Women's Rights and the Trump Presidency

           Women's Rights and the Trump Administration  

                     http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-women-politics-idUSKBN13Y1HL

Connection: In class we have been studying about court cases as well as there relevance in today's society. The Roe v. Wade case is a perfect example of a court case that is relevant.
Summary:
President-elect Donald Trump has been in the news a lot recently because of his stance on abortion and the court case Roe v. Wade. Donald Trump has said that he plans on placing an anti-abortion justice in the Supreme Court. These statements have worried many about the future of women's rights in the United States. Changes to laws regarding abortion have already been made. In Texas it is now required to burry the fetus remains from the abortion and in Ohio it is now illegal to have an abortion once a fetal heartbeat can be detected. These changes to the law of abortion mark a shift in the view of the public and can lead to a shift in women's rights. Many people have already planned a march in protest of Trump's views the day after he takes office. 

      

Questions

1. What changes can Trump make that will most influence women's rights?
2. What can US citizens due to address these proposed changes?
3. Should people be worried about the future of women's rights? 

       

Trump Vows To Increase Defense Budget, Then Criticizes Excessive Military Spending

Link: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-military-spending-flip-flop-226705














Trump "firing" the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a new combat plane program for which defense contractor Lockheed Martin will charge an estimated $400 million (depending on order number and cost per unit. Photo source: Foxtrot Alpha - Data source: CBS News.)

Summary: President-Elect Donald J. Trump has recently flip-flopped on the subject of military funding. Though he has promised to make the United States' armed services "so big, so powerful, so strong, that nobody, absolutely nobody, is going to mess with us...", he has also strongly supported elimination of the federal debt. Given that increased expenditures are usually correlated in public opinion with a stronger military, his two goals might appear conflicting to his electorate. However, in stating his positions, Trump has also called for the reining-in of defense contractors, which he perceives as being corrupt and too influential on the federal government. With his lack of a specific position on current budget regulation laws, Republican critics have said his ideas may be dangerous to national security and American strength in foreign policy. His new approach seems to be to increase the overall efficiency of spending on defense programs, saying that we can "do it for a lot less." Interestingly, his position diverges from that of the Republican Party, which believes (and has historically believed) that the military budget should be increased without qualification.

Questions
1. Which is of a higher priority at this point: national defense or the reduction of federal debt? Why? Should more attention be paid to entitlement programs (Medicare/Medicaid, etc.) instead?
2. What do you think Trump will actually do once in the White House? What approach will he take to make sure both debt reduction and security are addressed? Could he attempt to dismantle military-related iron triangles (between contractors, various Congressional committees like the House Armed Services Committee, and the Department of Defense)? If so, how would he go about it?
3. Is the current defense budget too big? Too small? Why? Is the money being used efficiently? If not, what should be done? (CBO, GAO involvement?)

Meet Exxon’s Rex Tillerson, Trump’s Choice for Secretary of State

Summary:

Trump recently appointed Rex Tillerson, Exxon C.E.O., for secretary of state. The president-elect dismissed Tillerson’s relations with President Putin that many are concerned with due to their involvement in Ukraine and their friendly relations with Syria. Tillerson has worked with many leaders of many countries as the representative of Exxon. However, he does not have any experience in foreign policy not regarding business. Tillerson has acknowledged climate change. However, he will most likely support policies that will “not hurt fossil fuel industries.” The most evident example of his ability to protect human rights was when he pushed for Boy Scouts of America to end the ban on gay scouts in 2013.

Connection: We have studied the executive branch and roles of secretary of state.

Questions to consider:

1. Do you think Tillerson is a good choice for secretary of state?

2. Do you think that Tillerson will be confirmed by the Senate?

3. Would Tillerson be able to improve or worsen relations with Russia?

Racial Segregation in New York Schools Starts With Pre-K

Elizabeth A. Harris, a writer for the New York Times, argues in her article that racial segregation in schools start with pre-kindergarten. Harris discusses how this is primarily based on the fact that many pre-kindergarten programs appear in areas where they can offer their services to the local community. However, in spite of this clear racial segregation, there is an understanding that “racial diversity needs to be built into the application process” of pre-kindergartens, where segregation in schools begins to stem from. Having diversity in schools not only improves the learning of nearly all students involved, but also exposes them at a young age “to be accepting and tolerant of each other.” This connects to our current studies on civil rights and the continued segregation in schools throughout the country.

Questions to consider:

1. How can you relate this article to the topic of affirmative action?

2. Why is fixing racial segregation in pre kindergarten programs possibly considered more important than in high school or college environments?

3. What does having a universal application process do? Why is that significant/important, especially for early learning centers?

Trump Administration Tones Down Skepticism on Russia Hacking Evidence

Trump Administration Tones Down Skepticism on Russia Hacking Evidence

Summary:
Fresh signs emerged Sunday that President-elect Donald Trump could embrace the intelligence community’s view that the Russians were behind a computer-hacking operation aimed at influencing the November election. Reince Priebus stated that the president-elect “would accept the conclusion if these intelligence professionals would get together, put out a report, show the American people that they are actually on the same page.” His statement follows an intensifying bipartisan push on Capitol Hill to launch a separate investigation into the matter. Mr. Trump has called for opening up new lines of cooperation with Russia, and some of his critics in both parties have said his refusal so far to say Russia tried to interfere in the election was a sign that he doesn’t believe that Moscow is a U.S. adversary.

A number of Republicans have advised Mr. Trump to proceed cautiously with Russia, saying the nation’s president, Vladimir Putin, is looking to expand his influence in the Middle East and Eastern Europe and threaten American alliances.

On Sunday, four senators—including Republicans John McCain and Lindsey Graham—sent a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell calling for a temporary select committee “on Cyber” to probe the alleged Russian hacks, among other things. They said that allowing existing congressional committees to look into the hacks is difficult because there are too many committees that have claimed oversight.

Questions:
How will Trump's presidency influence Russian policy incentives?
How aggressive will Trump be in dealing with Russia?
Will Trump set a new precedent for American foreign policy?

Trump Calling for Change

Trump’s Taiwan phone call was long planned, say people who were involved



Summary:

Trump made the decision as president-elect to restore communications with Taiwan which have been dismantled since 1979. While some may consider it a “thoughtless blundering of a foreign policy novice,” others see it as a way to initiate better communication with China. As members of Trump’s team, many GOP conservatives have begun to play a role in reinstating Taiwanese relations. America’s relationship with the Chinese has since been rattled, which has only made Taiwan more of a forefront for diplomatic correspondences. To clarify, both Trump’s team and Taiwan’s leaders had planned the call much beforehand, and both sides were ready to salute each other as proponents of democracy, able to support each other in their endeavors. Perhaps what is most important to note is the looseness of this phone call, how little it actually determines about America’s, Taiwan’s, and China’s relationship with each other. But it is of utmost importance to recognize that this has been the first official relation between the two countries in over 30 years.

Questions:

What effect will this phone call have on Trump’s presidency? On US and Chinese relationships?

Did Trump make the right call? (pun intended)

How much is Trump adhering to “typical Washington rules”?

Only about 1 in 4 want Donald Trump to repeal Obamacare

Only about 1 in 4 want Donald Trump to repeal Obamacare

Summary:

It was clear among Trump’s issues that he stigmatized the Afford Care Act as a “disaster”, with a promise that he would completely repeal it during day one of his administration. However, as the election came to an end, Mr. Trump started to tone down and agreed that he’d like to keep parts of the law. In addition, among Trump’s supporters, the percentage in wanting the law repealed dropped to 52% from a previous 69% while during the election. This poll has created skepticism in that the view against Obamacare is actually inflated due to protest votes, which makes for political risk in attempting to ensure a quick repeal and replacement. In effect, this plan by Republican leaders “could result in the loss of 20 million people’s insurance coverage”, which calls for the necessity in simply revamping the health care system. Georgia Rep. Tom Price is already working on a plan to replace the ACA, but as they begin to start making changes to health care, they realize they are actually just inheriting the problem.

Connection:

As we have experienced and seen before, polls can be misleading or plain wrong. In addition, the act of voting entirely based on party alignment has related to Presidential coattails, in which voters cast their ballots for congressional candidates of the president's party because they support the president.

Questions:

1. As Trump beings to change his tone on Obamacare, will he still follow through with his bold claim to completely repeal the ACA?

2. Will the Republican leaders be successful in creating a better replacement for ObamaCare? Or will they simply inherit the problems from it?

3. How will the repeal of Obamacare affect the 20 million people who are covered? How are the Republicans planning to deal with this problem?

Donald Trump and conflicts of interest

Donald Trump and conflicts of interest

 Summary: As Donald Trump prepares to take office, many Americans are still concerned that he is not qualified for the position.  One major concern the public has with our president elect is the fact that he owns his own company.  As people call for Trump to divest from his company, he claims, “the president can’t have a conflict of interest” as there are no laws or precedent on the matter.  As he is not subject to scrutiny from the Office of Government Ethics, Trump feels he has no responsibility to completely separate himself from his companies.  As he has many overseas business ventures, Trump, if still involved with his own company, will undoubtedly be seen as acting on his own commercial interest.  Although many people claim, in his defense, that because nothing like this has ever happened, premature judgment cannot be made, one may be able to find precedent in the administrations of other countries.  In Italy, a prime minister by the name of Berlusconi had many parallels with Trump.  He was a wealthy businessman who planned to distance himself but not divest in his companies.  While looking at Italy under Berlusconi, it can be seen that owning a company and running a country is nearly impossible.  Their situations are not exactly the same, however, it can be said that under Trump, similar scandals are bound to happen.  As foreign ambassadors have already began to favor Trump owned hotels, Trump’s company may prove to be detrimental to the public’s perception of his integrity throughout his presidency.

Connection: The legality of Trump’s actions are rooted in one’s interpretation of the constitution.  If Trump is sued, likely, SCOTUS will have to decide if a president can have a conflict of interest.

Questions:
Should Trump be forced to divest in his company?
Does Trump have any legal obligation to divest in his company (Emoluments Clause)?
Can Trump and Berlusconi be reliably compared?

Trump's Justice Nominations

Supreme Court Agenda in the Trump Era? A Justice Seems to Supply One

After trumps recent win in the presidential election, he has released a list of potential supreme court nominees. Despite the assumed negativity of the presidency, many were satisfied with Trump's choices at Scalia's memorial meeting. Supreme court justices discussed ambitious plans now that the supreme court will once again likely be dominated by republicans. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy still, however, has held the decisive vote. If Trump however decides to replace some of the older democratic justices the court will be dominated by the conservative Legal movement. This has caused what seems to be somewhat of an agenda coming from the republican side of the court. This became apparent when conservative justices shared their plans. one justice, Clarence Thomas, made it clear that he wanted to focus on the first two amendments. He suggested that the only conservatives could protect these rights. Similarly to trump, Justice Alito expressed is disdain for perceived political correctness. he spoke about the diminishing value of free speech American citizens have. He also addressed the discontent he shared with trump in terms of being overly politically correct and the effect that it has on people. He alluded to students on campus "On college campuses, both public and private, a new orthodoxy rules," brought up that a conservatives students opinion would not go over well with the rest of the campus. He also expressed his fears of proposed amendments to the first amendment as they would give more rights to the press as oppose to the people. At the conclusion of the meeting the audience applauded him for his analysis on the constitutional fault line.


1) What effect will a republican majority have on the house?

2) Will a republican majority throughout our government help or limit our countries progression?

3)Which justices do you think Trump will most likely nominate and why?

Jill Stein Pushes for Recount

Hillary Clinton's Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein

After the narrow margins of victory in crucial swing states, third party candidate Jill Stein advocates to raise and allocate funds for a recount in Wisconsin, followed by Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Although Clinton conceded the race on Nov. 9th, the Clinton campaign is potentially participating in order to rule out and reassure supporters that hacking by Russia and other factors did not play a role in influencing the election. On the other hand, president-elect Trump defends his victory by saying that the outcome of the election should be respected, and views the recount as "ridiculous," and "a scam by the Green Party." Regardless, since the day after the election, analysts, lawyers, and data scientists are already in the process of extensively examining the results.

Connection: The recount involves the debate regarding the efficacy of the Electoral College and the popular vote system.

Questions:
   
1. Do you believe that the recount will merit any change in the circumstances?
2. Have the results of a presidential election been challenged in the past?
3. Do you believe that Jill Stein and Clinton are rightfully responding to the results?

Future of Roe v Wade

What Might Happen to Abortion Rights if Roe v Wade is Overturned

As President-elect Donald Trump assumes office, the Supreme Court decision, Roe v Wade, faces a questionable future. Trump has stated in previous interviews that he intends on appointing a "pro-life" justice, and with the approval of Senate, it's possible that Roe v Wade could be weakened or reversed. Although, a complete reversal of Roe v Wade is quite improbable, it is probable that the decision could be "chipped away" at making it difficult for women to obtain the proper medical attention needed for an abortion based on what state they live in. While these implications may not effect higher income women who can afford to travel to different states to receive an abortion, it would directly impact lower income women and possibly prevent them from reaching a proper abortion clinic.

Questions:
- Do you feel it's possible that Roe v Wade be overturned completely?
- How could this effect the progression of Women's Rights?
- What other Supreme Court decisions could be reviewed or overturned?

Steve Bannon: Potential White Nationalist and Future Chief Strategist

Steve Bannon Speaks Out on White Nationalism, Donald Trump Agenda

This week, Donald Trump announced his appointment of Steve Bannon as his chief strategist. Bannon was the head of Breitbart News, which is associated with the alt-right, until he joined Trump's campaign earlier this year. Bannon and his news outlet have been accused of white nationalism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia, among other things, and he has admitted to the alt-right political movement being connected to these ideas. Now, Bannon calls himself an economic nationalist and claims that everything in Trump's presidency will be related to jobs. He appears to be preparing for some kind of revolution, and plans to use darkness against his political enemies.

Questions:
- How will the labels associated with Bannon affect public support of him and the Trump presidency in general?
- Is Bannon likely to be able to follow through with his "trillion-dollar infrastructure plan"?
- What are your thoughts on Bannon's statement that "darkness is good," and the examples he uses?

Meet Trump's Attorney General: Jeff Sessions

"Trump chooses Sen. Jeff Sessions for attorney general, Rep. Mike Pompeo for CIA director"

As the dust has begun to clear from this recent election, it has started to become more clear who will be the leaders of the country for the next four years. It was announced today that President-Elect Donald Trump plans to choose Alabama senator Jeff Sessions as his Attorney General. Sessions is a hard-line conservative known for his controversial stance on immigration, which includes support of Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering the US. Sessions is already on Trump’s transition team, and was one of his close advisors during the election process, so it comes as no surprise Trump is a fan of him.

Connection: We recently studied the executive branch, which the Justice Department, headed by the Attorney General, is a part of.

Questions:

-What do you think of this appointment?

-Do you think this Session’s conservative stances be reflected across the rest of Trump’s cabinet?

-How far to the right do you think Trump will be able to take his policy before being pulled back by the Republican establishment?

Prop 66: California Differs on the Death Penalty

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-death-penalty-prop-62-prop-66-20161109-htmlstory.html

The death penalty has been a constant issue in states across the country. They have constantly gone back and forth on whether to keep the penalty or get rid of it. Also if the state elects to keep the penalty, they must decide on how to reform it. Last Tuesday, Californians narrowly voted to keep the death penalty and to expedite the system as a whole due to the state's large death row population. However, many people have begun to voice their opinions on the various side of Proposition 66. In this article, Jazmine Ulloa describes not only the various sides yet the complications that will come with the new prop. The abolitionists against the punishment have states the prop will impair the constitutional and inherent powers of the courts. Others have states the prop only passed due to the "Trump Effect" where people passed this only out of fear. On the other side of the aisle, the supporters claim the prop will only save taxpayers money and strip away a layer of bureaucracy . Now that proposition has passed, the question becomes how to implement such an aggressive proposition. This prop states that individual trial judges will now have the power to decide whether or not the penalty should be used. This strategy will lead to different statewide uses of the penalty creating havoc. Also all the inmates on death row trying to challenge their conviction will have their cases sent to lower courts instead of the overloaded California Supreme Court. This will speed up the challenge process yet it will create varied responses court to court in California.

Connection: Recently we have discussed the power and strength of bureaucracy and the benefits and cons that come along with it. This new prop weakens the power of the bureaucracy and gives it back to the people to control. 

Questions:
1. If you were the lawmaker how would you address the challenges caused by this new proposition?
2. Should the federal government play a more important role in the death penalty? Explain why or why not.
3. Do you feel that the "Trump Effect" has led to the desire to keep such capital punishment around? Why?

Prop 64: How Legal is the Use of Cannabis?

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-proposition-64-marijuana-legalization-explained-20161107-story.html

 With the recent passing of Prop 64, it is now legal for any adult 21 and over to sell, purchase and transport 28.5 grams of marijuana. Yet, at the same time, there are still several laws and regulations that come with all three of these categories. In this article, Patrick McGreevy clearly explains that when it comes to selling cannabis in California, you will need a license to sell it, must implement the 15% excise tax on the marijuana being sold and are required to notify the state and get a background check to open a store. The failure to abide by any of these laws could result in a $500 fine, penalties or jail time. Similarly, Prop 64 makes it evident that when it comes to purchasing any type of marijuana, medicinal or recreational, no kids will be able to purchase it or even walk into a store. The containers and bags that the cannabis would come in will also be child proof and cannot be confused with commercially sold candy. Additionally, men and women above the age of 21 can't smoke marijuana in public places unless it is allowed by a local ordinance. McGreevy adds on that there is a $100 fine for doing so in a public area and a $250 fine for smoking in an area where tobacco is prohibited and anywhere near a school. The main regulation to keep in mind, however, is the fact that any use of marijuana remains illegal on a federal level even if the state has passed a law saying that it is acceptable.

Connection: The prop passed on November 8th, 2016, Prop 64, accentuates the separation between the state and federal government. The states have the power to pass a law like the legalization of marijuana, however, it is evident that it is much more difficult to pass something like this on national level because that would require the support of interest groups as well as congress.

Questions:
1. Do you think that legalizing marijuana on a federal level is a realistic possibility in the near future and do you believe that it would make an impact in states where it is already legal?
2. In your opinion, is the approval of Prop 64 beneficial or merely bothersome?
3. The approval of Prop 64 not only allows California state residents to access marijuana legally, but it also will give prisoners convicted with marijuana charges the opportunity to have their jail time shortened or abolished altogether. Do you feel that these convicts should be presented with a chance like this or should their conviction remain the same?

The NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association are prepared to fight Prop 63

Gun Supporters Ready to Fight against the passing of Prop 63 in California

Gun control has been a controversial topic these past few years as many citizens are pushing for more gun control laws while gun supporting groups such as the NRA present a strong opposition. In this article, author Bryan Schatz describes how Proposition 63 passed after 63 percent of California citizens voted for its enactment. However, interests groups such as the NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association are prepared to fight against the increase in gun control laws. Despite the increase in gun control measures, the California Rifle & Pistol Association were not particularly surprised at the enactment of Prop 63, given that the measure is similar to legislation passed earlier on in the year. In July, Governor Jerry Brown passed legislation that banned the possession of magazines that hold more than 10 bullets, made the sale of certain semi-automatic rifles illegal, and requires background checks when purchasing ammunition. Prop 63 outlined many of the same things and added a requirement that gun owners reported lost or stolen guns. It also made gun thefts a felony and created a system to take away guns from felons. Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, explained that many gun supporters did not fight earnestly against prop 63 because they wanted to concentrate their efforts on electing Donald Trump who would appoint court justices on the Supreme Court that are gun-friendly. Furthermore, the NRA and the association plan on taking legal action against Prop 63 and trying each of its individual laws in court.

Connection: The opposition the California Rifle & Pistol Association are planning demonstrates the power of large interest groups and how it can influence public policy. It also demonstrates how if a group is dissatisfied with a particular legislative outcome, they can still have their voice heard through other methods such as in courts or (as the NRA is doing) supporting politicians that share their same view point.

Questions:
1. In what ways is the NRA opposition an example of pluralism or hyperpluralism?
2. At the end of the article, Schatz describes the conflict between Democrats Newsom and De Leons. What does their conflict say about the effects of pork barrelling and credit claiming during a political election? Is the desire for credit leading to more conflict and potential corruption?
3. In the overall scope of gun violence and gun control laws, is Prop 63 too strict? Should it have been even stricter? In your opinion, is the NRA valid in opposing the proposition?

Democrats Retaking The Senate: Can This Election Mean Multiple Democratic Victories?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/03/down-ballot-democrats-fight-to-retake-senate-and-rebalance-supreme-court.html

Within all the drama of the presidential election many citizens have forgotten that this is more than just Hillary vs. Trump: It's control for- yes, the presidency- but also for the Senate. According to 270towin.com, "There are 34 seats up in 2016, of which 24 are held by Republicans. Democrats will need to gain 4 or 5 seats to take control [of the Senate]". Since it is unlikely that the Democrats will retake the House until around 2022, retaking the Senate is a great victory for the Democratic party, but not necessarily for productivity and approval ratings of Congress. This is mainly due to opposing factions holding separate halves of Congress, which will continue to result in policy gridlock for the time being. According to the article, if the Republican Party loses the Senate (and it most likely will), much of the blame will fall on Trump, as Congress has up until this point "Struggled to find a relationship with a candidate mired in personal scandals and controversies of his own making". Democratic control of the Senate may also push forward the Supreme Court justice nomination of Merrick Garland, and therefore radically reshape the structure and format of the Supreme Court. Naturally, the potential for all this to come into effect has Republicans on edge, especially those whose seats may soon be taken. This has prompted many Republicans to challenge "Hillary Clinton's legitimacy, even before she's won the contest. They are talking about levying impeachment charges against her... and blocking any and all supreme court nominees she might offer". This election has a lot at stake, more than just who sits as the face of this country, but the policy and progress that we can make as a country. 


Questions to consider:

1. Do you think that Democrats retaking the Senate would help in any way to ease gridlock? Explain.
2. Do you believe that Democrats will be able to retake the 5-7 needed seats to regain control of the Senate?
3. Is Trump responsible for the high likelihood of the Republican party losing their political control over the Senate?