Facebook
Home Government Page 2

Government

Structure of the U.S. States

Structure of the U.S. States

The Structure of the U.S. States
 
The United States is made up of 50 federated states that share sovereignty with the federal government. Because of this, an individual can be a citizen of both the State and the Federal entity simultaneously. This comes from the United States Constitution, which gives power to the both the state and federal government.
The U.S. state’s power is specifically delegated by the constitution in the 10th amendment of the Bill of Rights which says that any power that is not given to the federal government or is then received by the States or to its people, as long is the power has not been specifically prohibited to the states.
Traditionally, the 10th amendment leaves certain things to be regulated by the U.S. states such as:
• Public health
• Public education
• Transportation
• Water supply
• Electrical grids
• Local law enforcement
• Roads
• Telecommunications
• Intrastate commerce
With certain amendments and interpretations of the Constitution, there has been an increasing trend of the federal government playing a stronger role.
U.S. states have the power to organize their governments however they see fit as long as it is constitutionally sound and it is a republic.  Most states have used a three-branch system that imitates that of the Federal government, with an executive, legislative, and a judiciary branch.
• The executive branch of a U.S. state is led by the governor, who is the chief executive. He leads the Cabinet of the State in states that have a plural executive and has the power to veto legislation.
• The legislative branch of a U.S. state is usually a bicameral legislature (the exception being Nebraska’s unicameral legislature). There is the state Senate, which is the upper house, and the lower house which can be the State Assembly, House of Delegates, or the House of Representatives.
• The organization of the judiciary branch can vary between U.S. states, but their purpose is to still protect an individual’s Constitutional rights through due process. Many states have different levels of courts, from trial level, to the first appellate, and the state Supreme Court. With the exception of Louisiana which uses civil or code law, all U.S. states use common law.
The U.S. started with just the original 13 and since then has expanded to 50 states. Article 4 Section 3 of the Constitution points out that while new states can be admitted into the Union by Congress, the new state cannot be made up from jurisdictions of other states, or the combination of multiple states, whether partially or fully, unless all involved state legislatures and Congress agree to it. However, most states have been incorporated after being a territory organized under Article 4 section 3’s Territorial Clause.

French Lawmakers Approve Same-Sex Marriage Bill

French Lawmakers Approve Same-Sex Marriage Bill


Same-sex marriage in France is now one step closer to legality, as lawmakers in the lower house of parliament approved a bill that extends the right to adopt and marry to same-sex couples.


The initiative secured approval in the National Assembly by a vote of 329 to 229 and 10 abstains. Before it can be placed into law, the bill must still go before the Senate; if passed, it would formally mark the most critical advancement for French gay rights advocates in more than 10 years.


France is not the only nation debating the polarizing issue of gay marriage, as UK lawmakers also took a big step last week toward legalizing the measure when they appropriated the second reading of a bill in the House of Commons.


While a significant number of Parliament members backed the legislation, which is backed by Prime Minister David Cameron, the push has prompted widespread controversy and rebellion within Cameron’s conservative party. The bill in the United Kingdom must go through several more stages before it can officially be made into a law. The Church of England, and other religious institutions, are among the organizations vehemently opposed to UK legislation.


Extending the right to adopt and marry to homosexual couples in France was one of President Hollande’s electoral pledges during his campaign efforts last year.


France’s National Assembly, which is dominated by Hollande’s Socialist Party, approved the most critical article of law with an overwhelming majority earlier this month. The left, which also controls the majority of the Senate, faces stiff opposition from social conservatives and the Roman Catholic Church as huge numbers routinely turn out for protest marches in the nation’s capital of Paris.
The archbishop of Paris, Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois, claims that offering marriage and adoption to same-sex couples would be viewed as a transformation of marriage that would impact everyone. The bishop went onto say that failing to recognize gender difference within the union of marriage would be a deceit that would damage the foundations of society and lead to widespread acts of discrimination.


That said, the legislation has secured wide backing from gay rights advocates, including from the French, gay, lesbian and transgender organization Inter-LGBT who claims that legislation would be a significant step forward for France in terms of equality of rights.


A law legalizing civil unions in France was passed in 1999 under a previous Socialist government. Known in the nation as PACS, the civil union agreement may be entered into by straight or homosexual couples and offers many but not all of the rights of a traditional marriage.
 

Jobless Benefits May be Cut by 10%

Jobless Benefits May be Cut by 10%

 

Forced federal budget cuts initiated by Congress could cost the jobless up to 10% in their unemployment benefits. This proposal would take place March 1st if the budget proposal passes.
 
Aside from unemployment benefits, many other safety net programs, including Medicaid and food stamps, are protected from the $85 billion in forced spending cuts. 
 
The unemployment benefits vulnerable to the budget cuts are those provided by the federal government. These federal benefits kick in when your state benefits, which last up to a maximum of 26 weeks, are exhausted. Eligible workers currently can collect these federal benefits for up to 47 weeks. Federal unemployment benefits, which average roughly $300 a week, act as an emergency measure. Congress has been offering said benefits since 2008 as a stop-gap to protect the millions of Americans struggling to find new employment in a difficult economy.
 
The forced spending cuts are set to take effect next month to trim the program’s funding. If the budget goes through, recipients of unemployment benefits could lose an average of nearly $400 through the end of the fiscal year, which ends on September 30th. 
State benefits would not be impacted by the proposed budget cut. 
 
An estimated 3.8 million Americans are receiving federal unemployment benefits. The reduction in individual employment benefits will vary based on where the individual lives. This variance arises because states are scrambling to adjust their unemployment system if Congress fails to avoid these cuts. The longer a state waits; the next unemployment check a person receives could be very small. 
A number of the proposed federal cuts will not be felt immediately, but the reduction of unemployment benefits will surely ripple through the economy at a fairly rapid pace. 
 
The proposed budget cuts would also slash the resources an unemployed person can utilize at job centers, as funding aimed at assisting disabled workers, disadvantaged youth and low-skilled adult workers is set to be sliced. Veterans’ transition assistance programs, which aid military personnel locate jobs when they return from deployment, would also be negatively affected if the proposal goes through. 
 
Moreover, states will also lose a portion of their funding to administer the unemployment benefit program, which could result in slower processing claims and widespread staff layoffs.  
 

Throng of Hundreds of Thousands March in Puerto Rico against Gay Rights

Throng of Hundreds of Thousands March in Puerto Rico against Gay Rights

 

Roughly 200,000 religious Christians marched to voice their anti-gay sentiment in Puerto Rico on Monday afternoon. The march is considered the largest anti-gay demonstration in the commonwealth’s history.
 
Forming around San Juan’s Capitol building, hundreds of thousands religious Puerto Ricans halted traffic while defending the traditional heterosexual marriage concept. Traffic was halted for miles as the throng protested against the premise of granting gay couple’s legal rights. 
 
The mass demonstration, which took over three weeks to organize, attracted protested from all sects of the Christian religion who vehemently oppose same-sex marriage. And while many of these religious individuals simply rallied against the premise of same-sex marriage, a decent percentage were openly opposed to granting any rights to homosexual couples, including protections against violence. 
 
The protest comes in light of efforts by some Puerto Rican lawmakers who are seeking to pass an amendment to the nation’s Domestic Violence Act 54, which would provide protection rights for all couples, gay or straight. 
 
Puerto Rican Senator Luis Vega Ramos claims that the measure is essential because it provides justice and equal access to protection from intimidation, assault or domestic violence. However, in Puerto Rico, massive opposition to the movement could prevent homosexual couples from receiving any sort of protection against acts of violence.
 
The throng of protestors, who blasted gospel music and brandished large posters and signs, alleged that the proposed law would discriminate against the church. 
 
“We are worried that the legislation will discriminate against the church, and we are concerned that public education will be used to damage our children because it presents them with behaviors that their parents don’t support,” said Pastor Cesar Muniz, a spokesman for the nation’s religious group Puerto Rico for the Family. 
 
Monday’s protest marks the largest anti-gathering rally in the history of Puerto Rico. The rally deeply offended members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, as many LGBT members held small counters protests that, unfortunately, went unnoticed. 
 
A number of Puerto Rican legislators have expressed opposition to same-sex marriages while still fighting for violence protections for gay couples. The American commonwealth remains largely divided over the issue, especially among the religious communities. 
 
 

 

German Chancellor Gives-in to Conservatives on the Issue of Gay Rights

German Chancellor Gives-in to Conservatives on the Issue of Gay Rights

 

German chancellor Angela Merkel has decided not to endorse an expansion of gay rights, even as many members of her Christian Democratic party are willing to embrace change. 
 
The chancellor is under pressure to take a stand after the nation’s high court ruled that same-sex couples should be legally permitted to adopt their partner’s adopted children; prior to this ruling, same-sex couples could only adopt their partner’s biological children. The ruling provided to momentum to some in Merkel’s party to introduce new laws that would equalize tax rights for gay couples; however, social conservatives among the Christian Democratic Party halted such efforts. 
 
That said, key members of Merkel’s Christian Democratic Party are pondering a U-turn in policy with regard to policy on gay couples after the court ordered the government to grant them extensive adoption rights. 
 
The nation’s constitutional court rules that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt a child who is already adopted by their partner and that the current ban on gay adoption was unconstitutional because it debased the principle of equal treatment for all. 
Germany’s court gave the German government until July of 2014 to implement the ruling into law. “We will implement the constitutional court’s ruling into law, but at the same time, we will evaluate whether tax amendments are necessary,” said the leader of the party’s parliamentary group. 
 
Last December, the Christian Democratic Party issued a proposal to provide same-sex couples with the same tax perks as heterosexual couples after fervent debate. The apparent change of heart was criticized by the opposing Social Democrats, who accused the Christian Democratic Party of being forced by the court to embrace social change. 
 
The Christian Democratic Party has sought to bolster its urban appeal ahead of the election in September by giving more defined roles to ethnic minorities and women. 
Historically a staunch supporter of traditional family values, the Christian Democratic Party also faced pressure from within to lure homosexual voters; however, such an initiative seemed too ambitious for many at Congress last December. 
 
In Germany, homosexual couples can form civil partnerships but are not allowed to wed. Gay activists and opposition parties accuse Chancellor Merkel’s center-right government of avoiding the issue of gay rights. Civil partnerships in Germany do not provide the same tax privileges awarded to married couples. 
 

Michigan Court Delays Decision on Gay Marriage Ban

Michigan Court Delays Decision on Gay Marriage Ban

 

A federal judge decided on Thursday that he will wait for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on two landmark gay marriage cases before deciding on whether Michigan’s ban on gay marriage is constitutional. 
 
“I think we must wait,” said U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman in a hearing brought by two women who are requesting joint custody of their three children. “I choose not to make a decision until I know what the Supreme Court is going to do.” 
 
The delay disappointed Jayne Rowse and April DeBoer of Hazel Park who were involved in a custody case that prompted the hearing to question the gay marriage ban that Michigan voters approved in the 2004 election.
 
“We were hopeful that Judge Friedman would make a decision today, but it was cautious optimism,” DeBoer said. “We are still confident that he will rule in favor of us, and we will just have to wait until the end of June to see if that is what he is going to do.”
 
Rowse expressed shock when Friedman said the Supreme Court would not consider his opinion when deciding one of the country’s most widely debated social issues. “I believe his opinion would have carried significant weight,” said Rowse after the hearing. 
 
Friedman; however did acknowledge that the lawyers representing the women presented a “compelling case” in claiming they were denied equal protection rights. That said Friedman also stated that the state attorney’s office argued the law efficiently as they relied on precedents that could be upheld or overturned by the United States Supreme Court. 
 
Friedman expects to be ready to rule on the state law in late June. “Hopefully the U.S. Supreme Court will provide us with some direction, and I believe they will,” Friedman opined. 
 
The delay came after an hour of arguments from assistant attorney general, Joseph Potchen who represented the state and Carole Stanyar, who defended the women. Potchen began his statement by complimenting the couple on their parenting skills, but then shifted course by saying the women’s right were not violated based on the Constitution. “There is no right to marry someone of the same sex; it is our position that the public of Michigan should decide this issue, and not the federal court system,” Potchen stated. 
 
Potchen believes that social policy decisions such as same-sex marriage are more accepted if they come from the will of the general public rather than the courts. Staynar countered this claim by saying marriage is a fundamental right and cannot be infringed upon, even with a vote from the public. “Fundamental rights should not be subjected to popular votes,” she claimed. “This is the prominent civil rights issue of our generation; this is the last remaining group in American society that is denied equal protection under the law.”
 
Currently, 37 states in the U.S. have constitutional provisions or laws defining marriage as only taking place between one woman and one man. 
 
 
Source: Associated Press

Hillary Clinton Announces Her Support of Same Sex Marriage

President Obama Re-Elected as US President

President Obama Re-Elected as US President


It was late on November 6, 2012, but President Obama clinched the re-election in an election some thought wouldn’t be decided for days.  The results were close as more and more people stood in lines at the polls, but it was clear President Obama was showing a strong lead going into the evening.  


President Obama initially won Michigan and New Hampshire, both states that were strongly divided between the two candidates.  The results in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin soon showed the Obama clinched two more swing states, and with the electoral votes from California, President Obama only had to win in Ohio.  


The results for Ohio were announced late Tuesday night and bumped up President Obama’s electoral votes to 275.  By Wednesday morning, President Obama had secured 303 electoral votes, and Governor Romney had secured 206 electoral votes.  Only Florida remains undecided, but President Obama showed a slight lead in the state’s majority vote.  If Obama wins Florida, the final electoral vote count will give President Obama a total of 332 electoral votes.  


The national popular vote remained extremely close, but President Obama also showed a slight lead in the popular vote.  


With President Obama’s victory, three US presidents in a row have been elected to a second term.  


During President Obama’s victory speech, he acknowledged Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for their strong campaign.  He praised the United States and voters for their support, but he made a clear statement that the work required by citizens to improve the country does not end with the election.


President Obama ended the speech on a powerful note and gave his ideal of the United States.  He blessed the United States and praised the country as a place where everyone has an equal opportunity if they work hard, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, or who they love.  


Following the election, President Obama now faces budgetary issues in the United States and must work with Congress to set up a budget to avoid another fiscal cliff.

Residents Should Use Safety as Winter Storm Athena Nears

Residents Should Use Safety as Winter Storm Athena Nears


As winter storm Athena gets close to the Northeast states—especially areas affected by Hurricane Sandy—the Fire Administration (USFA) urges residents to take safety precautions while staying warm in order to avoid fires.  


Winter storm Athena is impacting mid-Atlantic and Northeast states at this moment, and the conditions are expected to continue through the night.  


The USFA suggests the following steps to prevent fires during the winter storm:


•    contact the fire department right away if you smell natural gas and exit the building right away
•    do not use an oven range to heat your home
•    keep anything at least three feet away from a space heater
•    make sure your space heaters have a “tip switch”
•    only use fuel the heater calls for
•    do not fill up a space heater if it’s still hot or still turned on
•    put a glass or metal screen in front of your fireplace to catch sparks
•    make sure your wood stove is working properly and has enough ventilation
•    do not put space heaters on carpets or rugs
•    open the damper for the fireplace before you light a fire
•    never leave a space heater on when you sleep


The USFA recommends the following to prevent CO poisoning during the winter storm:


•    do not run a gasoline generator in your home
•    keep the portable generator as far away from your home and your neighbor’s home as possible
•    don’t use a portable propane heater indoors unless the heater is designed for inside use
•    do not use gas or electric stoves to provide heat for your home
•    ask if a space heater is safety-certified before you purchase one


Source: U.S. Fire Administration
 

McCarthyism

McCarthyism

McCarthyism before McCarthy
“McCarthyism” is a term that was coined by a cartoon by Herbert Block featured in the Washington Post on March, 29, 1950. It was used to describe the campaigned carried out by Joseph R. McCarthy, who at the time was a Republican Senator of Wisconsin. 
While McCarthyism described the period which Joseph McCarthy campaigned, there were preexisting attitudes from events over 30 years prior that created what is now known as the McCarthy era.
The start of McCarthyism and the McCarthy era can be earliest tracked from the 1910’s. After World War I, there was an extreme sense of patriotism in American society. From here came the birth of the First Red Scare from 1919 to 1920.
There was a nationwide fear of dissent from the government, particularly from communists, anarchists, and socialists. During this time, many civil liberties were ignored, and innocent people were jailed for expressing their dissent. 
Americans were very concerned about the possibility of communists infiltrating the United States, where they could potentially subvert labor unions, schools, and other institutions. There was particular concern with the labor unions, as two of the largest unions had strong objections to WWI and had even held strikes for various reasons. These strikes were often associated to “Reds,” demonizing many of the strikes after as crimes against society to conspire against the government and establish communism.
In the aftermath of World War II and the deconstruction of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Russia was quickly becoming a powerful and influential force on the global stage. Russia was extending communist influence over many parts of Eastern Europe and China was at this point on the verge of becoming a communist state. The Korean War also demonstrated the fight against Communists, as the United States, South Korea, and the U.N. fought against North Korean and Chinese communists.
Both Government and private agencies began to investigate, hoping to find evidence of this subversive activity. In the 1930’s the House Committee on Un-American Activities was formed, and was revived throughout the 1940’s and 1950’s.
In 1950, Joseph R. McCarthy was a young Senator who was hoping to seek political gain. He created an effective and well publicized, but morally questionable campaign using what is now known as McCarthyism, which relentlessly sought to expose Communists in the United States. His McCarthyism-filled Anticommunist campaign, which continued till 1953, attempted to identify and eliminate communists as well as “fellow travelers” in the government. 
In the same year, McCarthy claimed he had a list of 205 names of individuals who were Communists working within the State Department, which he never released. Many Congress members approved of his questionable ethics due to the success he received from them. It was the use of these heavy-handed tactics that Herbert Block coined McCarthyism in his cartoon, just weeks after the announcement of this list.
The Senator’s use of McCarthyism was initially endorsed by many voters and politicians, but ultimately McCarthy destroyed his reputation when he attacked the U.S. army by accusing them of promoting communists. He submitted evidence that was found to be fraudulent and after attempting to wrongly discredit one of the attorneys hired by the U.S. Army, his McCarthyism was quickly exposed his popularity effectively vanished, followed by weakened attitudes of McCarthyism.
123...7Page 2 of 7
Disclaimer: There is no confidential attorney-client relationship formed by using Laws.com website and information provided on this site is not legal advice. For legal advice, please contact your attorney. Attorneys listed on this website are not referred or endorsed by this website. By using Laws.com you agree to Laws.com Terms Of Use.
Facebook
©