Congratulations
for deciding to take AP Gov. Though this class will be tough, if you make
an effort to completely engage in the content you will find the experience very
worthwhile!
Most
of what we cover will be relevant to the current political landscape. We
will discuss modern trends, upcoming (and current) electoral races, and new
policy. To be successful in this class you will need to have a general
understanding of today's political news. You will need to pay attention
whats happening in government, the current events.
Use
the following guidelines to help you prepare:
1. Find a current
event that connects to our vocab. Be able to explain the vocab word, and
how we see it in action in the event.
2. Article selection
-the piece you choose is appropriate in length and content
·
the
selection relates well to US government and politics
·
no
sports or celebrity news unless it relates DIRECTLY to gov.
·
article
is a published piece associated with a news source
·
no
blog entries. They can be informative but are not subject to the same fact
checking as formal news sources.
3. Bullet list of ten
pieces of factual or inferential information
·
what
did you learn from the article?
·
what
could you infer from the information?
·
these
bullets must be in YOUR words
4. An analysis of how
the article relates to the study of politics, looking for a minimum of three
relationships.
·
use
political language/concepts/models -shows relationship of phenomenon
·
reference
specific topics covered in class
·
discusses
cause and effect
·
discusses
bias
·
minimum
6-8 sentence paragraph
5. Your thoughts and
reflection.
Your
blog entry is DUE each Friday by 3:00 PM. Submitted assignments show a
timestamp, so be sure to submit prior to 3:00 for full credit.
20%
will be deducted per day late.
To
receive full credit, you must:
The
analysis must be original. No quotes. MAKE SURE TO PROVIDE A LINK TO THE
ARTICLE. It is appropriate to add relevant pictures etc. to provide more
background.
Name
Hour
Date
Source:
Vocab
word:
Separation
of powers
Notes:
·
“Separation
of powers restoration act of 2016”
·
Would
undo Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council
·
Democrats
want to preserve it, Republicans want to overturn it
·
The
chevron decision was made in 1984 and stated “that certain federal agency
interpretations of federal statutes are to be upheld so long as they are
reasonable and permissible readings, even if they are not the interpretations
that courts would embrace in the first instance.”
·
This
boils down to, basically, if a law can be interpreted a certain way, or advised
to be handled a certain way by a third party expert, it can be enforced to that
extent (if you can argue your point to the court you're golden).
·
This
makes it a lot easier to win/manipulate federal court cases to your advantage
over how things should be enforced.
·
It
is supported because it gives the executive branch more leeway (and therefore
accountability) when interpreting laws.
·
This
is a blatant overlap of power which is why certain people want it gone.
·
(Executive
overlapping judicial)
·
It
encourages laziness in congress and gives more power to the executive branch,
so it greases the machines wheels but increases the risk of political backlash
on the executive branch.
(Note:
Not my views just summarizing the article)
Analysis:
Increasing the interpretation power of
the executive branch increases efficiency and accountability, real
accountability. Regardless of what branch of govt. A decision originates in,
there will be political blowback. The republican argument against this case
rests on that blowback being more risk than reward which is circumstantial at
best. The very congress that votes to strike down this power is the very
congress that can regulate it as they see fit seeing as how the executive
branch only has the power of interpretation when their bills are too vague.
This interpretation adds another layer of examination as to how the law should
be enacted (by the party whom it would affect the most negatively if messed up)
and could be overturned in cases of extreme impunity as well as controlled at
its roots (congress).Judicial review of an unconstitutional exertion of this
interpretation would be necessary but has no merit as of right now and there is
certainly no merit in the overturning of a law that has no ill effect and
increases the efficiency of the government.
Thoughts/Reflection:
I tend to believe that allowing for more loose interpretations of the Constitution can be problematic in the short term. The solution, an impartial and independent judiciary becomes a critically important piece, and requires a faith in a branch of government that has been losing public confidence recently. Saying that, I also believe that a more elastic version of our law is necessary, given the context of the time. Many constitutions have failed for their inflexibility.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable
News Websites:
CNN.com
 |
| No US weekly please |
cbsnews.com
abcnews.go.com
reuters.com
news.bbc.co.uk
worldnews.com
www.MSNBC.com
www.FOXnews.com
www.USAToday.com
www.TIME.com
Check
the "politics" tab
________________________________________________________________________________
Podcast Weeks
Occasionally we will have "podcast" current event weeks. When announced, the expectation is that you select a podcast from "The Daily" and make your podcast relative to the topic discussed.
Podcast selected should be no more than 2 weeks old.
All other instructions are the same for podcast weeks.
https://www.nytimes.com/podcasts/the-daily
