PA's 2008 Presidential Election returns by District

Facts

1. In Pa the votes for Obama and McCain were about equal from white voters, but Obama pulled ahead from the votes of African Americans, Hispanics, and other ethnic groups.
2. Obama got Philadelphia along with Southwestern and Northeastern PA which was crucial for the election.
3. This election had one of the states largest turnout in decades.
4. Pa is a strong gun state with almost one million licensed hunters.
5. Democrats now outnumber republicans by more than one million

Pennsylvania's Congressional Districts

Facts:

1. The first congressional district in Pa consists of part of both Delaware county and Philadelphia county.
2. Pa's second district is represented by Chaka Fattah (D), who has been serving in the House of representatives since 1995.
3. Pa's 5th congressional district is made up of parts of 17 different counties. It is represented by republican Glenn Thompson.
4. A charge of Gerrymandering by democrat was brought up for the 6th congressional district of Pa. Democrats stated "looms like a dragon descending on Philadelphia from the west, splitting up towns and communities throughout Montgomery and Berks Counties."
5. The population of the 7th congressional district of PA 646,522.
6. Pa's 9th Congressional district is 59.39% rural and is considered to be a safe seat for republicans.
7. Pa's 12th Congressional district is the only one in the nation that voted Democratic for Kerry in 2004, then in 2008 voted republican for McCain. 
8. Pa's 14th district includes the entire city of Pittsburgh and is overwhelmingly democratic.
9. Pa's 17th Congressional district consisting of 646,420 constituents has been represented by Democrat Tim Holden since 2003.
10. Greensburg county included in the 18th district, even though represented by a republican has not voted republican since 1995.

How Washington Works

10 facts

1. Congress is given short weeks in order to give the members more time with their constituents. 
2. "Potomac fever" which is the incurable addiction of wielding political power or feeling at the political center, was said to be caught by people who serve in the executive branch or congress.
3. Most people stay in Washington after their term and become lawyers, lobbyists, or consultants, becaue they're grown accustomed to Washington's ways.
4. Personal relationships often cut across party and ideological lines.
5. An amendment can sometimes be a complete substitute bill with quite different impact and meaning, which is known as the "killer amendment".
6. The House Whip is Trent Lott of Mississippi.
7. Republican Brahmin from Boston, held four cabinet positions in the Nixon and Ford administrations.
8. Many people view politicians as a synonym for hypocrisy, which actually tends to be very inaccurate.
9. Washington is referred to as a one-subject town.
10. Very few politicians admit in print how much they hunger for public recognition. 

Questions:

1. Do you believe that politicians living in Washington are isolated from the mainstream?
2. Do you think because congressmen often see their constituents it pressures them to earmark more? 
3. Do you think that new politicians in Washington are more are more easily swayed by the opinions of others because they are looking to make connections with people?
4. Do you believe that people in Washington could "survive" if they didn't form a group of allies?
5. Is the majority of people in the government including lobbyists from wealthier families?
6. Does power tend to go to peoples head if they stay in Washington too long?
7. If politicians are truly in office for public service then how could corruption happen?
8. Do you think a politician can lose touch with his constituents because he is so much more informed of issues than the people he represents?
9. How do people change once they are out of office and out of Washington?
10. Do you believe that deep down Washington truly changes a person?

How Birth Control and Abortion became Politicized

Facts

1. The House voted to unfund Planned Parenthood.
2. The first birth control clinic was opened in 1916 by Margret Sanger.
3. Contraception used to be illegal.
4. Back then many women did not use contraception, but did have abortions, almost 1 in 3 pregnancies.
5. The first legal birth control clinic was opened in 1921.
6. Herman Cain views Planned Parenthood negatively
7. Sanger believed that the white race was above all other races.
8. Sanger was opposed to abortion.
9. The reform of birth control started as a liberal idea, then switched to a conservative one.
10. In the '70's a poll showed that many republicans were  supportive of the American Birth Control league.

Questions:

1. When birth control was first introduced what was the initial reaction to it?
2. How dangerous was having an abortion back then?
3. What was the mortality rate for child birth?
4. Were there any exceptions to the Comstock act?
5. When it was decided that women didn't have the right to birth control, did they back up this decision  using the constitution in anyway?
6. When did birth control become easily available to the public?

Committees of Pat Meehan

SUBCOMMITTEE OF AVIATION

• This overseas aviation safety and infrastructure and the impacts of transportation security on safety and the aviation industry.
• Writes the legislation authorizing the policy, projects,and priorities of the FAA.
• Transportation Security Administration Oversight which is air port security, legislators are trying to develop better post 9/11 security with the resources that we have.

COMMITTEE OF HOMELAND SECURITY

• Committee was created in 2002 in response to the September 11th attacks.
• Was created to give congressional oversight to the development of the department of Homeland Security.
• Was designated a standing committee on January 4, 2005.

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE

• Pat Meehan is the chairman
• Shares efforts with the Department of Homeland Security
• Jurisdiction falls with the Office of Intelligence and analysis and the intelligence functions of component agencies.

West Wing -The Stackhouse Filibuster

Facts:

1. There is an immediate vote after a filibuster.
2. During a filibuster a person can not stop talking, eat, drink, or use the bathroom.
3. The congress has the authority to cut reports to save money despite the overall savings is very little.
4. A Christmas tree bill is when legislators "hang" all of their own amendments on to it.
5. The vice president is informed along with the president of many more things than congress.
6. During a filibuster a senator can yield to another senators question.
7. Filibusters can only happen in the senate.
8. You don't have to talk about something relative to the bill during a filibuster.

Questions:

1. What does she mean when she refers to "spin boys" in the beginning of the episode?
2. Is there a process of eliminating reports, or can they just trash them like they seem to on the show?
3. What does the president usually do during a filibuster?
4. How often do filibusters actually work?
5. What are some bills where filibusters have been placed?

Illegal Immigration

"Would there be cases in which illegal immigrants are allowed to stay in the United States?"
There have been cases in which illegal immigrants have been authorized to stay. For example a 20 year old woman named Olga Zanella was unexpectedly allowed to stay in the country after she had been pulled over in Texas. Her family also came forward and requested to become a legal citizen. The conditions for her to stay in the country legally were to stay in school and out of trouble. This is an effect of Obama trying to reform the deportation process. ICE say's they are now trying to focus on criminals and people who could be considered dangerous, rather than immigrants simply trying to get an education. The arrests made by homeland security have actually significantly fallen from 1.6 million in 200 to 400,000 in 2010 to 300,000 in 2011.


Why should jobs be given to illegal immigrants if they can be given to US citizens.
I believe most if the work that illegals do is simply work that our citizens don't want to do. First of all they will refuse to work for the low pay that these jobs provide and they aren't accustomed to the back-breaking, physical labor that many of these jobs require. In fact today because of the tough job market a recent study shows that the amount of people traveling from the Mexico to the US are about equal to the amount of people traveling back from the US to Mexico. In addition illegals don't have a very big impact on many citizens wages. The main people who would be competing with illegal immigrants for work would be high school dropouts. No one else is really looking to do the kind of work they do because they are over qualified. It also has little effect on the unemployment rate because of the immigrants in the country more jobs are opened up in other places such as diners or a barbershop. In fact when the impact of illegals on the economy is averaged overall the result is slightly positive, increasing the wealth of the US by less than one percent.

Why don't illegal immigrants just go through the process to become a citizen?
The first step you have to take in trying to acquire a green card is to see if you're even eligible to get one. You can apply for a green card through family, a job, if you're a refugee, and there are many other cases. Each case has a list of things required for them. This can be a very long and involved process and you don't even have a definite chance of being a citizen. It is also an expensive process it's $680 total. $595 for an application fee and $85 for fingerprinting. Many of the immigrants have neither the money nor the time to wait for this process when they need to provide for their family.

I learned a lot from this. It's extremely difficult and expensive to get citizenship. Immigrants are also heavily stereotyped while American citizens don't even know the real facts. In fact i came across one newspaper where the whole article was opinion and was completely wrong. This man was saying all of these things about immigration when he clearly shouldn't be. He had zero facts or statistics to prove what he was saying and many people commented on it agreeing with it. It show me how arrogant and oblivious people are to the true facts of this issue. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/politics/27immigration.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5312900

http://www.cuny.edu/about/resources/citizenship/faqs/citizen.html#Fees%20note

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=80f63a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=80f63a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/15/immigration-to-us-from-mexico-in-decline-amid-bleak-economy/

Changes to Pa's Electoral Votes

Facts:

1. Only Maine and Nebraska have adopted awarding electoral votes by congressional district.
2. Democrats have won Pennsylvania in the last five presidential elections.
3. PA has 20 electoral votes, winner takes all.
4. Some believe voting turnout will decrease because 2 electoral votes isn't enough incentive.
5. Madonna and Young believe that there should be a uniform law getting rid of the electoral college and just elect the popular candidate.
6. Because 12 republican representatives were nervous on the effect it would have on being re-elected they hit the brakes on changing the electoral college.
7. If this had been around in the 2008 election Obama would have received 11 votes and McCain 10.
8. Governor Corbett seems to be going back on saying he would sign the change if it passed legislature.
9. 52%-40% are prefer the winner take all electoral college now.
10. The idea of awarding electoral votes by congressional district was introduced in the 1950's.

Questions:

1. Why is it a bad thing that PA would be less influential and that candidates wouldn't be able to take states for granted?
2. How would elections from the past have changed if this had been implemented?
3. Do only presidential elections have electoral votes?
4. Do you think this would make it more difficult for people with less money because candidates would have to campaign more?
5. Should the states have control over this or would it just be easier to have one national law?

Sources:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/09/17/a_really_bad_idea_111367.html
http://pennsylvanianews.info/pennsylvania-top-stories/nervous-pennsylvania-gop-house-members-kill-electoral-college-change.html

John Boehner, the Speaker of the House

Facts:

1. He often doesn't have the backing to see plans through.
2. Being forced to back the drawing on his first spending cut he considered to be his biggest regret.
3. He tends to follow the crowd on issues.
4. Threatened to punish recalcitrant republicans by taking away committee assignments.
5. Boehner's republicans have used the leverage of controlling a single chamber of congress to slash $1 trillion from the budget over the next decade.
6. Attempts to have more open process with more open rules.
7. Tends to tell it like it is and seems to admit when he's wrong.
8. Boehner is not a shy man and can be serious yet have fun, he even nicknamed one reporter loudmouth.

Questions:

1. Why can't Boehner often see his plans through, what's holding him back?
2. How do citizens tend to view Boehner?
3. Does he not exercise his authoritarian power as a tactic to be popular with people?
4. How is he viewed in the eyes of other politicians?
5. What do you think are some of the biggest challenges Boehner will face in the future?

Is the House of Representatives Too Small?

5 Facts:

1. In 1911 to ensure that the house of representatives did not become to unruly the limit of 435 members was placed on the house.
2. The country has tripled in size since 1911 but representation stays the same.
3. A positive outlook of congress decreases as the population increases. 
4. A cube route law has been developed as a way to get an idea of about what the representation in the House should be.
5. Only about 20% of the population would like to see the size of the house increased.

Questions:

1. What was the citizen to representative ratio in 1911?
2. Should representatives try to make themselves more available to the communities they represent?
3. What would be a positive effect of a house smaller than 435?
4. How can more minorities be represented in the house?
5. How can the government advertise that the number of reps can be changed because many people are unaware the number has the ability to be changed?

I personally think it could be a little bigger but not much, i think i would feel more comfortable keeping it the same size it is now.  If it were a lot bigger it would slow things down and if it were smaller there wouldn't be enough representation. 

Congressmen Financial Status

Pat Meehan, in his 2011-2012 Campaign CMTE 

         Raised: $974,353

         Spent: $285,027

     In pocket: $734,268

            Debt: $0

Tim Ryan, 2011-2012 Campaign CMTE

         Raised: $464,810

          Spent: $326,049

     In pocket: $256,648

            Debt: $0

I've learned that there is a huge difference from one representative to another, but even more of a difference from one representative to the average citizen. Even if a representative didn't have much in pocket money you can still see that there's no debt. This is really unrealistic for the average citizen. Most people are consumed by debt and when a Representative doesn't have that it makes it harder to relate to the average citizen. Even if he was once in debt, it's not the same once you are free and clear.

I learned it's important to follow this because it shows where lobbyists have been donating money, and gives you an idea of possible conflicts of interest.  People who are representing your financial interests don't have the same ones as the average person. It seems like Meehan has a little extra money despite him not being a millionaire yet he probably will be soon. Ryan on the other hand, except for the no debt seems much more realistic and able to relate to the average person. Also by the time this info is published it is dated, it needs to be sped up. I agree with the author that more should be done to see our representatives finances, so that we know exactly what's going on.

Due Process "Last Resort"

10 Facts:

1. The main evidence against Kevin Rojas was from eye witnesses who believed it was him based on the color of his jacket.
2. Kevin Rojas was advised not to testify in court.
3. Much of the evidence in the case had never been investigated or presented to the judge or jury.
4. Only about 5% of cases have biological evidence.
5. There are no government resources devoted to proving a felons innocence after trial, it all has to be done by the work of individuals.
6. The Supreme Court will soon hear about changing how eye witness identifications are used.
7. John Farmer was a republican who first started the questioning of eyewitness identification.
8. Rojas spent four and one half years in prison for something he did not do.
9. One estimate on the amount of innocent people was about 2 or 3% of those in prisions.
10. Jim Muclusky is very important in the exoneration of innocents in New Jersey.

Questions:

1. Do you think that eyewitnesses are unreliable because of the trauma they've experienced?
2. Do you believe a good attorney is what makes it or breaks it in a case even if the person is innocent?
3. Should eyewitnesses be submitted to lie detector tests?
4. If a person is not satisfied with their defense lawyer if it's a public lawyer do they have the opportunity to switch lawyers?  
5. Do you believe that DNA evidence should be ruled above an eyewitness?

John Paul Stevens Court Cases

Rasul v Bush 
Facts:

1. Stated the US court system has the authority to decide whether foreign nationals were wrongly imprisoned.
2. Was ruled 6-3 in favor of of Rasul
3. It was four British and Australian Citizens
4. When their families learned of their imprisonment the families said that denying the men of the right to an attorney violated the fifth amendment.
5. Was decided on June 28, 2004
6. It was ruled that non citizens get the right to habeus corpus 

Questions:

1. Why are non citizens given the rights of citizens?
2. How do other countries handle prisoners of war?
3. How long were the men wrongly imprisoned for?
4. What would the American government do if one if its citizens were wrongly imprisoned? 

Supreme Court Justices Biographies

10 Comments/Questions/Facts

1. John Roberts who is the Chief Justice was nominated to the Court by President Bush on September 29, 2005.
2. Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to move around from job to job a lot, is that normal for most judges?
3. Anthony M. Kennedy was in the national guard at one point, does this give him a different perspective then the other judges on issues?
4. Because Justice Clarence Thomas served as an Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights,does he tend to vote more liberally?
5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg played a big part in launching the Women's Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.
6. Stephan G. Breyer was an assistant prosecutor of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.
7. Justice Breyer was a visiting professor in Sydney Australia and Rome.
8. Samuel Anthony Alito was an assistant to the Solicitor General at one point.
9. Sonia Sotomayor was nominated to the supreme court by President Obama on May 26, 2009.
10. Elena Kagan was appointed the 11th Dean of Harvard Law School in 2003.  

Supreme Court Justices

Court Case Selections

1. The first court case that interested me was Pacific Operators Offshore vs. Valladolid. This case is asking whether or not workers compensation coverage cover workers only injured or killed on the rig itself, or does it extend to where ever he works for the company in general. I believe that he should be covered. This was a work accident that caused his death, it was tragic and the company should compensate the family because the death was caused by the company not Valladolid. This issue has not been decided on. 
2. The second court case i chose was Cavazos v Smith. This is about the grandmother of a baby who was possibly shaken to death (Shaken Baby Syndrome). She was tried and found guilty in lower courts, however she appealed, and later it was stated that there was not a sufficient amount of proof to prove that this is what the baby died of. The supreme court ruled that there was an error in that there was not enough proof that this is what the baby died of in a 6-3 vote. The constitutional right that was violated was the grandmothers Miranda Rights.
3. The final case that i found interesting was Abbott v Abbott.  This case is about two parents who got divorced and the Chilean court gave the mother custody and the father was given the right to visit. Neither of the parents were allowed to move with the child out of the country with out the consent from the other parent. The mother did so and moved to Texas. The father filed suit and the question that got to the supreme court was: "Does a clause that prohibits one parent from removing a child from a country without the other parents consent confer a 'right of custody' within the meaning of the Hague Convention or International Child Abduction? The supreme court voted 6-3 no,saying that the parent  has the right to custody under the Hague Convention and the International child abduction laws when a parent has the right to restrain another from leaving the country.

Roe vs Wade Reading

10 facts/ details:

1. Soon the question will not be whether or not a woman can have an abortion, but what restrictions and regulations should be put on abortions.
2. One argument against abortion used to be that making the procedure illegal would protect women because it once had a very high mortality rate.
3. Now, mortality rates for women undergoing early abortions (first trimester) appear to be as low or lower then the rates for normal child birth when they are done at a legal clinic.
4. Offices that illegally preform abortions are referred to as Abortion Mills.
5. If human life is considered to begin at the moment of conception then the state government has an obligation to protect it.
6. A woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy falls under her right to privacy.
7. Some pro-choice points include: it is unsafe to bring a child into the world where the parents aren't psychologically ready, and it  may cause psychological harm to the mother.
8. Viability is usually at approximately seven months.
9. States look to protect fetal life after viability.
10. There was a 7-2 supreme court ruling in favor of Roe in the court case of Roe vs Wade.

Question:

1. Does a fetus have rights?
2. Should regulating, or even allowing abortions be left up to the national or state government?
3. When do you believe human life begins, do you think there should be a cut off for when you can have an abortion?
4. Do you believe that women with only certain circumstances should legally be allowed to have an abortion?
5. Do you think that if abortions were illegal there would be too many unwanted children in the adoption system?