Turning Purple to Red: Gerrymandering in North Carolina

In the 2016 Presidential election, North Carolinians voted 49.8% Republican and 46.2% Democratic, while voting 48.8% Republican and 49% Democratic in the gubernatorial race, landing Democrat Roy Cooper the governor's seat. By all accounts, North Carolina is a purple state: it has a mix of both Democratic and Republican civilians. But take a look at the map for how Representatives to the house were elected:

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/north-carolina

North Carolina sends 10 Republican representatives to 3 Democratic ones, despite being a purple state. You might have already guessed from the title as to why this has been possible. 

North Carolina's gerrymandered maps have been addressed in the past: a 2017 Supreme Court case ruled their maps unconstitutional on the grounds that they had been drawn along racial lines. However, as congressional maps are drawn by the state legislature, these maps were simply redrawn with a blatant partisan advantage in mind. In a 2016 House hearing, Republican state Rep. Dave Lewis said: “I propose that we draw the maps to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.”

This brings us to the present day, where a federal court ruled last week that these redrawn congressional maps were unconstitutional. This is huge as this decision was the first time a court has ruled that a congressional map is unconstitutional because of partisan gerrymandering. Gerrymandered states, such as Texas and Pennsylvania, could follow suit, leading to a lot of changes in the House. However, don't expect these changes to show up in time for the 2018 midterms. The congressional districts in North Carolina won't be redrawn for 2018 midterms with less than two months before elections, and state legislators have already filed an appeal with the Supreme Court. If the conservative Trump nominee Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, this case may be overturned.

Sources:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/29/17795920/2018-midterms-north-carolina-gerrymandering-case-supreme-court

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/plaintiffs-in-nc-gerrymandering-case-say-new-maps-not-an-option-for-november/2018/08/31/78cd6666-ad64-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html?utm_term=.e529f68fc821

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/22/15676250/supreme-court-racial-gerrymandering-north-carolina

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/north-carolina-gerrymandering/527592/

https://www.azavea.com/blog/2017/07/19/gerrymandered-states-ranked-efficiency-gap-seat-advantage/

Why are Macarons so expensive?

Every time I walk into Draeger's, the first thing I notice is the assembly of macarons behind the display glass. And every time, I balk at the price -- $1.25 for each puny cookie. Why were these french cookies so expensive? So I did a little bit of research.

Apparently, it’s because of the preparation. First of all, macarons require the egg whites to be aged up to five days before getting mixed in -- this is to ensure that the cookie is fluffy and airy. Next, the almond powder and sugar must be refined and sieved multiple times to ensure that the domes of the cookie are perfectly smooth. After all that, chefs must mix the meringue with the dry ingredients. They must be careful; while stirring too much results in flat, hard cookies, stirring too little causes the formations of peaks and spikes. When the batter is finally ready, bakers must concentrate in precise piping; even the slightest slip can result in two atrociously uneven halves. Finally, before the cookies can be put in the oven, bakers must wait once more -- a 15-30 minute resting period is ideal in order for the cookie halves to develop the signature “foot” along the cookie edges.

With this much preparation and required skill, the price tag is kind of justified. In some places, macarons are sold up to $4 per cookie. Draeger macaroons are relatively cheap in that respect, but then again, most of their macarons had peaks, cracks, or dents. It didn’t affect the taste (I like the cafe ones the best), but an imperfection is an imperfection, and I guess that’s the reason why Draeger macaroons are only $1.25 each and not $3.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/going-out-guide/wp/2017/05/16/are-ladurees-macarons-really-worth-almost-3-each/?utm_term=.07328553f4ad

https://www.rachaelraymag.com/real-life/why-cost-macaron-expensive

Questions:

Have you ever eaten a macaron? Favorite flavor? Other thoughts? Do you think they’re overpriced?

Trump Administration proposes to let states decide coal regulation.

Summary: Made in accordance to the 2015 Clean Power Plan (CPP) was an Obama-era legislation that aimed to scale back carbon emission from power plants by 32% from their 2005 levels by 2030 (The Economist). The plan has yet to come into effect due to legal challenges by coal states, but on August 21, 2018, the Trump administration introduced a new legislation, the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule to replace the CPP before it even comes into effect. The ACE essentially allows states to decide their own emission reduction targets -- according to the EPA, this plan would increase coal use by as much as 9.5% by 2035 (The Economist). Most reductions in noxious gas emissions imposed by the new plan is considerably less ambitious. For example, according to The Economist, whereas the CPP is would reduce sulfur-dioxide and nitrogen-oxide by more than 20%, ACE would only reduce these gases by 1-2%. Further analysis by The Economist predicts that like the CPP, ACE would likely face legal challenges; it is unlikely for the new proposal to be enacted before Trump’s term ends.

Opinion: Just from the statistics, I find ACE a disturbing replacement to the CPP. The Economist explains that the market itself is beginning to rely less on coal and more on Natural Gas (a fuel cheaper, cleaner, and more readily available due to fracking -- which is the extraction of gas from underground rock). Renewable energy is becoming less expensive and more viable as an alternative, and mining of coal itself has become more efficient due to automation (therefore needing less workers). The market can handle less coal, there’s less demand for coal and coal workers, so why adopt ACE? Even if coal production was increased, I feel like it wouldn’t create that many more jobs because of automation -- if the government really wanted to preserve jobs for the “little guy,” they should focus on AI and machinery regulation which can replace human workers -- just saying.

Questions:

--Discuss the Affordable Clean Energy rule. Is it something that worries you?

--Why do you think the Trump administration made this proposal? Who are they trying to appeal to? --Discuss the politics behind climate change.

--Would allowing more coal output generate a significant amount of additional jobs? Do your own research and discuss.

--Do you agree with the Economist’s analysis that the lessening use of coal is more due to market than government intervention? Why or why not?

Sources:

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/08/23/the-trump-administrations-latest-plan-to-prop-up-coal

https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/proposal-affordable-clean-energy-ace-rule

Jacksonville Shooting

Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Summary:

24-year-old Maryland gamer David Katz opened fire and then killed himself during the Madden video gaming tournament in Jacksonville, Florida on August 26, 2018. According to CNN, 2 were dead and 10 were left injured from the shooting. Reports from CNN say that Katz had lost a game earlier in the day and that he has had a history of mental illness -- factors that may have contributed to the shooting. According to the divorce records of Katz’s parents, Katz had been undergoing psychiatric treatment since the age of 12. He had obtained a 9mm handgun and a .45-caliber handgun a month ago in Maryland legally -- despite his history, he had successfully undergone all background checks and trainings necessary to purchase a gun. Federal law mandates that those deemed “mentally incompetent” in court or who were committed to mental health institutions against their will (for 30 days+) are disqualified from obtaining legal firearm, but it doesn’t include precautions against patients with a history of psychological issues. (Update 8/29/18 : According to the Washington Post, Katz, although he has been hospitalized twice, none have exceeded the 30 days which would've prohibited him from obtaining a gun).

Analysis:

Dominating recent headlines, gun control and gun violence remains a pertinent issue of modern politics. Much of the debate is geared towards who should be able to obtain a gun and who shouldn’t. In general, democratic, urban states tend to have tighter gun control while Republican, more rural states have looser laws. In states with tighter laws such as California, they conduct universal background checks in order to close the federal gun show loophole (which essentially allows private sellers and sellers at gun shows the option of not conducting background checks) -- a universal background check essentially means that even private sellers have to conduct background checks. Other forms of gun control include waiting periods meant to cool down the impulsive or mandatory training. On the federal level, moderate gun control legislation have been introduced, but the NRA, probably America’s most powerful lobbyist organization, have continually influenced politicians to shoot those bills down in defense of the second amendment (the right to own guns).

Opinion:

The shooter in this particular event obtained his guns via all legal means so it seems that even with gun control, accidents can still happen. Even if we enforced a stricter set of criteria for mental health, there will still be cases where there’s undiagnosed cases of mental instability. While I am not saying we shouldn’t pay more attention to mass shootings, mass shootings only comprise of less than 2 percent of all gun related deaths, yet it seems to dominate headlines the most -- more than gun suicides or accidental misfires. I feel like the public should place more focus on child access prevention laws or help to the mentally ill so that there’s less suicide and less gun-related accidents.

Discussion questions:
Is the focus on mental illness in the gun control debate justified? Would placing more gun restrictions on the mentally ill be effective, or should the focus be directed elsewhere?

How else should politicians address gun control? What measures should be in place?

What is your reaction to this event? Is it more of an accident or is it a signal to strengthen gun control?

What can we do to diminish the power of the NRA? Should we? Why or why not?

What measures could’ve been placed in Maryland specifically to prevent this tragedy?

Sources

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/gun-violence-stats-2015/

https://www.thetrace.org/2017/01/understanding-mass-shootings-in-america/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/27/us/jacksonville-madden-tournament-shooting/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/28/us/jacksonville-madden-shooter-katz-mental-health-invs/index.html

Vox youtube videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn6hVIISA6o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4qUsgHa4Y

How powerful is the NRA?

https://www.businessinsider.com/nra-power-lobbying-statistics-gun-control-2017-10

An update on DACA -- Is DACA headed towards the Supreme Court?

Courtesy of Wikimedia

Summary/ Analysis:

DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood arrivals, is an Obama-era executive order that defers, for two years, deportation of illegal immigrants who were brought across the border as children. The status is renewable and at the same time, provides these immigrants with social security (SSN) numbers so that they can obtain work permits and driver's licenses.

DACA being an executive order* means that it’s not a bill -- it has the force of law but it can be directly issued by the president and bypass congress. Back then, Obama, a democratic president, faced a Republican dominated congress that tended not to favor his policies, so in order to bypass congressional procedure, Obama issued an executive order. Bills are harder to pass; bills require a majority vote in both Senate and House in addition to the president’s approval, but on the flip side, if a bill does get passed, it’s equally hard to repeal a law, (repealing a bill would require the same process as passing a bill).

The executive order is easier for the president to issue, but it can also be just as easily repealed by the next president. When DACA had first been implemented, Republicans argued that the executive order was an overstep of presidential boundaries. The Trump administration decided to end the program on March 5th 2018, but the courts of California, District of Columbia, and New York has blocked the action, claiming that in accordance to the Administrative Procedure Act, which dictates that for the repeal of any substantial program, agencies must publish proposed changes in the Federal Register, give the public a chance to provide feedback, and then give an adequate explanation of why the changes are not “arbitrary” or “capricious.” Court judges found the Department of Homeland Security’s justification inadequate, further arguing that rescinding DACA would negatively affect the hundreds of thousands of people already enrolled in the program.

The Update:

While California and New York federal judges had only ordered the Trump administration to continue renewing existing DACA statuses, DC federal court judge John Bates in early August went a step further and ordered the Trump administration to reopen the program entirely, to start accepting new applicants. Currently, the DACA case is again being heard in Texas by the conservative district judge Andrew Hanen, a judge known as an “immigration hawk” according to Vox. Ten states are presenting arguments that DACA is unconstitutional, but as of now, according to CNN, Hanen said that he would only consider the portion of the case that pertains to ending DACA immediately -- not its constitutionality.

With potentially conflicting rulings, the Supreme Court may have to weigh in; If the case is heard now, there would likely be a 4-4 split along party lines as the Supreme Court is currently down a judge. Trump’s pick, Judge Brett Kavanaugh will begin his Senate hearing/confirmation process on September 4th.

Connection:

Apart from obvious legislative checks and balance connections, DACA is a POLICY adopted by the executive branch during the Obama era that is a part of the larger POLITICS surrounding immigration and his struggles against a Republican dominated congress. While the democrats tend to favor a more empathetic approach, arguing that these immigrants are escaping from horrid environments and that DACA recipients especially, who didn’t have much of a choice in coming to the United States, should receive some sort of special exception, the Republicans embrace the view that the immigration laws in place ought to be followed, we should give job priority to Americans, and that it’s just not feasible to let everyone who wants to come to America do so.

Opinion:

I think this topic is quite interesting and shows the complexity of governmental controversies. I see the arguments on both sides so it’s hard for me to decisively side with one side or another. While I do agree that DACA recipients are here often under no fault of their own, I also think that illegal immigration should be deterred in some form (maybe not remove DACA, but at least strengthen border security) -- I feel like it’s unfair to immigrants further away from America who had to endure the wait and who went through the process legally.

Discussion question:

Since DACA is an executive order, does the Trump administration have the right to repeal DACA? Why or why not? Should they repeal DACA?

Was Obama justified in issuing DACA? Discuss the idea of an executive order.

Sources:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/09/05/the-legal-flaw-with-ditching-daca-215579

https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2018/08/27/is-daca-heading-for-the-supreme-court

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/7/17655450/trump-daca-immigration-court-texas-judge-ruling

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/08/politics/daca-hearing-texas/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2017/09/05/546423550/trump-signals-end-to-daca-calls-on-congress-to-act

More on deportation:

https://www.usatoday.com/pages/interactives/graphics/deportation-explainer/

Higher Gas Prices a Headache For GOP–Except in California

Summary:
While with the normal season change it is only custom that other parts of society change. In this case it is gas prices. This has been a normal tradition but at this point is is higher than previous spikes as the earlier occurrences through the year including long-term oil supply/demand imbalance, a robust economy, production cuts from OPEC and Russia, the collapse of the Venezuelan oil industry, and the Trump administration’s destabilizing Middle East policies.In most states the shift of blame lays on the Republicans and the current president, however in California the angered eyes turn towards its own representatives. Although most prices will decrease after the summer it has been reported by many that they have opted out on long road vacations for the raised gasoline.

Opinion:
I feel that such a price raise is only normal as it is a big season for driving and vacationing giving the perfect opportunity to raise funds in that area. I feel that many people would be upset with and is given the power to finger point yet it happens about every year so I don't see how many can be over dramatic and blame those who make the official statement. Personally I don't drive so I myself can not see the base effects.

Do you believe that it is reasonable for the gas price raises at this point in time?
How does this affect your thoughts on driving or how would you believe people to change their mode of getting places in response? Would more switch to public transportation? Would this help or further hurt the economy?

Link:Article-NewYorkTimes

Accused Stalker Sent Man 65,000 Texts After One Date, Police Say

Summary:
31-year old Jacqueline Ades is accused of breaking into her date's home, bathing in his tub, and sending thousands of disturbing text messages to the man's phone after one date. This was after the victim saw Ades in his house via security camera footage while he was on vacation, after which he called the police. A large butcher knife was discovered in the passenger seat of her car. Ades allegedly sent about 65,000 text messages to the man’s phone. The victim said that she sent about 500 text messages to him a day.

In one of Ades’ messages, she allegedly stated, “…Don’t ever try to leave me…I’ll kill you…I don’t wanna be a murderer.” She also said that she wanted to wear his body parts and bathe in his blood.

Ades was arrested on charges of threatening, stalking and harassment.

Opinion:
A lot of people frown on double-texting, but what about 500 texts in a day? Not going to lie, I'm kind of jealous. This guy basically got 21 texts per hour, and I can't even get a "you up?" All jokes aside, this woman needs help and belongs in an institution. I can't decide which of her actions was worse, saying that she'd bathe in his blood and wear his body parts or her incessant texting.

If you've just met someone, what's an acceptable amount of texts to send them before a reply?
http://fox40.com/2018/05/10/accused-stalker-sent-man-65000-texts-after-one-date-police-say/
https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/12/crimes-stalker-jacqueline-ades-accused-7540570/

Israel Kills Dozens at Gaza Border as U.S. Embassy Opens in Jerusalem

Article Link

Israeli forces killed dozens of Palestinians in bloody clashes at the Gaza border Monday in the deadliest day there since the 2014 war, as the US officially opened its Embassy in Jerusalem just 50 miles away. At least 58 Palestinians died, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry, during protests over the Trump administration's controversial relocation of the Embassy from Tel Aviv, a move that has been praised by Israelis but has enraged Palestinians. Palestinian officials accused Israel of committing a "horrific massacre" and called on the international community to immediately intervene. The Palestinian Health Ministry said more than 2,700 had suffered injuries, and that many of the dead had not yet been identified.


Questions:
1. Should the UN be involved? What agreement can they make with Isreal and Palestine to make sure this never happens again?
2. Why do you think that Isreal and Palestine still haven't come to an agreement?
3. What has caused the rise of these intentions?

US birth rates drop to lowest since 1987

Summary:
Around 3.85 million babies were born in the United States in 2017, the fewest since 1987. Birth rates among women in their teens and twenties decreased while birth rates among women aged between 40 and 44 increased. Both the birth rate, the number of births per thousand, and fertility, a lifetime average forecast, fell in 2017.



Opinion:
It is easy to see why births are dropping: the younger generation simply can't afford to have kids. People can barely afford things like mortgage payments, cars, health insurance, and student loans, so it's clear to see why people are waiting until their forties to have kids. Another problem is that due to America's declining birth rate and fertility rate, we will likely reach a situation similar to that of Germany or Japan, where the death rate is greater than birth rates. This can have massive long-term consequences, like a smaller working class, which could in turn lower overall GDP growth. Additionally, a topic we discussed in class that also relates to this is entitlement programs. America runs on systems like Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security that rely on the assumption that there are more people who fund these programs than there are people who benefit from these programs. As a result of the shrinking working class and growing number of people eligible for Social Security, taxes will most definitely increase to accommodate the larger older population. Hopefully immigration will continue to increase in order to counteract the decreasing birthrate.

Do you think changes need to be made to entitlement programs in the future?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44151642
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/report004.pdf

Chicago cop paid teen runaways for sex. Out-of-state condoms made it a federal crime, records say

Summary:
After a 61-year old Chicago cop named William Whitley paid a 14-year old girl for sex in 2015, the girl came forward to federal investigators with details about their encounters, including the specific types of condoms the now ex-cop used. While this may seem like an unimportant detail, this piece of evidence was what allowed Whitley to be charged in a federal court instead of a local one because condoms Whitley used to commit the crime came from outside Illinois, where the crime occurred, meaning his “conduct affected interstate commerce,” according to an FBI criminal complaint. Whitley pleaded guilty to one count of sex trafficking a minor on Tuesday.

Opinion:
After learning about cases in class where the government increases its power through the commerce clause, I believe that its a bad thing that Whitley was able to be charged at the federal level. If more stuff like this happens, it's not crazy to think that the federal government will be able to prosecute almost every crime in the country. You have a crime involving a car? The car was made in a different state, so now the crime is Federal rather than local. You used a weapon manufactured in another state to in self-defense? Have fun defending against the federal government in court.

No doubt Whitley is scum. He claimed that he didn't know the girl was 14 and he said that the girl repeatedly told him she was 23, despite the braces on her teeth saying otherwise. Additionally, when they banged, Whitley "left his Chicago Police Department uniform hanging from his bedroom door" and "he even bragged about being a cop." Whitley also had a loaded firearm stashed under his pillow in bed, court records said. However, I personally think that the case itself shows that the federal government can take nearly any case depending on how bad they want it. The fact that condoms were used as the basis for Whitley being charged federally proves that the government can use selective enforcement. In that case, Whitley was better off raw dogging it because he'd probably get in less trouble. Even though this guy is a terrible person, I think this leap to make the crime a federal offense is stupid. If condoms can be used to determine that something is a federal crime, than almost all crimes are federal crimes.

How do you feel about this government extension of power through the commerce clause?
http://www.kansascity.com/news/state/illinois/article211467074.html

Earth just had its 400th straight warmer-than-average month thanks to global warming

Summary:
Federal scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Thursday that last month was Earth's four-hundredth consecutive month with above-average temperatures. Additionally, in April, Carbon dioxide reached its highest ever concentration in the atmosphere at 410 parts per million, which is the highest CO2 concentration in 800,000 years, according to the Scripps Institute of Oceanography.

Opinion:
It's easy to point fingers in the global warming debate. Things like Trump pulling out of the Paris climate deal and China's emission standards are all credited with the rise(and fall) of global temperatures. However, what I personally think is one of the biggest contributors to global warming is our own demand for consumer goods. We can say China is damaging the Earth with their low emission standards, but it's the demand coming from the States for consumer goods that makes the factories in China lower emission standards in order to pump out more goods. One of the best ways to combat global warming would be to start with lowering our own demand for goods or buy products that are known to be produced in a country with strict emission standards.

Is global warming a real concern? If so, what steps should we take to fight it?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/17/global-warming-april-400th-consecutive-warm-month/618484002/?csp=chromepush

In Familiar Cycle, Trump Laments Texas School Shooting and Vows Action

Article link


Nine students and a teacher were killed Friday morning in a shooting at Santa Fe High School in the southeastern Texas city of Santa Fe. It's the 22nd school shooting in the US in 2018. 10 people are dead, a law enforcement official said. Nine of those killed are students and one a teacher. Two law enforcement officers are among those injured. At least 13 people have been hospitalized. Dimitrios Pagourtzis, 17, the suspect, appeared before a judge in Galveston County via video from the county jail. He is being charged with capital murder and aggravated assault of a public servant. He was denied bond and not asked to enter a plea. President Trump addressed the shooting at an unrelated White House event, saying: "This has been going on too long in our country." Trump is once again promising to make sure people who don't deserve to have guns should not possess them. He has said this many times in the past, and let's see if he holds good on his promise this time.

Questions:
1. Will President Trump hold good on his promise about gun control this time?
2.  What is your opinion about the 2nd amendment?
3. What steps should be taken by all schools, to help prevent such incidents in the future?

Quakes Damage Roads as Ash Spews From Hawaii Volcano

Link To Chicago Tribune Source

Summary:

Earthquakes have been damaging both roads and buildings on the Big Island of Hawaii since Wednesday. Ash emissions have streamed from the Kilauea volcano continuously. There have been occasional spouts of ash shooting out of the volcano, causing ash to fall downwind onto several communities. On Tuesday, Ash had spouted as high as 12,000 feet into the air according to local scientists on site. "'We're all safe, and I wish they'd open the park back up, but they have to keep it safe for everybody,' said Ken McGilvray, an area resident. 'We live on a volcano!"" However it has been recommended that more than 1,000 residents be evacuated due to the eruption, many if not most of the residents have elected to stay put, as they have lived there for many years and are used to earthquakes and eruptions such as these. Although so far these events have been quite normal for the volcano, geologists have warned that a larger-scale eruption could occur that would send huge boulders shooting up in the air and landing on near-by communities. Although it is still a possibility, it is still unclear as to whether or not this is likely to occur. 

Opinion:
Ultimately, it is up to the people that have lived in these communities for many years that can decide whether or not they want to evacuate or stay put. The biggest issue currently would most likely be the air quality. All of that ash would create awful air quality, which, in turn, could prove deadly for the lungs. But, in regards to falling boulders, this article does not give out the impression that geologists are very worried about the possible large-scale eruption, otherwise, residents would not be allowed to make the decision to stay at home on the volcano, as this would mean certain death for the entirely of the community.

Questions:
1) If a natural disaster is going to result in catastrophic ends, is it morally ethical to force people out of their homes?
2) Should the residence of the communities on the volcano be concerned about the hypotheses of geologists?
3) What in the constitution could possibly prevent the government from forcing an evacuation of these communities living on the Kilauea volcano?
4) Which interest group would be concerned about this event regarding the changing air-quality in Hawaii's Big Island. 

New York Times: FBI and Justice Dept. investigating Cambridge Analytica

Article Link

Cambridge Analytica was in the eye of a storm recently for having accessed a lot of user data inappropriately from FaceBook and used it to influence voter opinion during the 2016 Presidential Election. This scandal caused damage to FaceBook's reputation around data privacy and security. Mark Zuckerberg had to testify at the US Senate recently to address public concerns about the way the company handles user data. Cambridge Analytica is currently under investigation by the FBI and the Justice Department

Questions:

1. Do you think that we need much more robust data protection and privacy regulations?
2. Do organizations like FaceBook should also be under scrutiny for having failed to protect user data?
3. Do you think other social media sites have also been exposed to such breaches in the past that have never been disclosed to the public?

North Korea warns US as it suspends South Korea talks over military drills

Article link

Given the backdrop of the historic summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-Un on June 12 in Singapore, North Korea today threatened to cancel the summit due to the on-going military exercises between the United States and South Korea.  Given the fact that this summit is an important step towards peace in the Korean peninsula, this might turn out to be a huge setback for the United States and its allies. The US state department is trying to verify what North Korea has said, and is confident that the summit would go on as planned.

Discussion Questions:
1. Do you think that North Korea will cancel the forthcoming summit between President Trump and Kim Jong Un?

2. Given North Korea's sensitivities towards joint military exercises between the US and South Korea in the past, do you think that the United States should have postponed the joint military exercises?

3.  Do you think the United States believes that its business as usual till the time North Korea agrees to complete de-nuclearization?

Repositioning conservative voters into a party that better represents their views

Article Link

                                          Source: Matt Chase, The New York Times

With dwindling support for the Republican Party under President Trump in California, now may be the time to create a new conservative political party that is center-right. Even in a liberal state like California, this formula proved successful under Governor Schwarzenegger and given that fewer voters are identifying with the two major political parties, opportunity knocks. Over the past twenty years, Democratic support has dropped slightly from 47 to 45% of voters while Republican support has dropped from approximately one third to one quarter of voters. Given president Trump's low approval ratings, now seems like the time for conservative political leaders to get behind a new brand that would appeal more to center-right leaning voters.

Discussion Questions:

1. Given that Republicans control all three branches of government right now is this idea too risky?
2. Does the unprecedented political polarization we've seen in the 21st century invite opportunity for a mainstream third party or parties?
3. If this plan were successful, could membership of this new party surpass Republican party affiliation within a decade or two?

A Black Yale Student Was Napping in a Dorm, and a White Student Called the Police

The Yale campus. A graduate student in the university’s African studies program said she was harassed for taking a nap in a common area.

Around 1:30 a.m. of Tuesday, a black graduate student, Lolade Siyonbola, was caught asleep in the common area of her dorm at Yale University by a fellow student. The white student, who is not identified, told her that she had no right to be here and promptly called the police. Ms Siyonbola, posted a 17 minute recording of her encounter with the police who responded to the call, which garnered 600,000 views by Wednesday. After Ms. Siyonbola proved she had a dorm there by unlocking her room with it, the officers were unsatisfied and asked to see her ID to confirm it with the university records frustrating Siyonbola.

In my opinion, the behavior of the white student as well as the police was uncalled for. Even if the white student was suspicious to find someone she did not recognize in the dorms, it did not seem like she even considered the possibility of the stranger being another student. I think that prejudice was the main reason she was so quick to call the police. As for the police, I think that they should have left after Siyonbola proved that she had the key to her dorm room, I mean did they think that she had stolen a key and somehow knew which dorm the key belonged to?

Was the white student right to be suspicious?
Do you think that the police were just doing their job carefully or were they overstepping their bounds?
Do you think that racial tensions are particularly high right now, if so, why might this be?

Article Link

Are population growth and increasing diversity making governing America impossible?

Article link

                                          Source: Alexander Glandien

As the U.S. population has passed the 325 million mark and the nation continues becoming more diverse, this article asks the question of whether the nation is becoming impossible to govern. Polarization is causing elections so close that the Electoral College has produced a winner who did not win the popular vote in two of the past five presidential elections. Popular mistrust of government continues growing with Congress having abysmal approval ratings and the president has been under investigation for the past year. Federalism was supposed to be a system the nation could grow into and help prevent any group from gaining too much power, but political factions have evolved into unprecedented levels of opposition.

Discussion Questions

1. Is the 21st century polarization in politics a sign that parts of the governmental system need to be reconsidered?

2. Is our political structure robust enough to accommodate a diverse group of people approaching 330 million?

3. How can popular trust of government be improved?

CA Surges to Become the World's 5th Largest Economy

Article link

                                          Source: Jim Wilson, The New York Times

California can now boast that if it were a nation, it would have the fifth largest economy of any country in the world. The state economy has grown despite strict environmental regulations, high taxes, and rising minimum wages. Texas boasts high rates of economic growth with a laissez-faire hands off government approach to managing its economy. Other western states have had similar or larger growth rates to California's. Silicon Valley is a huge growth engine with Apple bringing in $229 billion in revenues (more than the state of Wyoming) and Facebook boasting median pay of $240,000. The consequences include increased traffic, a housing affordability crisis, and the fastest rise in homelessness of any U.S. state. Governor Brown took a deficit that Governor Schwarzenegger handed him in 2011 and currently is operating a $6 billion surplus.

1. How is California managing its economic growth? Does the state deserve praise for its successes or criticism for unaddressed concerns?

2. What can California do about the housing affordability, traffic, and homelessness problems?

3. Does the state need to be worried about a recession or is the economy so strong that it can overcome an economic slowdown?

Trump Administration Ends Protected Status for Thousands of Hondurans

Article Link

Summary: The Trump administration on Friday ended a special immigration program for 57,000 Hondurans who have legally lived and worked in the U.S. for two decades, giving them 18 months to leave the country. The announcement is the latest step by the administration to phase out Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which is granted to foreign nationals whose countries are decimated by hurricanes, earthquakes and civil wars. By cutting off TPS for Hondurans, the administration has now ended the program for 98% of the roughly 317,000 immigrants from six countries who had been legally residing in the U.S., some for nearly 30 years.

"Forcing their return to a country that is wracked by endemic violence and poverty will put their lives in danger, separate families, and have devastating effects on communities both in Honduras and the United States," said Sister Patricia McDermott, president of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas.

Analysis: What was intended to be “temporary” clearly was not. Twenty two years is not a temporary or fleeting time in any person's life. I simply do not understand the rush to kick out hard-working people who have been here for so many years. When TPS is ended for a particular group, there should be a special appeals process where an affected individual can make a case for why he or she should stay. This decision is only creating more illegal immigrants willing to take the risk of living in the shadows instead of abandoning their lives here. Families will be broken up and livelihoods will be disrupted for no good reason.

Questions:

What are your thoughts on this topic?

Do you approve of Trump’s decision to terminate TPS?

Should thousands of people who have lived most of their lives in the US get sent back to country they are no longer familiar with?