details for EACH chapter.

3. How will this news impact Joe Bidens’s upcoming election campaign?

4. As a student, what do you think about America’s education policy?

4. What improvements would you suggest? Why?

4. What current education policy to you think is the worst in this country or in the state of Texas? Why?

Grading Rubric:

1.

1.

1. Your essay must be double spaced with full and complete sentences. Your essay must be at least 200 words with proper essay grammar and correctly spelling.

2. 20 points will be deducted for each missing or incomplete essay questions.

3. 25 points will be deducted from improper grammar, incomplete sentences and misspellings.

Where to Submit Essay:

· Access Blackboard

· From the Main Menu

· click on the Military Spending Essay

· Compose your essay

Part II (worth 10 points) Due 05/05/2023 by 11:59 PM

1. Access the Discussion Board

1. You must access the discussion board to view the discussion question.

2. Find the discussion thread that reads, Military Spending

3.  Make your initial post. THEN, reply to at  least one classmate’s post.

4. You must compose at least 3 full and complete sentences.

This assignment is optional and is worth a total of 65 points. Please email ahead of time with any questions that you may have. All emails after 9PM on submission night will be answered the following day. Your essay submission will be graded “as- is.”

Read all three (3) articles (1. Drugs and the Media, 2. Public Enemy Number One, and 3. Miracle Drug, Poison, or Placebo: Patients’ Experiences with Antidepressant Medications as Described in Postings on an Online Message). As part of your discussion, answer the following five (5) questions:

• According to the author of each article, what has been and is the role of the mass media?
• How is social media (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc.) changing the landscape regarding “drug messages”?
• What new forms of or enhancements to social media can you envision over the next 5 years? How will be media’s role and hence its impact change in the future?
• How can the Pharmacists’ voices be heard in this new media environment?
• Given the rapidly moving marijuana legalization landscape, what biases now seem to be present in Nixon’s “War on Drugs”?

You are encouraged to look at additional current references from the literature (which you must properly cite) to support your points. Limit your initial post to no more than 500 words.