(no subject)
svcccj@msn.com
Introduction
I have learned a lot about how politics are done in the past three months. While it may appear that Congress, the President, and the Judiciary, bureaucracy is really turns the wheels of government. I also learned that in order to generate political capital, you have to moderate your views and sell your policy, not your ideology. In this paper, I will demonstrate how to sell yourself as a politician by moderating your views and how you must know the nuances of bureaucracy to get anything done. I will do this by drawing on campaign strategies from politicians past and reading about the intricacies of bureaucracy.
How will you promote or oppose the same sex marriage policy to the citizens who will vote on this issue next November? In other words, how will you connect to the voters?
I would make my connection with the voters in multiple stages. When I run for president the first time, one of the planks in my platform will be gay rights (such as making discrimination against a person's sexual orientation illegal and allowing homosexuals to adopt a child together and other benefits of marriage), but I would not support homosexual marriages. Although I personally believe very strongly that gays should be allowed to marry, homosexual marriage is a very polarizing issue and I don't believe that I could get elected if I supported full-out homosexual marriage. For instance, Al Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000, supported homosexual rights like harsher punishments for hate crimes and said that domestic partnerships should be recognized in some way. Gore did not, however, give full support to homosexual marriage. [1] Ralph Nader, who got just under two percent of the vote in 2004, supported full rights for all homosexuals. [2]
During my first term in office, I will continue to press for homosexual rights, like harsher punishments for hate crimes and allowing homosexual couples to file joint tax returns. I would emphasize harsher punishments for hate crimes and joint tax returns because victim's rights and economic conservatism are appealing to people in both parties. These issues are also appealing to other constituencies, like African-Americans (who vote Democratic but tend to be more socially conservative) and religious minorities like Muslims (who are also socially conservative).
In presenting my program I would first take ammunition away from my political opponents. Because my political opponents often argue that pedophilia and homosexuality go hand in hand, saying things like "1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality account for between a fifth and a third of all child molestation, [3]" I would make child molestation awareness and education a very large part of my first term as President. Because the vast majority of child molestation occurs between an adult male and a female child, education about what really happens when children are abused would be beneficial to getting homosexuals more accepted by society and that could increase political capital and support for gay marriage. I would also push for more resources to be devoted to foster homes, where children who have been abused often go.
Secondly I would try to appease the public. Since many of the people who oppose gay marriage are religious, I would donate mass sums of my own personal (not federal) money to faith based initiatives and make faith a big part of my life. Timothy Kaine did this excellently in his campaign for governor of Virginia. Although there is substantial evidence that Kaine supported civil unions [4], Kaine did not make gay rights a very big part of his campaign but instead concentrated on his personal faith. [5] I would take a leaf from Kaine's book and emphasize my faith while I snuck gay rights into my platform during my first campaign. I would also emphasize and work with the Christian faiths that support gay rights, such as the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church the Unitarian Universalist Church, and the Episcopalian Church.
I would also initiate a heavy ad campaign. To get people really motivated for gay marriage, I would create a political action committee and call it "Artists for Social Justice." The PAC would host a heavy ad campaign featuring liberal celebrities, like Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, Ben Affleck, Jennifer Aniston, George Clooney, Bono, Kim Catrall, Kate Hudson, Madonna, Gwyneth Paltrow, Julia Roberts, Uma Thurmond, and others. Celebrities are American aristocracy and have enormous potential to influence the American electorate. The ad campaign would start about three years into my first term so that by the time my re-election campaign started the electorate would have seen advertisements for gay marriage for quite some time. Using celebrities in advertisements would fortify my base; young people, who are by far the most socially liberal age demographic, are also the ones most influenced by celebrities.
I would begin to implement my same-sex marriage policy in earnest a few months into my second term, because I would have enough time to fully realize my vision by not having to worry about getting re-elected. I would start my same sex marriage program during the "honeymoon" period with the press following my second inauguration. I think that would be far enough away from the election so that my political opposition could not accuse me of hiding my plans during the campaign.
What type of measurements will you employ to gauge public opinion on this matter?
Madame President, you know already that in order to generate political capital you must be in good standing with the public. Now the question is how you gauge your political capital. Opinion polls are used for a variety of different reasons; production companies use opinion polls to gauge how many people are going to see their movies and businesses use opinion polls to see how the public reacts to their product. [6] Public opinion polling is done by interviewing a random sample of the population. Typically, these samples comprise of only a few thousand participants at the most. Surveying most of America, or even a large city, would be too big and costly a job to do effectively. [7] People in controlled public opinion polls are purposely selected to come from all walks of life: rich, poor; educated, uneducated; butchers, bakers, candlestick makers. This is because the more variety the sample has the greater likelihood it has of being accurate. Controlled samples, when done correctly, have a ninety-nine percent chance of being within 4-5 percentage points of accurately showing the opinion of the total American populace. [8]
Now, how is "done correctly" defined? Obviously, a good interviewer must be chosen. An interviewer must be as objective as possible, so that they will not consciously or unconsciously affect the interview findings. Most interviewers are hired on the recommendation of community leaders. [9] In order to be accurate, the sample's questions must be asked in an open ended way so as not to suggest anything to the participants. For instance, a question like "Do you support the right of every adult American to spend their lives with whomever they want or are you a heartless bigot?" suggests the answer to the participant, while a question like "Do you support civil unions for homosexuals?" does not.
What department or departments will be responsible to implement the policy if it is passed?
As you will find out though, while you and Congress get much of the publicity for passing and implementing laws, it is the bureaucratic agencies that do the bulk of the work. [10] You will need to use the Cabinet departments because they are the major administrative units. [11]
Cabinet departments are not uniform; they all have different sizes, degrees of importance or relevancy, and budgets. [12] Each department is responsible for a different area. To implement your gay marriage policy, I suggest you use the Department of Justice, Civil Rights division; the Treasury department, and the Department of Health and Human Services, which are all Cabinet Departments.
The Civil Rights division of the Justice Department was founded in 1957 to enforce federal statues banning discrimination on the basis of race, sex, handicap, religion, and national origin. [13] Among the acts it protects are Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, 1964, and 1968, Police Misconduct Provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994; and Section 102 of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). The DOJCR has ten sections that deal with different issues today in civil rights. Some of the sections that will be most important in legalizing gay marriage include the Appellate Section, Housing and Civil Enforcement Section, and the Special Litigation Section. The individual sections have responsibility for issues involving civil rights in their subject areas, for instance, the disabilities rights section is responsible for enforcing titles I, II, and III under the Americans with Disabilities Act. [14] They can do this by arguing cases in which titles I-III are involved, certify buildings that comply with the ADA, and coordinate public outreach and awareness. [15] How will all these sections implement the gay marriage program? The Appellate section would have to be used to review whether the decisions to ban gay marriage in some states were made constitutionally. Because the Appellate section works both defensively and affirmatively, I would have them file an amicus curiae brief registering my position on gay marriage. The Housing and Civil Enforcement section is responsible for the enforcement of federal civil rights laws. Because the right of homosexuals to marry would be a new and different civil right, it would fall to this section of the court to decide how to implement and enforce the gay marriage initiative. Because the Supreme Court has the power of judicial oversight, they have the responsibility of deciding exactly how this law is implemented into society. The Special Litigation section protects the right to have access to reproductive healthcare clinics. Although they mainly deal with abortion cases, increasingly, homosexuals are coming under attack for trying to exercise their reproductive rights. The Special Litigation section would have to extend restrictions to include groups who protested homosexual’s reproductive rights.
The US Department of Treasury is the steward of U.S. economic systems. [16] According to its website, "The mission of the Department of the Treasury is to promote the conditions for prosperity and stability in the United States and encourage prosperity and stability in the rest of the world." [17] The Treasury has a lot of impact on various tax cuts because organizing and enforcing the collection of taxes from U.S. citizens are among the Treasury’s responsibilities. Another reason that the Treasury department is so important is Social security. Social security has a lot of benefits for spouses that do not extend to live in partners. A spouse is entitled to one half of the worker's retirement benefits and can draw on other benefits from the worker and gets significant survivors benefits when the worker dies. [18]
Another department I would utilize in the fight to legalize gay marriage would be the Health and Human services department. The Health and Human services department is "the United States government's principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.” [19] The HHS has control of social science research, infant and child health, and foster care and adoption. [20] The Administration for Children and Families, a department within the Health and Human Services, regulates foster care and standardizes adoption protocol. Currently, the law has made it very difficult for homosexuals to legally prove they have valid family arrangements.
This is what I need the departments to do in the future
By its very nature, the Treasury department is involved in tax cuts. One of the more recent and controversial tax cuts is the marriage penalty relief tax cut. [21] The marriage penalty relief tax cut gives married people a tax break that does not extend to two individual people. [22] By 2009, the tax deductions that married people get will be more than 200% those of unmarried people. [23] By getting civil unions, gays would also receive the tax cut. The Treasury Department would have to go through the tax code and include homosexual unions in their definition of marriage. I would also need the Treasury’s help to find out the fiscal burden the increased tax cuts placed on society and what the government could do to alleviate that burden.
To fully realize my plan for civil unions, I would have to reform Social Security so that spouses of both heterosexual and homosexual marriage are eligible for all the benefits that they may not currently receive. These Social Security benefits include generous survivor’s benefits and other benefits that come with marriage. Currently, gay couples do not get these benefits, even if they have been paying for heterosexuals to get them. The Treasury would have to change Social Security to allow gay couples access to these benefits.
Currently, homosexual couples are not allowed to jointly adopt a child together. The Administration for Children and Families, or the ACF, would have to amend its regulations to allow gay couples to file petitions for adoption jointly. Right now, only one partner can file for an adoption, which means that the other partner enjoys no rights as the adoptive parent.
What are the administrative challenges that are at the heart of the bureaucracy?
Political Scientist Michael Lipsky was particularly sensitive to the administrative challenges that lay at the heart of the bureaucracy. Because the head of the bureaucracy cannot be involved in every task that the agency is responsible for implementing, many of the tasks are done at the discretion of “street-level” bureaucrats. What is a street level bureaucrat? A street level bureaucrat is a person “normally regarded as a low-level employee….your teacher, your child’s teacher, the policeman on the corner.” Despite the fact that these people may not appear to have much power, Lipsky argues, they are really the ones who get to decide how the government enforces regulations. For instance, even though people often drive a few miles faster than the posted speed limit, it is highly unusual for a police officer to stop someone who is going 67.4 miles in a 65 mile zone. The policeman utilizes street level bureaucracy in this situation because even though the law says one thing, another rule is enforced at the policeman’s discretion. The problems with street level bureaucracy arise when people grow increasingly dependent on street level bureaucrats. If a public servant does not enforce the rule for enough people, the people will come to expect and even rely on the “bent” rules. While this may seem innocent when we are talking about going 2.4 miles over the speed limit, street level bureaucracies, Lipsky argues, can bleed from the public life into the private sector. With this comes financial crisis and the line between what the government can and cannot regulate blurs even more. I think that the way bureaucracies are set up encourages “street level bureaucracy”. Because one person cannot feasibly oversee every little thing that is in the realm of responsibility for any particular agency, the lower level bureaucrats will always have some degree of discretion in decision making.
With regards to Iraq, what can the government really do to implement your policy vision? Be specific - this is the mechanical (getting-policy-done) aspect of governing.
MY IRAQ POLICY
I think we first need to acknowledge our mistakes and commit to multilateralism in military and diplomatic operations in Iraq. No matter what we do in Iraq, we will need the support of other nations to help us secure a world that is permanently safe for all of us. Because many other industrialized nations believe that we were wrong about Iraq, we must acknowledge our mistakes so that they will help us in the long term.
With the support of the world community, I would create a timetable for the American pullout of Iraq. While I would end the military occupation of Iraq, I would maintain a strong diplomatic presence Iraq. I would do this so that America would be able to foresee potential threats in the area and deal with them before the threats were realized. Having a strong diplomatic presence would be much cheaper and safer than waiting for attacks on our country.
THIS IS SPECIFICALLY HOW I'M GOING TO IMPLEMENT MY IRAQ POLICY:
The most important thing I would do is listen to what the leaders other countries tell me and when appropriate compromise my views in an effort to obtain some wide and meaningful consensus.
Because of the failure of our Iraq policy and the real and symbolic power of the American presidency, I need to initiate the effort to reach consensus in the community of nations about the future of Iraq. I would begin this reconciliation effort at the United Nations Security Council. Because three members of the Security Council, China, France and Russia vigorously opposed our invasion of Iraq, the Security Council will probably support my decision to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and have a large scale military withdrawal. After obtaining the formal support of the Security Council, I would seek the assistance from NATO. NATO is an alliance of 26 nations from North America and Europe. Specifically, I would ask that NATO be available to support the Iraqi government if there are any unforeseen problems when America withdraws its military from Iraq. Obtaining a military commitment from NATO to support a free and independent Iraq would discourage Iran from interfering in Iraq’s affairs and give the Iraqi government some sense of security.
After I secure support from the Security Council and commitments from NATO, I would send my Secretary of State to the Arab League. The Arab League is political organization concerned with the social and economic health of countries in which there is a strong Arab presence. I would ask the members of Arab League to commit themselves to support an independent Iraq and most importantly to take steps to prevent terrorists from using their territories as bases for operations in Iraq.
After meaningful consultation with the UN, NATO, and the Arab League, I would devise a specific timetable and strategy for the withdrawal of American troops. Creating a timetable to get out of Iraq quickly and safely would be beneficial to America, Iraq, the Middle East, and the rest of the world. America would benefit from the withdrawal because we would be more financially secure and we would be able to replenish our armed forces. America will ultimately be safer with a strengthened military, sound fiscal policy and good diplomatic relations with the rest of the world. Giving Iraq full sovereignty would be beneficial to the Iraqis because it would allow them to do what is in the best interest for Iraq and free Iraq from having to look out for the best interest of America. This is what the Iraqis want; several Sunnis said on election day that they were excited about the prospect of living in "this democracy, this freedom" and they waited for the day that "Americans can go home [ [i]].
[1]http://www.issues2000.org/Al_Gore_Civil_Rights.htm
[2]http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=19
[3] http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet2.html
[4] http://www.washblade.com/
[5] http://www.kaine2005.org/news/articles/20050610.php
[6] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[7] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[8] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[9] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[10] Patterson, Thomas E. We the People, page 452
[11] We the People page 450
[12] We the People, page 450
[13] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html#intro
[14] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html
[15] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html
[16] http://www.ustreas.gov/education/duties/
[17] http://www.ustreas.gov/education/duties/
[18] http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/fact.html?record=1086
[19] http://www.hhs.gov/about/whatwedo.html/
[20] http://www.hhs.gov/about/whatwedo.html/
[21] http://www.ctj.org/html/mp0700.htm
[22] http://www.choice-of-entity.com/MarriagePenalty.htm
[23] http://www.choice-of-entity.c
Introduction
I have learned a lot about how politics are done in the past three months. While it may appear that Congress, the President, and the Judiciary, bureaucracy is really turns the wheels of government. I also learned that in order to generate political capital, you have to moderate your views and sell your policy, not your ideology. In this paper, I will demonstrate how to sell yourself as a politician by moderating your views and how you must know the nuances of bureaucracy to get anything done. I will do this by drawing on campaign strategies from politicians past and reading about the intricacies of bureaucracy.
How will you promote or oppose the same sex marriage policy to the citizens who will vote on this issue next November? In other words, how will you connect to the voters?
I would make my connection with the voters in multiple stages. When I run for president the first time, one of the planks in my platform will be gay rights (such as making discrimination against a person's sexual orientation illegal and allowing homosexuals to adopt a child together and other benefits of marriage), but I would not support homosexual marriages. Although I personally believe very strongly that gays should be allowed to marry, homosexual marriage is a very polarizing issue and I don't believe that I could get elected if I supported full-out homosexual marriage. For instance, Al Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000, supported homosexual rights like harsher punishments for hate crimes and said that domestic partnerships should be recognized in some way. Gore did not, however, give full support to homosexual marriage. [1] Ralph Nader, who got just under two percent of the vote in 2004, supported full rights for all homosexuals. [2]
During my first term in office, I will continue to press for homosexual rights, like harsher punishments for hate crimes and allowing homosexual couples to file joint tax returns. I would emphasize harsher punishments for hate crimes and joint tax returns because victim's rights and economic conservatism are appealing to people in both parties. These issues are also appealing to other constituencies, like African-Americans (who vote Democratic but tend to be more socially conservative) and religious minorities like Muslims (who are also socially conservative).
In presenting my program I would first take ammunition away from my political opponents. Because my political opponents often argue that pedophilia and homosexuality go hand in hand, saying things like "1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality account for between a fifth and a third of all child molestation, [3]" I would make child molestation awareness and education a very large part of my first term as President. Because the vast majority of child molestation occurs between an adult male and a female child, education about what really happens when children are abused would be beneficial to getting homosexuals more accepted by society and that could increase political capital and support for gay marriage. I would also push for more resources to be devoted to foster homes, where children who have been abused often go.
Secondly I would try to appease the public. Since many of the people who oppose gay marriage are religious, I would donate mass sums of my own personal (not federal) money to faith based initiatives and make faith a big part of my life. Timothy Kaine did this excellently in his campaign for governor of Virginia. Although there is substantial evidence that Kaine supported civil unions [4], Kaine did not make gay rights a very big part of his campaign but instead concentrated on his personal faith. [5] I would take a leaf from Kaine's book and emphasize my faith while I snuck gay rights into my platform during my first campaign. I would also emphasize and work with the Christian faiths that support gay rights, such as the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church the Unitarian Universalist Church, and the Episcopalian Church.
I would also initiate a heavy ad campaign. To get people really motivated for gay marriage, I would create a political action committee and call it "Artists for Social Justice." The PAC would host a heavy ad campaign featuring liberal celebrities, like Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, Ben Affleck, Jennifer Aniston, George Clooney, Bono, Kim Catrall, Kate Hudson, Madonna, Gwyneth Paltrow, Julia Roberts, Uma Thurmond, and others. Celebrities are American aristocracy and have enormous potential to influence the American electorate. The ad campaign would start about three years into my first term so that by the time my re-election campaign started the electorate would have seen advertisements for gay marriage for quite some time. Using celebrities in advertisements would fortify my base; young people, who are by far the most socially liberal age demographic, are also the ones most influenced by celebrities.
I would begin to implement my same-sex marriage policy in earnest a few months into my second term, because I would have enough time to fully realize my vision by not having to worry about getting re-elected. I would start my same sex marriage program during the "honeymoon" period with the press following my second inauguration. I think that would be far enough away from the election so that my political opposition could not accuse me of hiding my plans during the campaign.
What type of measurements will you employ to gauge public opinion on this matter?
Madame President, you know already that in order to generate political capital you must be in good standing with the public. Now the question is how you gauge your political capital. Opinion polls are used for a variety of different reasons; production companies use opinion polls to gauge how many people are going to see their movies and businesses use opinion polls to see how the public reacts to their product. [6] Public opinion polling is done by interviewing a random sample of the population. Typically, these samples comprise of only a few thousand participants at the most. Surveying most of America, or even a large city, would be too big and costly a job to do effectively. [7] People in controlled public opinion polls are purposely selected to come from all walks of life: rich, poor; educated, uneducated; butchers, bakers, candlestick makers. This is because the more variety the sample has the greater likelihood it has of being accurate. Controlled samples, when done correctly, have a ninety-nine percent chance of being within 4-5 percentage points of accurately showing the opinion of the total American populace. [8]
Now, how is "done correctly" defined? Obviously, a good interviewer must be chosen. An interviewer must be as objective as possible, so that they will not consciously or unconsciously affect the interview findings. Most interviewers are hired on the recommendation of community leaders. [9] In order to be accurate, the sample's questions must be asked in an open ended way so as not to suggest anything to the participants. For instance, a question like "Do you support the right of every adult American to spend their lives with whomever they want or are you a heartless bigot?" suggests the answer to the participant, while a question like "Do you support civil unions for homosexuals?" does not.
What department or departments will be responsible to implement the policy if it is passed?
As you will find out though, while you and Congress get much of the publicity for passing and implementing laws, it is the bureaucratic agencies that do the bulk of the work. [10] You will need to use the Cabinet departments because they are the major administrative units. [11]
Cabinet departments are not uniform; they all have different sizes, degrees of importance or relevancy, and budgets. [12] Each department is responsible for a different area. To implement your gay marriage policy, I suggest you use the Department of Justice, Civil Rights division; the Treasury department, and the Department of Health and Human Services, which are all Cabinet Departments.
The Civil Rights division of the Justice Department was founded in 1957 to enforce federal statues banning discrimination on the basis of race, sex, handicap, religion, and national origin. [13] Among the acts it protects are Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, 1964, and 1968, Police Misconduct Provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994; and Section 102 of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). The DOJCR has ten sections that deal with different issues today in civil rights. Some of the sections that will be most important in legalizing gay marriage include the Appellate Section, Housing and Civil Enforcement Section, and the Special Litigation Section. The individual sections have responsibility for issues involving civil rights in their subject areas, for instance, the disabilities rights section is responsible for enforcing titles I, II, and III under the Americans with Disabilities Act. [14] They can do this by arguing cases in which titles I-III are involved, certify buildings that comply with the ADA, and coordinate public outreach and awareness. [15] How will all these sections implement the gay marriage program? The Appellate section would have to be used to review whether the decisions to ban gay marriage in some states were made constitutionally. Because the Appellate section works both defensively and affirmatively, I would have them file an amicus curiae brief registering my position on gay marriage. The Housing and Civil Enforcement section is responsible for the enforcement of federal civil rights laws. Because the right of homosexuals to marry would be a new and different civil right, it would fall to this section of the court to decide how to implement and enforce the gay marriage initiative. Because the Supreme Court has the power of judicial oversight, they have the responsibility of deciding exactly how this law is implemented into society. The Special Litigation section protects the right to have access to reproductive healthcare clinics. Although they mainly deal with abortion cases, increasingly, homosexuals are coming under attack for trying to exercise their reproductive rights. The Special Litigation section would have to extend restrictions to include groups who protested homosexual’s reproductive rights.
The US Department of Treasury is the steward of U.S. economic systems. [16] According to its website, "The mission of the Department of the Treasury is to promote the conditions for prosperity and stability in the United States and encourage prosperity and stability in the rest of the world." [17] The Treasury has a lot of impact on various tax cuts because organizing and enforcing the collection of taxes from U.S. citizens are among the Treasury’s responsibilities. Another reason that the Treasury department is so important is Social security. Social security has a lot of benefits for spouses that do not extend to live in partners. A spouse is entitled to one half of the worker's retirement benefits and can draw on other benefits from the worker and gets significant survivors benefits when the worker dies. [18]
Another department I would utilize in the fight to legalize gay marriage would be the Health and Human services department. The Health and Human services department is "the United States government's principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.” [19] The HHS has control of social science research, infant and child health, and foster care and adoption. [20] The Administration for Children and Families, a department within the Health and Human Services, regulates foster care and standardizes adoption protocol. Currently, the law has made it very difficult for homosexuals to legally prove they have valid family arrangements.
This is what I need the departments to do in the future
By its very nature, the Treasury department is involved in tax cuts. One of the more recent and controversial tax cuts is the marriage penalty relief tax cut. [21] The marriage penalty relief tax cut gives married people a tax break that does not extend to two individual people. [22] By 2009, the tax deductions that married people get will be more than 200% those of unmarried people. [23] By getting civil unions, gays would also receive the tax cut. The Treasury Department would have to go through the tax code and include homosexual unions in their definition of marriage. I would also need the Treasury’s help to find out the fiscal burden the increased tax cuts placed on society and what the government could do to alleviate that burden.
To fully realize my plan for civil unions, I would have to reform Social Security so that spouses of both heterosexual and homosexual marriage are eligible for all the benefits that they may not currently receive. These Social Security benefits include generous survivor’s benefits and other benefits that come with marriage. Currently, gay couples do not get these benefits, even if they have been paying for heterosexuals to get them. The Treasury would have to change Social Security to allow gay couples access to these benefits.
Currently, homosexual couples are not allowed to jointly adopt a child together. The Administration for Children and Families, or the ACF, would have to amend its regulations to allow gay couples to file petitions for adoption jointly. Right now, only one partner can file for an adoption, which means that the other partner enjoys no rights as the adoptive parent.
What are the administrative challenges that are at the heart of the bureaucracy?
Political Scientist Michael Lipsky was particularly sensitive to the administrative challenges that lay at the heart of the bureaucracy. Because the head of the bureaucracy cannot be involved in every task that the agency is responsible for implementing, many of the tasks are done at the discretion of “street-level” bureaucrats. What is a street level bureaucrat? A street level bureaucrat is a person “normally regarded as a low-level employee….your teacher, your child’s teacher, the policeman on the corner.” Despite the fact that these people may not appear to have much power, Lipsky argues, they are really the ones who get to decide how the government enforces regulations. For instance, even though people often drive a few miles faster than the posted speed limit, it is highly unusual for a police officer to stop someone who is going 67.4 miles in a 65 mile zone. The policeman utilizes street level bureaucracy in this situation because even though the law says one thing, another rule is enforced at the policeman’s discretion. The problems with street level bureaucracy arise when people grow increasingly dependent on street level bureaucrats. If a public servant does not enforce the rule for enough people, the people will come to expect and even rely on the “bent” rules. While this may seem innocent when we are talking about going 2.4 miles over the speed limit, street level bureaucracies, Lipsky argues, can bleed from the public life into the private sector. With this comes financial crisis and the line between what the government can and cannot regulate blurs even more. I think that the way bureaucracies are set up encourages “street level bureaucracy”. Because one person cannot feasibly oversee every little thing that is in the realm of responsibility for any particular agency, the lower level bureaucrats will always have some degree of discretion in decision making.
With regards to Iraq, what can the government really do to implement your policy vision? Be specific - this is the mechanical (getting-policy-done) aspect of governing.
MY IRAQ POLICY
I think we first need to acknowledge our mistakes and commit to multilateralism in military and diplomatic operations in Iraq. No matter what we do in Iraq, we will need the support of other nations to help us secure a world that is permanently safe for all of us. Because many other industrialized nations believe that we were wrong about Iraq, we must acknowledge our mistakes so that they will help us in the long term.
With the support of the world community, I would create a timetable for the American pullout of Iraq. While I would end the military occupation of Iraq, I would maintain a strong diplomatic presence Iraq. I would do this so that America would be able to foresee potential threats in the area and deal with them before the threats were realized. Having a strong diplomatic presence would be much cheaper and safer than waiting for attacks on our country.
THIS IS SPECIFICALLY HOW I'M GOING TO IMPLEMENT MY IRAQ POLICY:
The most important thing I would do is listen to what the leaders other countries tell me and when appropriate compromise my views in an effort to obtain some wide and meaningful consensus.
Because of the failure of our Iraq policy and the real and symbolic power of the American presidency, I need to initiate the effort to reach consensus in the community of nations about the future of Iraq. I would begin this reconciliation effort at the United Nations Security Council. Because three members of the Security Council, China, France and Russia vigorously opposed our invasion of Iraq, the Security Council will probably support my decision to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and have a large scale military withdrawal. After obtaining the formal support of the Security Council, I would seek the assistance from NATO. NATO is an alliance of 26 nations from North America and Europe. Specifically, I would ask that NATO be available to support the Iraqi government if there are any unforeseen problems when America withdraws its military from Iraq. Obtaining a military commitment from NATO to support a free and independent Iraq would discourage Iran from interfering in Iraq’s affairs and give the Iraqi government some sense of security.
After I secure support from the Security Council and commitments from NATO, I would send my Secretary of State to the Arab League. The Arab League is political organization concerned with the social and economic health of countries in which there is a strong Arab presence. I would ask the members of Arab League to commit themselves to support an independent Iraq and most importantly to take steps to prevent terrorists from using their territories as bases for operations in Iraq.
After meaningful consultation with the UN, NATO, and the Arab League, I would devise a specific timetable and strategy for the withdrawal of American troops. Creating a timetable to get out of Iraq quickly and safely would be beneficial to America, Iraq, the Middle East, and the rest of the world. America would benefit from the withdrawal because we would be more financially secure and we would be able to replenish our armed forces. America will ultimately be safer with a strengthened military, sound fiscal policy and good diplomatic relations with the rest of the world. Giving Iraq full sovereignty would be beneficial to the Iraqis because it would allow them to do what is in the best interest for Iraq and free Iraq from having to look out for the best interest of America. This is what the Iraqis want; several Sunnis said on election day that they were excited about the prospect of living in "this democracy, this freedom" and they waited for the day that "Americans can go home [ [i]].
[1]http://www.issues2000.org/Al_Gore_Civil_Rights.htm
[2]http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=19
[3] http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet2.html
[4] http://www.washblade.com/
[5] http://www.kaine2005.org/news/articles/20050610.php
[6] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[7] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[8] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[9] http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls2.htm
[10] Patterson, Thomas E. We the People, page 452
[11] We the People page 450
[12] We the People, page 450
[13] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html#intro
[14] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html
[15] http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/activity.html
[16] http://www.ustreas.gov/education/duties/
[17] http://www.ustreas.gov/education/duties/
[18] http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/fact.html?record=1086
[19] http://www.hhs.gov/about/whatwedo.html/
[20] http://www.hhs.gov/about/whatwedo.html/
[21] http://www.ctj.org/html/mp0700.htm
[22] http://www.choice-of-entity.com/MarriagePenalty.htm
[23] http://www.choice-of-entity.c