Filibustering in the senate

            A filibuster is one of the many tactics used in the United States senate in order to prevent a measure from being brought to a vote. This is used during a debate in order to sway the opinions of senate members as to gain votes to the side of which the person is filibustering for. The most common form of a filibuster is when a senator is attempting to delay or completely prevent a vote from on a bill and he or she does so by extending the debate. The senator is allowed to debate or talk about his or her stance on the issue for as long as he or she can continue to talk. There has even been instances where there are cots brought in for the senators to sleep on so that when one person is done filibustering the other senators can just jump right in and debate against the previous filibuster. In order to end a filibuster without the actual senator stopping by themselves there has to be a ¾ majority or 60 out of 100 senators vote to invoke cloture. In the past, filibustering has been used in the house of representatives as well as in the senate but revisions to the house rules limit debate, in the senate debate continued on the grounds that any senator had the right to debate as long as he or she wanted or felt necessary on any issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm

Impeachment

The US Constitution states in Article 2, Section 4: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

The current impeachment process is as follows:

Impeachment is started by members of the House of Representatives and are then turned over to the Judiciary Committee which then decides whether the allegations are worth being formally voted upon

The entire House votes for or against impeachment, needing majority for approval.

If approved, the Judiciary Committee has an investigation to see if there is enough evidence to impeach the President. The next step is to draft articles of impeachment based on charges supported by evidence.

If the Judiciary Committee sends any articles of impeachment, the house takes a vote and will win by majority.

If at least one of the articles of impeachment are approved then the president is considered impeached and the case is then sent to the senate.

The trial of the President is held in the Senate with the Chief Justice presiding. The President may have a lawyer or can represent him or herself.

The Senate may conduct the trial or the case may be given to another committee and in which case said committee would report all case evidence to the senate

The trial is held in a courtroom with the examination of witnesses. During questioning, Senators remain silent, all questions from the senate must be given directly to the chief justice in writing.

After all evidence and closing arguments have been gone through, the Senate decides behind closed doors and then proceeds to vote in open session. In order to convict the president the vote must be a two thirds majority, (67 senators). In this case, the President is removed from office and then the vice president becomes president. The decision is final and there is no right of appeal.

In United States history there has technically only been 2 presintial impeachments. Although some people belive there has been 3, Nixon technically was never impeached. He resigned and was then given a pardon for the crimes he commited (Watergate scandal)

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments

/http://www.historynet.com/were-u-s-presidents-johnson-nixon-and-clinton-impeached.htm 

Media and US politics

The way technology has changed over the past 10 years is very influential to politics in more ways than one.  first, now you can choose the news that you are hearing or watching. Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, recently said, “With the Internet, with YouTube, with TiVo, with cable TV, people are selective viewers now. . . . People approach their news consumption the way they approach their iPod: You download the songs you like and listen to them when you want to listen to them.” With people being able to choose what they watch and when they watch it, it gives people who are campaigning a disadvantage because people don’t have to listen to what they have to say if they don’t want to.  second, by sharing via social media sites. A good example of this is when President Obama announced that he was running for office on a web video and announced his vice present by text message. third, by people being able to like or dislike things on web pages they give politicians a general idea of how the public feels about a certain issue, which helps candidates campaign in a better way to win support. Lastly, internet fundraising has been a very influential strategy used by many politicians such as John McCain, Ron Paul, Barack Obama, and Scott Brown. President Obama raised hundreds of millions from online fundraising throughout his presidential campaign.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/slideshows/5-ways-new-media-are-changing-politics

Political Participation

http://www2.fiu.edu/~milch002/CPO3643/outlines/participation.htm

The article attached explains different types of political participation and why people do or don’t choose to participate in politics. First off, it explains what political participation is, the actions of private citizens by which they seek to influence or to support government and politics. Participation in politics involves more than just voting, political participation is the freedom to speak out, assemble and associate, and the opportunity to register as a candidate, to campaign, to be elected and to hold office in government. Next, there are 2 types of participation, conventional vs. unconventional. The first type, conventional, conventional participation is a relatively routine, added behavior that uses the channels of representative government. There are 2 behaviors expressed in conventional government, supportive and influencing. Supportive behaviors are used to show allegiance to your government and country and influencing behaviors are used to modify or reverse government policy. Compared with other countries, American citizens are less likely to vote in elections, but more likely to engage in other forms of conventional participation. The other for of political participation is unconventional participation. Unconventional participation is an uncommon behavior that changes or defies the government, and it is usually stressful for participants and their opponents. Americans generally disapprove of unconventional political action, especially the ones that interfere with daily living. Unconventional participation has been successful in influencing government decisions. People participating in unconventional ways tend to share three beliefs: distrust of political system, strong sense of political efficiency, and a highly developed sense of group consciousness. Americans are more likely to participate in unconventional politics than are citizens in other democratic countries. The reasons for political participation are political socialization, the process by which an individual acquires his or her political beliefs, and agents of socializations, numerous things that influence people such as family, media, and schools. Participation rates are a function of resources and civic skills.

https://www.boundless.com/political-science/textbooks/boundless-political-science-textbook/political-participation-and-voting-9/voting-as-political-participation-67/other-forms-of-political-participation-374-4271/

 This article talks about the different ways that citizens can participate in politics.  New media, such as social networking sites, blogs, and online campaign donations, have provided new ways for political participation. Citizens can participate in civil society, an important part of political participation, with activities like volunteering, attending events associated with causes, or joining a civic organization. Citizens can protest, riot, or refuse to vote to show unhappiness with certain elements of the political system. Citizens can also participate in politics by being directly involved in campaigns, they can run for office themselves, donate money or time to candidates, or discuss political issues and campaigns with friends and family.

Is Solitary Confinement Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

http://ccrjustice.org/solitary-factsheet

The above article talks about solitary confinement and how it could be considered cruel and unusual punishment. In the eighth amendment of the United States Constitution it is stated that the government may not impose excessive bail or fines and my not impose cruel and unusual punishment, such as torture. The topic I would like to discuss is solitary confinement and whether it is or isn't considered to be cruel and unusual punishment. In my opinion, solitary confinement is cruel and unusual punishment and I feel this way because being away from human contact for extended periods of time can have major psychological effects on people. Research shows that prolonged solitary confinement can cause anxiety, headaches, insomnia, nervousness, nightmares, mood swings, depression, and so on. By using solitary confinement to punish criminals you are creating more psychological problems and damages which can be dangerous in the long run. When you really think about it, if someone committed a crime that was severe enough to deserve solitary confinement as a punishment then it’s very likely that there is already something psychologically wrong with that person and by creating more psychological problems for that person you are only going to cause more problems for them as an individual. This is why I believe that solitary confinement should be considered as cruel and unusual punishment.