Elections Test Question

In order to be elected in America, one must show hard work and perseverance. Each candidate is working for a common goal, to take office and help better our country in the way that they see fit. It is these different philosophies on topics such as health care, education, and the economy that make elections what they are. Candidates with different stands on topics look to insure voters that their way is the best through media and conventions. Each candidate has a Political Actions Committee, a private group that works to help elect a candidate and advance the outcome of an election. The people in this group live in "the bubble" and spend months of their lives helping their candidate. A good PAC can really help the outcome of an election and is often the difference between gaining office or not. It is difficult enough to win an election, but without an effective PAC, it is hard to get a candidate’s name and ideas out to the public.

A successful candidate needs proper funding in order to have a chance come election time. Hard money is essential for media advertising and fundraising for the campaign trail. Hard money is money directly received by a candidate that is put in use to help the campaign. On the other hand, soft money is huge donations from corporations, labor unions, or individuals, and it is now illegal. It gave the democrats an unfair advantage so it was banned permanently. Donations are allowed to be made through mail, but cannot exceed specified limits. Having enough money to execute a long and strenuous campaign is vital to having a successful outcome.

Another factor that goes into elections is media influence. We all see hundreds of commercials for candidates around election time and wonder who the best choice is. This is when some elections become anti-democratic. Not every candidate has the same chance, and we saw in the video, “Can Mr. Smith make it to Washington?” that Jeff Smith never stood a chance because he was running against a candidate with a famous, well known name and family. A true Democracy should come down to who the best candidate truly is, and not how popular his or her name is. Media bias is the act of people in the media to select which events and new stories are covered, and how they are reported. They either don’t mention, or add fake statements to help get their own beliefs across rather than fairly broadcasting the news. Media bias can change the outcome of an election. Candidates without the support of the media often don’t stand a chance.

Political Parties are political organizations that strive to maintain power within the government. Most well known, are the republican and democratic parties. Democrats are more liberal while Republicans are conservative when it comes to governmental affairs. These groups compete to gain office, but there is also competition within the groups. Only one candidate from each party makes it out of the primary, so they must compete with each other, without making their own party look bad.

The last issue that plays a huge role in elections in America is voter turnout, the number of people that show up to the polls on election days to cast their vote. There are two ways to look at this issue. One, low voter turnout is a bad thing because it does not properly represent the entire country in a Democracy. Two, low voter turnout is a good thing, because the people that are well informed are the only ones voting which means that the right candidate will most likely be chosen. There are pros and cons to each argument, but one thing is for certain, making voting mandatory will not better the situation. This is when the government crosses the line and is no longer truly democratic.

Civil Liberties Test

When freedoms and protections collide, changes are sought out by the country. These protections restore man's freedoms after a violation. People are given countless freedoms, but at times, these freedoms are abused. When they are abused, people need protections that can help them in court. Common protections that are activated most often are freedom of speech, search and seizure, self incrimination, and rights in the court of law. All of these being touchy subjects, when present, receive a lot of press, like all the cases we researched in class. The amendments to the constitution provide our country with more organization and prevent citizens from being unfairly treated. However, these freedoms with surely collide with protections and cause problems in and out of the court room.
Freedom of speech is often misunderstood. There are some light guidelines to what people can and cannot say. For example, this first amendment was evident in the Bethel v. Fraser case, where a school found a student guilty of violating his freedom of speech rights by inappropriately nominating a fellow classmate. He was found guilty because the school had the right to prohibit vulgar and offensive language, and the student was suspended. This clearly shows a conflict between freedoms and protections, because the student thought that he had the right to say whatever he wanted to, but was obviously not protected by the first amendment. The case went to court where the school was found innocent of violating the first. Slight problems like this are bound to happen, and in the long run will better our nation.
The fourth amendment of the constitution is the indirection of unreasonable search and seizures, and that a search warrant is needed to search for belongings. The New Jersey v. T.L.O. case had a strong relation to this fourth amendment. A fourteen year old girl was accused of smoking in the school bathroom, so the school administration searched her purse, but found marijuana and other drug paraphernaria as well. Now, did the search violate the fourth amendment? The answer is no, because reasonable suspicion and probable cause exist in schools. The school had enough backing them up to go in and search the girls purse. The fact that they found the marijuana and other drug items, falls under the plain view clause where if something dangerous is seen, an action must take place to rid of the illegal substance. Another case where search and seizure was prominent is the Mapp v. Ohio case. Dolree Mapp was convicted of possessing inappropriate materials after an admittedly illegal police search of her home. She appealed her conviction, but was not successful because all evidence obtained by search and seizures in violation of the constitution is inadmissable in a state court. Even though they did not enter her house expecting to find obscene materials, once they were in plain view, they had the right to confiscate the items and arrest her. Both of these cases show the problem between search and seizures, and what people think they have as their freedoms. Many times, people think that they have more freedoms than they do, and this leads to conflicts between freedoms and protections.
The sixth amendment is the right to a fair and speedy trial. Everyone has the right to an equal chance in the court of law, criminal or not. This amendment was violated in the Miranda v. Arizona case. In this case, a man was questioned by police for rape and kidnapping, but was never given his right to an attorney or told that anything he said could be held against him in the court of law. The police violated everyones right to a fair trial, because without an attorney, Miranda did not stand a chance in court. Because of this, Miranda did not go to jail, because he self incriminated himself. This collision between freedoms and protections is very important, because this criminal, who kidnapped and raped a young girl, got away with it because of the police officer's mistake. Freedoms and protections coexist, but in cases like this the two collided and caused a bad outcome.