“FLORIDA RESTORES FELONS' VOTING RIGHTS”

The Economist Article

The Washington Post Article

Many convicted felons who have completed their sentence or parole, with the exception of murder and/ or sex offenders. They have previously received a lifetime voting ban or petition Florida to get their voting rights back at the discretion of a committee, with the exception of murderers and sex offenders, who must still petition to the committee. More than 60% of the Florida population voted to pass Amendment 4 on November 6th to their state constitution that allowed convicted felons out of prison the right to vote. Before this law passed, more than 1.5 million Floridians were denied the right to vote as part of one of only four states (the others being Iowa, Kentucky, and Virginia) that denied it. The Amendment reads that the disqualification from voting for persons with felony convictions “shall terminate and voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence including parole or probation.” I believe this is a right decision as these felons have already served their time and paid their dues to the justice system, now it is their time to get their rights back, particularly voting. It shows that there are still forms of disenfranchisement in the US and there is still work to be done in terms of civil rights in our nation and around the world, although parts of Europe and Asia have opened up voting to felons.

QUESTIONS:

1. Do you believe convicted felons should have a right to vote?
2. Would more felons voting move Florida (a swing state) into more of a Republican or Democratic State?
3. How would this law affect Florida’s and maybe even America’s future political landscape?

CNN Suing President Trump for Banning News Correspondent Jim Acosta

CNBC Article

CNN Official Complaint

Press Conference Video

Trump's Advertisement on Immigration

CNN correspondent Jim Acosta was barred from attending future White House press conferences after he and President Trump had a heated exchange on Wednesday. Acosta had asked a question about the deployment of US troops sent to stop migrants coming into the southern US border and then followed with another question about how Trump "demonized" immigrants in an advertisement released on October 31st supporting the GOP. Trump avoided both questions and when a White House Intern attempted to take the microphone from Acosta, he resisted. According to a statement released by CNN, the White House rescinded Acosta's press pass due to "retaliation for his challenging questions". Today, CNN and Acosta are suing many White House officials, among them President Trump and Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee, for violating the 1st and 5th Amendments. As stated in a 60 Minutes Interview, Trump restricts liberal news outlets in order to "discredit [them] all and demean [them] all so when [they] write negative stories about [Trump] no one will believe [them]", however, the outcome of this lawsuit will determine if it this restrictive action can continue.

Questions:

1. Were the President's actions unconstitutional?

2. In whose favor will the lawsuit turn out? Why?

3. What can other news outlets do in order to resist the actions of the White House?

Increase the House of Reps from 435 to 593?

Article link

                                               Source: New York Times

The House of Representatives grew consistently from 65 members in 1789 up to 435 in 1911. Now nearly 108 years later we are still stuck at 435 members, which represent an average of 750,000 Americans compared to the 200,000 about a century ago. Increasing the membership of the House of Representatives to 593 would get the U.S. more in line with modern democracies and give our elected officials more manageable sized constituencies. It would cost more in terms of tax dollars, but if money were spent more efficiently the problem could be solved. One potential benefit of this change would be fewer problems with the electoral college producing results different from the popular vote.

Discussion Questions
1. Is it time to increase the size of our House of Representatives?
2. Would this proposed change solve more problems than it creates?
3. What if any impact might this have on polarization?
4. Would Democrats or Republicans be more likely to approve this plan?
5. Do you see this proposal leading to more gerrymandering or a way to resolve past gerrymanders?

China is not buying North Dakota Soy Beans

Summary: Farmers in Cass County, North Dakota have prospered for decades by growing and selling soybeans, most of which are shipped across the Pacific Ocean to consumers in China. However this year, sales have declined by nearly 94% as a result of tariffs from the ongoing trade war between the US and China. Trump claims that these tariffs will help revive the American steel and auto industry, however, it coming at a high cost for other industries such as agriculture which rely heavily on foreign markets. The North Dakota soybean industry was originally created by Chinese demand for the beans and has rapidly continued to grow rapidly for the past few years. Last year, there were 6.4 million acres of soybeans in the state, as compared to the 450,000 acres in the mid 1990s. As the state’s production of soybeans increase, companies have invested millions on machinery and infrastructure. In addition, public health officials in North Dakota are concerned about the impact of falling prices, which has led to a recent rise of suicides, particularly among young farmers with high levels of debt. Currently, the US is losing potential profit margins to other countries that grow their own soybeans, such as Canada, who are shipping their soybeans to China at higher prices and then buying American beans at lower prices to meet domestic demand. Discussion Questions: 1. Is the Trade War ultimately good for the US? 2. Has Trump's tariffs been effective as a "tool" to force changes in America's economic relationship with China? 3. Is it right to promote one industry at the cost of another? 4. How has foreign competition played a role in the decline of the North Dakota soybean industry? Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/05/business/soybeans-farmers-trade-war.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Sessions Out. Marijuana Stocks Up.

 Following the 2018 midterm election, 33 states have legalized medical marijuana, and 10 have legalized recreational marijuana — including California. According to the Pew Research Center, 62% of Americans support the legalization, which has grown from 30% in 2010. Although the American public seems more supportive of medical and recreational marijuana, the federal government regulates marijuana like other controlled substances under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970. Under this act, possession, cultivation, or distribution is illegal, and there are controversial mandatory minimums. In the Supreme Court case Gonzales v. Raich (2005), the court ruled that the federal government has the constitutional authority to prohibit marijuana for all purposes. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was a staunch opponent of marijuana usage and stated, “Good people don’t smoke marijuana.” Session reversed Obama’s policy of shortening prisoning sentences of federal inmates who violated the Controlled Substance Act. Matthew Whitaker, the new attorney general, doesn’t have an anti-marijuana history, unlike his predecessor. Marijuana company stocks like Tilray(up 30%), Aurora Cannabis(up 9%), and Alternate Harvest Marijuana all made gains on the stock market.   

Discussions Questions

1. Should the federal government or state government regulate controlled substances?
2. Are mandatory minimums useful in preventing drug offenses?
3. How should the federal government regulate the booming marijuana market?
4. How tough should the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 be enforced by the federal government?

Sources

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/18/trumps-pick-for-attorney-general-good-people-dont-smoke-marijuana/?utm_term=.d1d57775aad7

https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/8/18075358/jeff-sessions-resgignation-marijuana-legalization-drug-policy-politics-attorney-general

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/

Sessions Forced to Resign Following Midterms

Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions

Jeff Sessions was forced out of his position as Attorney General shortly after the midterm elections. Announced via Twitter, President Trump named former Iowa attorney general Matthew Whitaker, who is infamous for opposing Mueller's Russian investigation, as the acting Attorney General. Session's dismissal marks the culmination of the longstanding tension between Trump and Sessions following the early Trump supporter's recuse from the Russian Investigation despite Session's actions of rolling back numerous Obama-era policies as well as enforcement of Trump's hard stances on immigration and crime/prosecution. Following news of Whitaker's appointment, Democrats have demanded for Mueller's investigation to continue without interference as well as for Whitaker's recuse from the investigation. On the other hand, while Republican leadership has praised Sessions for his work, they have not concerned themselves with the future of Mueller's Russian investigation. 

Sessions' Replacement: Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker

Personally, I believe that Trump's actions are unjustifiable in that he tries to obstruct justice and avoid a fair investigation. While Trump may have wanted to fire Sessions a long time ago, I think he might have held it off to not interfere and prevent Republicans from losing the midterms. However, with the newly Democrat-controlled House, I don't think this Russian investigation would be that easy to end, and even if it ends, the Democrats would continue to push for justice through the form of more investigations.

Discussion Questions

1. Do you think Trump's decision to and reasoning behind firing Sessions is justifiable?
2. Why do you think President Trump decided to fire Sessions right after the midterms rather than before the midterms?
3. How will President Trump's actions change with the Democrats now controlling the House, or would he stay the same? 
4. What actions do you think the new Democrat-controlled House will take against the President and such actions?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/sessions-resign/index.html

http://time.com/5448197/jeff-sessions-resigns/

http://time.com/5448238/jeff-sessions-fired-congress-reaction/

Celebrities In Politics

November 6th is an important day for the nation, with many expecting to see a blue wave sweep across Congress. Ever since the election of Donald Trump in 2016, Democrats have been campaigning and rallying for support of Democratic candidates and policies in order for this transition to occur. In recent years, politics has also seeped into political culture, with social media influencers and celebrities voicing their beliefs and support. In a time where these figures have such a strong influence over their fanbase, many believe that they can make a difference in encouraging people to vote, and who to vote for. Many have been following Kanye West’s very public endorsement of Donald Trump, which has resulted in much backlash and rejection from the African American community and many others. In fact, Beyonce, who used to be close friends with Kanye, is said to have severed ties with him over this situation. Today, Beyonce came out in support for Beto O’Rourke, the Texas Democratic Senate candidate, to her 119.9 million instagram followers.  Lebron James also wore a Beto hat in support of the candidate last week, attracting lots of attention. In a situation as close as the Beto/Cruz race, the endorsement of these politicians by influential pop-culture figures may just give one the upper hand, pushing them across the finish line. Not only do these posts support a certain candidate, but they encourage voting in general, promoting our society to be more proactive and increase voter turnout. Even Taylor Swift, who has shied away from talking about politics in the past, released a statement encouraging people to “vote based on who most closely represents your values.” All of this activity has stirred much controversy about how celebrities can use their platforms to affect the outcomes of politics.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/06/entertainment/beyonce-beto-o-rourke/index.html

http://time.com/5418427/taylor-swift-politics/ 

Discussion Questions:

1. Do media influencers and celebrities have enough power to sway the political climate? If yes, should they have this power?
2. Should pop culture figures voice their political opinions? Or is it better to keep the two separate?
3. How big of an impact do you think social media has had on revolutionizing political campaigns, and how might celebrities take this impact to the next level?
4. To what extent do debacles like Trump and Kanye's friendship detract from the seriousness of politics?