Deficit Vs. Growth

NBC and the wallstreet journal made a survey which asked people a question. It was brought to my attention by a blogger in the Washington Monthly Blog.


Respondents were asked, "Which of the following two statements comes closer to your point of view? a) The president and the Congress should worry more about boosting the economy even though it may mean larger budget deficits now and in the future; or b) The president and the Congress should worry more about keeping the budget deficit down, even though it may mean it will take longer for the economy to recover."

It seems that our government is more worried about our deficit than our actual economic growth. This is something that not many are aware of. It is great that our government is working hard to decrease our deficit, but where does that leave economic growth. Are they just putting it off for next year? All their work has not caused many changes. What has been accomplished when it comes to reducing deficit is meaningless. Congress and the president should focus more on GROWTH which is waht our economy needs.

The author of this blog really wants the people to see the efforts that our government is putting into something that has lesser importance than actually making our economy grow. It seems the author believes that deficit does not affect the population directly so it should not be so important. I actually disagree with the author in this point. I bleive it affects the population no matter what. But reducing the deficit will bring change in the long run, and people are suffering economically now and want changes now.

Editorial- Broken in USA

It seems a bill has given immigration the right and power to deprive 1,800 people of their jobs. The Obama administation has led to he firing of 1,800 employes of American Apparel Factory. Many illegal immigrants were found to be working at this business. The US Immigration has left them jobless and without an opportunity to legalize their residency. The author discusses how this is a way for the government to seem tough. They have many targets of businesses who hire illegal immigrants in order to exploit them. This is not the case with American Apparel, the author says. Employes there get paid 10 to 12 dollars an hour, which is actually good pay.

I believe this bill has given US Immigration to much power. "crackdowns" should have some sort of benefit to either party. In this case people are simply out of jobs, and 1,800 tax payers are put out of jobs and financial security.

http://http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/opinion/01thu2.html

Is Race the Source of Criticism in Obama's Presidency?

President Obama has been criticized since before he became president. He has been called a communist, socialist, amog other things. His economic plans, and views have been critized, questioned and mocked. It is evident that there is a problem. He has claimed that there is a factor of race invloved, but he assures that this is not the preominant factor. Although he has made remarks where he implies that some voted for him because of his race, and that others did not vote for him becuase of his race, he still believes that his race is not the main cause of him being criticized."He described himself as just the latest in a line of presidents whose motives had been questioned because they were trying to enact major change." Jimmy Carter has said that race has been a major contribution to his criticism and President Obama still denies it.

Obama strongly belives that the criticism is actually due to the fact that the people are truly concerned about their healthcare plans. Since this followed the bailing out of banks and atomobile companies, he belives the discussion and tension grew larger. This tension he says brought the question, "What is the role of governtment in society?" He believes that people question how much influence governemt should have over society. Mr. Obama told CBS News. “Even though we’re having a passionate disagreement here, we can be civil to each other, and we can try to express ourselves acknowledging that we’re all patriots, we’re all Americans and not assume the absolute worst in people’s motives.” Hopefully President Obama is right and that the american people have learned to see through the color of one's skin when criticizeing someone's actions. HHaving doubt and critizicing Mr. Obama's form of goverment is fine, as long as it is based on his true actions and not on his race. You can find the full article in the following link.

MMC

http://http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/health/policy/19obama.html?ref=politics

Enforcing Civil Rights

WASHINGTON — Seven months after taking office, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is reshaping the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division by pushing it back into some of the most important areas of American political life, including voting rights, housing, employment, bank lending practices and redistricting after the 2010 census.
As part of this shift, the Obama administration is planning a major revival of high-impact civil rights enforcement against policies, in areas ranging from housing to hiring, where statistics show that minorities fare disproportionately poorly. Few agencies are more engaged in the nation’s social and cultural debates than the Civil Rights Division, which was founded in 1957 to enforce anti-discrimination laws.

The Reagan administration dropped the division’s policy of opposing tax-exempt status for racially discriminatory private schools. (Under the Bush administration, the division had signed off on a similar law requiring Georgia voters to furnish photographic identification, rejecting criticism that legitimate minority voters are disproportionately more likely not to have driver’s licenses or passports.)

Among the critics, Hans von Spakovsky, a former key Bush-era official at the division, has accused the Obama team of “nakedly political” maneuvers.

Under the Bush administration, the agency shifted away from its traditional core focus on accusations of racial discrimination, channeling resources into areas like religious discrimination and human trafficking.

Department officials are working to avoid unleashing potential controversies as they rebuild the division’s more traditional efforts on behalf of minorities.

The administration’s fiscal year 2010 budget request includes an increase of about $22 million for the division, an 18 percent increase from the 2009 budget. The division has also lifted Bush-era rules that some career staff members saw as micromanagement or impediments, like restrictions on internal communications and a ban on front-line career lawyers’ making recommendations on whether to approve proposed changes to election laws.

The division’s downgrading of the New Black Panther Party charges, which were filed in the final days of the Bush administration, has had rippling consequences. It apparently prompted Senate Republicans to put a hold on President Obama’s nominee to lead the division as assistant attorney general for civil rights, Thomas Perez.

Bush-era changes to the division’s permanent rank may also have lingering effects. The practice, which no previous administration had done, violated civil service laws, it said.

The Obama transition team’s confidential report on the division, obtained by The New York Times, says 236 civil rights lawyers left from 2003 to 2007. (The division has about 350 lawyers.)

Many of their replacements had scant civil rights experience and were graduates of lower-ranked law schools.


Full Article
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/us/politics/01rights.html?_r=1&ref=politics