Trump Dumps his Responsibilities onto Congress: Does this Force Congress into Agreement or is it Counterproductive?

Trump’s Executive Actions May Mean More Headaches For Struggling Congress

By Tamara Keith

Oct. 16 2017

Trump’s agenda is composed of issues that all pertain to similar goals: to reverse Obama-era policies. He is pushing away the Iran nuclear deal that evaporated the nuclear-related economic sanctions, with intention to completely lock down any possibility of nuclear development. He is attempting to curb the subsidies given to insurance companies, and, finally, he wants to expire DACA. These issues connect to greater movements in Congress that would never reach bipartisan agreement, thus putting greater strain on the Republican-dominated House.

Trump is optimistic that his goals will implement and force change through the House, slowly but surely. He said that stopping the payments to insurance companies would contribute to the effort of eliminating Obamacare, and that his DACA expiration would later force unanimous agreement in Congress regarding the movement of money to build a wall. By continually using the term “we will”, Trump appears to be contributing to the policies, however, all the responsibility that comes attached to his plans are burdened onto the shoulders of Congress. The GOP is already struggling to achieve their own goals on the agenda, including passing a tax system overhaul; however, these partisan issues Trump is raising are taking priority.

Despite taking away time and money from national issues, Schumer (NY Senator) and Charlie Dent (US rep. of Penn) agree that the must-pass government funding legislation will create opportunity for an omnibus or other sort of negotiation where bipartisan agreement can be reached in relation to the health care subsidies. This offers a promising future for agreement in the House on issues that involve channeling the tax revenue, especially for health care.

Questions:

1. Is it enough for Trump’s policies, to force a bipartisan agreement on health care subsidies, to justify his control over the Republican agenda?

2. Considering Trump is simply following his outline for his term of presidency, would it make sense for his approval rating to go down?

3. Do you think Democrats will agree to get rid of Obamacare if it came to the point of reducing subsidies to the insurance companies?

Tom Steyer Launches $10 Million Campaign to Impeach Trump

http://time.com/5001180/donald-trump-impeachment-tom-steyer/

By Katy Steinmetz

October 27, 2017

Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer has funded a multi-million dollar campaign to impeach president Trump on the charges of “being an immediate danger to the health and safety of America” and obstruction of justice with ads airing in all 50 states. In the ads Steyer himself accuse Trump of almost starting a nuclear war with North Korea as well as undermining the First Amendment by threatening to shut down news organizations. In addition Steyer claims that Trump’s firing of FBI director James Comey to be an obstruction of justice. Steyer made his fortune through hedge funds and has even donated over $165 million of his own money in the last two election cycles. Steyer is also considering running for Governor of California as Jerry Brown is nearing the end of his final term and also Senator Dianne Feinstein's seat in 2018.

Questions:

1. Do you think that Trump’s offenses qualify as “treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors” as stated by the Constitution as grounds for impeachment?
2. Do you think Steyer has ulterior motives behind the impeachment campaign, such as furthering his own political interests as he may run for office?
3. How could the next mid-term election possibly affect Trump’s chances of being impeached

The Rise of Trumpcare: Can Trump replace Obamacare through executive orders?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/politics/trump-obamacare-executive-order/index.html
By: Tami Luhby and Kevin Liptak
October 12, 2017

President Trump has recently signed the "Executive Order Promoting Healthcare Choice and Competition" also know as the "Trumpcare" Executive Order, which orders various governmental agencies to find ways to modify the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). One of these "governmental agencies" is the Labor Department, they will begin research on methods of allowing small businesses and groups of individuals to join together and buy nationwide association health plans, thereby promoting lower healthcare. The order will also allow Americans to purchase healthcare that does not comply with Obamacare and broadens the ability for employers to give their workers money to by their own healthcare.

While most of these provisions do seem appealing, critics have identified numerous drawbacks of the executive order. The order will free association health plans from various Obamacare regulations, thus resulting in lower costs but inferior benefits. This will result in younger and healthier people leaving Obamacare and skyrocketing premiums for for those that remain in Obamacare.

As a result, many are urging the president to work with congress instead of forcing changes through executive orders. In fact the senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer tweeted that Trump "is using a wrecking ball to singlehandedly rip apart & sabotage our healthcare system" referring to his executive order. This event thus calls into question the effectiveness and sheer power that executive orders give a president.

Questions:

1. Is Trump's use of executive orders to dismantle Obamacare a fair method to push his agenda?
2. Are executive orders too powerful in their ability to bypass congress?
3. Do Trump's new policies shift America's healthcare system in a positive direction?

Jeff Flake Not Seeking Re-election for Senate

Jeff Flake, a Fierce Trump Critic, Will Not Seek Re-election for Senate

By Sheryl Gay Stolberg
Oct. 24, 2017

Senator Jeff Flake, of Arizona, announced that he will not be running for re-election in the 2018 midterms during a notable floor speech. He attributes this to disapproval of Trump, and everything the Republican party has come to stand for. Flake emphasized disdain over "the flagrant disregard for truth and decency" that he has observed in his time as Senator under Trump. With a rocky relationship with Trump and often contradicting beliefs, it is not surprising that these disagreements over policies regarding immigration and isolationism ultimately discouraged Flake from running again. In his speech, Flake also acknowledged that "sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office, and there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles". After studying the benefits that incumbents are subject to, including access to campaign finance, it is highly unusual that Flake would announce this so early. While many other politicians would choose to remain in office, Flake's lack of support within his party indicates he would not win the 2018 election, so he did not bother trying. Furthermore, his announcement indicates honor that is rarely found within politics. Flake strongly opposes the actions of his party, and stepping back from office reflects that sentiment. Hopefully, Flake's actions inspire others who disagree with the morals of what they currently represent, so they also stand up for what is right.

Questions

1. What does Flake's early announcement say about the 2018 election?

2. Do you think this will impact the public's perception of Trump significantly?

3. Do you think Flake made the right decision?

Trump's approval holding steady, but more say country headed in wrong direction

Poll: Trump's approval holding steady, but more say country headed in wrong direction
By LOUIS NELSON 10/17/2017

About thirty seven percent of the people polled approve of the way Trump handles his job as president, which remains the same as last month, whereas those that do not approve of Trump's job performance rose one percent to fifty seven percent. However, only forty six percent of people believes that the US is headed in the right direction, which is a decrease of seven percent from August. This drastic decline is primarily due to Trump's response with the hurricanes and his proposed tax reform package. If the trends continue, things may start to shape up for Democrats for the 2018 midterms.

Questions:

1. Do tracking polls accurately represent the people's opinions and knowledge? Explain.
2. Do you agree with how Trump is handling the hurricanes? If not, what course of action would you suggest he take?
3. Based on these statistics, do you think 2018 will be an anti-incumbency election? In other words, do Democrats have a chance at taking over the House or Senate in 2018? Why or why not?

So, Trump doesn't want war? Wait, I'm confused...

Tillerson on North Korea

Posted on: October 16th, 2017

By: Eli Watkins

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has confirmed that the United States' will continue diplomatic efforts in dealing with the hostile North Korea. Tillerson will was quoted saying "Those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops," implying that he believes that nuclear warfare could be imminent. 

What was most surprising to read was that Trump agrees with Tillerson, wanting to resolve this issue diplomatically. Tillerson said, "[Trump] is not seeking to go to war" and that avoiding violence is his preferred avenue.

Trump, however, has Tweeted some contradicting things in regards to Tillerson's comments. While the Secretary of State was in Beijing, trying to cool tensions with North Korea, Trump said that Tillerson "was wasting his time" and also threatening to "totally destroy the isolated nation." Despite this lack of certainty regarding US Policy towards North Korea, Tillerson assures the public that China "is not confused in any way" and is aware of how the United States intends to deal with North Korea.

As precautionary measures, the United States has begun taking part in joint naval drills in the water of South Korea. According to Kim Kwang Hak, a researcher at the Institute for American Studies of the North Korean Foreign Ministry, this has hardened the determination of the rogue that the "US shouold be tamed with fire" and has lead North Korea to move [their] hand closer to the 'trigger'."

Questions:

1. Do you think it's healthy that the President and his Secretary of State contradict each other so often on such a serious matter? What could be some potential repercussions of this issue?

2. What do you think Trump actually thinks is the best way to deal with North Korea? Is he just putting on a show to prove his manliness or is Tillerson lying?

Trump Chips Away at Affordable Care Act

Coverage Questions Swirl as Trump Cuts Subsidies - Andrew Soergel, US News &World Report, October 13, 2017

After Trump's failed attempt to repeal Obamacare, he is taking a new approach in trying to chip away at the Affordable Care Act. Trump has issued a statement stopping the cost sharing reduction subsidies authorized by the Affordable Care Act. These subsidies were designed to make coverage more affordable to lower-income Americans. However, these subsidies have been criticized and in federal court was ruled that "the payments could not be authorized without approval from Congress." This has been a constant debate between Democrats and Republicans for many years, yet no party has been able to come up with a compromise or solution to the issue. Many are afraid that losing these subsidies will continue to raise the premiums of health insurance affecting the many people that are on Obamacare. However, some Republicans are stating that it is unconstitutional to bailout these insurance companies, due to the fact that congress is in charge of the government "purse" and "how the previous administration abused taxpayer dollars and skirted the law to prop up a broken system." Despite this fact, many from both parties fear the future of health insurance due to the President's recent actions.



Questions:
1.  Do you agree with Trump's actions? If no, what could he have done instead?
2. Who does this affect the most in America?

Texas Tech Shooting

Ralph Ellis - Tony Marco

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/09/us/texas-tech-police-officer-fatally-shot/index.html

Gun control and police brutality continue to be topics that weigh heavy on the minds of Americans; however, violent retaliation against police brutality by those in pain as a result of their maltreatment of Americans documented, and undocumented is an issue that is in need of more acknowledgment as well.  On October 10th of 2017 Hollis Daniels, a 19-year-old freshman from Seguin, Texas opened fire on Officer Floyd East Jr., who was working at Texas Technological University, as a security guard for the night.   Officer East was allegedly not provoking the student, and as officials were able to find drug-related paraphernalia in the student's dorm, they are assuming the murder was drug induced.  

1. Should colleges search dorms for weaponry?

2. Should colleges attempt more background checks for students they are considering for admission?

Will Las Vegas Change Gun Control?

"Trump's ardent pro-gun stance is new, but will Las Vegas force him to give ground?" Noah Bierman, Los Angeles Times, Oct 7, 2017

What is now the worst mass shooting U.S. history, the Las Vegas massacre, killed 58 and injured hundreds last week, has caused a rise in controversy with gun control. President Trump now faces a large conflict, with many citizens angry, wanting more gun control, but also many fighting for the right of the second amendment. With Trump being close with the NRA, them spending more than $30 million, endorsing him during the campaign, and them being a key factor in helping him win the election, he is now faced with a larger issue. Trump being a supporter of gun rights has stated “Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.” Trump has addressed the shooting sending thoughts and prayers out to the victims and their families, but has ignored the gun control topic stating “We’ll talk about gun laws as time goes by". Many argue more regulations need to be emplaced to ensure events such as the Las Vegas shooting do not occur. The NRA usually tends to stay quiet after events such as Las Vegas, although they have stated their should be restrictions on bump stocks, a device that can be attached to a rifle to make it fire as fast as an automatic weapon. Even though it is a rare statement from the NRA, many argue they avoiding the bigger issue and changing the focus onto bump stocks.

Questions:

1. Do you think the President's response to topic of gun control was appropriate? If not, how should have Trump responded?
2. How do you think Trump’s relationship with the NRA will affect any suggested gun control regulations?

NFL Protests - Taking a Stand?

President Trump reignited his feud with the N.F.L. on Sunday by telling Vice President Mike Pence to walk out of a game.

Trump Tells Pence to Leave N.F.L. Game as Players Kneel During Anthem - Mark Landler, Ken Belson and Maggie Haberman, New York Times, OCT. 8, 2017
Conservative PAC Begins Ad Campaign Encouraging NFL Fans to Turn Off Games - Kevin Seifert, ESPN, Sep 24, 2017

Players in the National Football League have been protesting the National Anthem in one way or another for about a year now beginning with former San Francisco 49ers quarter back, Colin Kaepernick. Kaepernick and other players stand up for what they believe is racial inequality in the United States and are supported by interests groups such as the Black Lives Matter group. However two weeks ago President Trump brought the protests to a national attention by calling out players who have knelt for the national anthem and just this week VP, Mike Pence, walked out of a game between the Indianapolis Colts and The San Francisco 49ers because he "will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem." Many players and people saw this as a PR stunt, looking to appeal to the mass of NFL watching Americans who may have voted or support Trump. As can be seen in the second article, a conservative PAC also has been spread PR advertisements by telling viewers to "take a stand not a knee" and to "turn off the NFL." This has greatly angered many people within the NFL who want politics to stay out of the game in order to keep viewership up.  Overall, many interest groups have been involved in the NFL protest issue and with the issue extremely relatable and understandable to many American citizens, taking a PR stance might be a successful way to go about gaining support for a specific side.

1. Do you think that going public, in terms of PAC advertisements, and Pence walking out of the game, can be successful in order to gain support against kneeling?
2. How has government intervention and conflict, in something that is normally meant to be a uniting game, potentially impacted the Trump presidency? Has it been positive or negative?
3. Were Pence's actions and comments called for even if it was just a publicity stunt?

Wisconsin Supreme Court Case Could Reshape Redistricting

  HOW A WISCONSIN CASE COULD RESHAPE REDISTRICTING, Michael Wines, New York Times, Oct. 1, 2017

Gill v. Whitford has drawn so much attention to the constitutionality of gerrymandering and the Supreme Court's role in slowing or stopping this gerrymandering that 54 friend-of-the-court briefs totaling one thousand pages have been written on behalf of constitutional lawyers, historians, party elders, social scientists, and a neuroscientist. The basis of Gill v. Whitford is simple: Following Republicans' 2010 midterm triumph, Republican mapmakers and strategists utilized advanced computer models and voting data to determine Assembly party lines. Cementing Republican control over the Assembly solidified the party's national political grip. The argument against this strategic redistricting is based on a 1964 Supreme Court ruling that mandates each district to have an approximately equal number of people. Thus, "packing" voters into specific districts violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nevertheless, experts are torn on how SCOTUS will react to the Wisconsin map and respond to the issue.

1) How do you think SCOTUS will/should approach the issue of gerrymandering?

2) Should the federal government take control of the redistricting process completely?

3) What does gerrymandering say about the state of U.S. democracy today?

Can Geometry Fix Gerrymandering?

Can Geometry Fix Partisan Gerrymandering? Rebecca Goldfine, Bowdoin, 8/20/17

Gerrymandering, at a basic level, is a problem of geometry. State legislatures drawing districts to favor one party is problematic when issues like “packing” party-affiliated voters to contain them in one district or “cracking” them up into several districts to sprinkle non-sympathetic voters throughout several districts to dilute their vote arise.  However, a professor of mathematics at Tufts University has created a mathematically- based strategy to bring a more fair and just political system. The strategy will precisely account for oddly shaped districts and not simply draw around groups with shared interests or form voter suppression as is done today. With this math, gerrymandering is proposed to be drawn fairly with equal representation of voters all while balancing between the traditional districting principles and producing shapes that are constitutionally fit. 

Questions: 

1). What are the problems with gerrymandering and is math really a solution? 

2). Do you think state legislatures and mathematicians can ever work together? If not, why would they be against the cooperation? 

The State of Jefferson

CALIFORNIA'S FAR NORTH DEPLORES 'TYRANNY' OF THE URBAN MAJORITY, Thomas Fuller, New York Times, 7/2/17

The State of Jefferson is a state proposed by the people in Nothern California that would consist of both the rural areas of Nothern California and Southern Oregon, attempting to secede from both states to become its own. Why secede? Californians up north feel like California is often made by representatives focusing on the more populated Southern California and Bay Area regions. In the North, the unemployment rate is higher, rules are more strict, and some people live in poverty. Therefore, Jefferson is Northern California's way for the citizens to feel represented by the state. Additionally, those in the proposed state of Jefferson have voted Republican in the presidential elections, while both California and Oregon remain Democratic states, thus also demonstrating how much of a divide there is between the two areas of California.

Questions:

1. Will the State of Jefferson even happen? What is the best solution for this issue of representation between Northern California and the rest of California?

2.  If Jefferson happens, how would that affect California? The U.S.?