Difference in the American Political System - Personal Statement Example

American National Government and 2. I believe that every adult person can make a small difference in the American political system. This can be done by using the vote that citizens have, to choose politicians in local and national elections. Some individuals can make a big difference, and an example of this is President Obama who has introduced an important health care reform and has changed the way that people view the Presidency, since he is not a white person like all the previous presidents were. 3 I believe in environmentalism and I would be prepared to work for improvements in the way that the United States sources and uses its energy. 4 I think the school prayer issue is mainly a constitutional one. There is a moral dimension to prayer, but this can be easily fulfilled in each family home, or in churches, mosques, synagogues and temples. Everyone is free to have whatever kind of prayers they want to have, or no prayers at all, if that is their wish, in these places. It is very important that everyone should be free to worship in the way that they want to. However, in the school situation, it is not appropriate for one religion to decide what kind of religious practice is delivered to all the children. In state schools I think it is better to have teaching about different religions, but to leave acts of worship, and acts of prayer, out of the curriculum. It is not proper for Muslim children to be forced to listen to or participate in Christian prayers, or for Christian Children to pray to Hindu gods, since there may be strong views against this practice in each family. 5 History has shown that rebellion and non-rebellion were both justifiable actions, since Canada chose to remain as a colony for much longer, while and the United States chose not to, and both solutions were acceptable and effective in the end. The issue of taxes was important at that time, because it meant that the colonists had to give up too much of their money and products. It was very difficult to make a living in the new country. If I had been there, I would probably have sided with the radicals, because I believe people should try to look after themselves and their family and immediate community first of all, and then their region, their country, and last of all long distance commitments. When resources are scarce, it makes no sense to let Britain become richer while the colonists starve. This was a special situation, when a new country was being born, and this makes it acceptable to rise up against the British, in my opinion. The colonial elite wanted to maintain their privilege, and I think that all of the colonists, including the poor workers, deserved a chance to build up a decent life for themselves. 6 I think that a country has two choices: it can be a unified country with a single set of laws for all the people, which cannot be altered by specific groups, or it can be a federal country, with separate units which are free to make changes to the laws, depending on their own priorities. Since the United States is now, and has always been, a federal type of country, then I think it is absolutely fine for different states to have different rules such as jail terms and education spending priorities. States only have a finite amount of money, and people vote for parties who decide how this money should be used. If one state has more hospitals and better health care, while another has more colleges and better education provision, then that is a consequence of these choices. Within each state, there is a requirement to operate the chosen system in a way which is fair. It is not appropriate to compare, for example, access to particular health services in one state with those in another, because there is no requirement to make these things exactly the same. The disparities are part of the freedom that states have to choose. The issue of jail terms may be more complex than it looks on the surface, so that for example a state with large rural communities may have less crime, and less serious crime, than a state with large cities. I think it is right and proper for the federal government to set guidelines and limits, but for the states to be free to vary their laws and sentencing within these parameters. 7 I am not sure about my parents’ party identification and we do not talk about politics within the family. I think this has made me more curious about politics, and it has encouraged me to find out about the ideas that lie behind the main political parties in the United States. Sometimes I do not see very much difference between the Democrats and Republicans, but on other issues, like taxation, there obviously two sides to be taken up. In a way I think it is good that my parents do not impose a political view on me, because it allows me to weigh up the alternatives and make my own choices, including choices outside the two main parties. 8 I do not watch very much television. I prefer video games where I can influence what I am seeing. I estimate that I watch perhaps 10 hours per week of television. Television is influential because it brings my attention to particular issues that are in the news, or some social problems which are discussed in talk shows and dramas. I would not miss television if it was switched off for a month, because I would switch over to the internet. 9 I think everyone should be held to the same standards. Politicians are normal citizens like everyone else. The problem with politicians and standards is only the fact that their mistakes are more public, and people react to them more strongly than to the mistakes of individual people who are not on television or in public meetings. I already have quite high standards for my own behavior, and I think it is ok for me to expect the same behavior from politicians. It is important that politicians should be allowed to make mistakes, apologise, and then get on with their work again, in the same way that ordinary people do. They are only human. Most political scandals about adultery, or speeding, or getting drunk at a party are things that are very common in society, and it would be hypocritical to expect politicians to be immune from these mistakes. There are some areas, however, where politicians should held to extremely high standards, for example in dealing with public money and in making profits from their public position. In this area they should be treated like banking personnel and police: expected to show exemplary conduct. These standards are the same for all citizens, but most people do not have the occasion to be involved in them. 10 I believe that Christians should be involved in elections, and in fact, that everyone should be involved in elections. In a democracy every citizen should be free to stand as a candidate and campaign for their chosen politician. I think also it is impossible to prevent people revealing what their moral and religious beliefs are, since this is part of their world view and influences how they make decisions. 11 The NRA offers a magazine subscription as part of the membership signing up process. There are meetings and events that members can attend, and there are member only parts of the website with a lot of further information in videos and updates. The organization also has many links which offer discounts on goods and services like insurance, hotel bookings, mortgage and real estate services, hearing aids, prescriptions and some financial services. 12 As a member of Congress my duty is to represent the people who have voted for me to be there. In most cases I would therefore vote in the way that best represents the needs of these people. There is also, however, a need to consider the views of the party of which I am a member, and my own convictions. Sometimes these three dimensions of, district, party and personal conviction are in conflict and a judgement has to be made. I think everyone must deal with this in their own way, and in most cases I would go with the solution that covers two out of the three interests. On maybe one or two issues I might abstain from the vote if I felt my own personal convictions were too strong, but this is an exception only to be used maybe a couple of times in a lifetime, since politicians are paid precisely to make these kind of judgement calls on behalf of others. 13 There is a difference between telling a lie and not revealing the truth. I think Christian politicians, and in fact any politicians belonging to any religion, have a duty to be truthful as far as they can, and certainly in all routine and daily matters. The only times when it is acceptable to keep quiet about important things is when there is a serious and imminent danger to people, and when telling the truth is likely to cause death and injury to people. The example of a terrorist plot is a good one, because it involves balancing the need to track down the terrorists, which sometimes implies secrecy about what is known, and protecting the public from a potential threat. I think it is right to avoid causing harm, and to be wise about the flow of information because careless words can cause panic and this does not help people, or tackle the terrorist problem. It might be uncomfortable for the politician to act in this way, but so long as his or her motive is good, and the government takes responsibility for the consequences of what is revealed and what is hidden, then this is a justifiable and realistic, although exceptional, position to take. 14 I would report corruption if I was sure it was happening. I would be a whistle blower but I am not sure exactly how I would do this. It can be dangerous to be a whistle blower, since people often react with a feeling of revenge. I think there is too much bureaucracy, and that reducing it would be good, but this might be difficult in the complexity of modern society. We need a strong government to support the weak in society, because I do not think that the free market provides enough of that. What is needed is more effective government, which means ensuring that initiatives work, rather than just adding more people and watching things fail. I think we need to examine where the successes are and build on that. 15 Plea bargaining is a fact of life in the American criminal justice system and I believe that even if it were officially abolished, there would still be elements of it in the way that courts and lawyers behave. I do not agree with it in theory, since it means people do not get the punishment that they theoretically deserve. On the other hand, I think the sentencing has become adjusted to plea bargaining, and so in the end it works out to more or less the same result, and so I guess I can live with it for practical reasons. 16 I would not favour such a change. Judicial review is an important double check mechanism which limits the power of any individual. It adds delays and complexity to the system, but it helps to prevent a dictatorship arising. 17 I only remember Christianity from kindergarten and I think it was mostly just superficial. My religion is Shintoism and I have no experience of being pressurized to join in Christian activities. I do not remember any prayers at commencement or before games. 18 I would allow all of these individuals to speak on campus, even if I do not believe in their ideology. However, at the same time, I would allow other students to protest peacefully against such a free speech, and I would hope that any advertisements for nazi or black separatist events, which are clearly racist, would be opposed. In such a situation it may be wise to cancel the events for safety reasons, or to allow counter-demonstrations, both of which would educate people about the danger of racially extremist views. Read More