bclarkson21ahsgov - Tumblr blog

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

Legislative and Executive Action

2163: Commission on the Social Status of Black men and Boys Act

This bill originated in the Senate, and was passed first by the senate then later by the House. This bill establishes the Commission on the Social Status of Black Men and Boys within the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Office of the Staff Director to conduct a systematic study of the conditions affecting Black men and boys. This bill was mostly supported by Republicans including Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney, but had to Democratic supporters Kamala Harris and Cory Booker. This bill was assigned to the Committee of Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. I’ll be honest I do not fully understand what this bill is trying to do, so I would not be able to give my opinion on whether to vote yay or nay.

U.S. Department of Justice

“To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans”. “The Attorney General is William Barr. Mr. Barr served as a law clerk under Judge Malcolm Wilkey of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Following his clerkship, Mr. Barr joined the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge as an associate. He left the firm to work in the White House under President Ronald Reagan from 1982 to 1983 on the domestic policy staff, then returned to the law firm and became a partner in 1985.Under President George H.W. Bush, Mr. Barr served as the Deputy Attorney General from 1990 to 1991; the Assistant Attorney General of the Office of Legal Counsel from 1989 to 1990; and the 77th Attorney General of the United States from 1991 to 1993. From 1994 to 2000, Mr. Barr served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel for GTE Corporation. Mr. Barr then served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Verizon from 2000 to 2008. At both GTE and Verizon, Mr. Barr led the legal, regulatory, and government affairs activities of the companies. After retiring from Verizon in 2008, Mr. Barr advised major corporations on government enforcement matters, as well as regulatory litigation. Mr. Barr served as Of Counsel at Kirkland & Ellis LLP in 2009 and rejoined the firm in 2017.President Donald Trump announced his intention to nominate Mr. Barr on December 7, 2018, and he was confirmed as the 85th Attorney General of the United States by the U.S. Senate on February 14, 2019. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts administered the oath of office. Mr. Barr joins John Crittenden as one of only two people in U.S. history to serve twice as Attorney General.” The DOJ supports many components, programs, and initiatives including the Civil Rights Division, which deals with the rights of the people.

2 notes · View notes

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

California Proposition Assessment

Prop 16: California Constitutional Amendment- Affirmative Action in Public Education and Employment

Prop 16 would repeal an earlier amendment which is Prop 206, which banned the consideration of race, sex, ethnicity, or national orientation in public education, public employment, and public contracting. Prop 16, “ would have no direct fiscal effect on state and local entities because the measure would not require any change to current policies or programs “. The prop got defeated with 57% of people voting no, and 43% voting yes. This is surprising to me because as a Democratic state I thought that people would want women and people of color extra opportunities. This proposition had a lengthy list of endorsers, which include the California Democratic party, US Senators Diane Feinstein, Kamala Harris, and Bernie Sanders, Governor Gavin Newsom, and even Speaker of the US House Nancy Pelosi. Along with 26 US Representatives, 3 California State Senators, 4 assembly members, the mayors of San Diego, Long Beach, San Jose, San Francisco, LA, Oakland, and Stockton. This list of supporters helps to show a voter that this is a legit proposal, as well as showing that it is a liberal supported proposition.

Pros

1. Women and people of color, or ethnic nationality get extra in order to “even” out the playing field white American

2. Would have cost the state nothing if it was passed

Cons

1. Makes and unequal system, which goes against the Constitution which states that all men are created equal

I personally would have voted no on the proposition because I believe in Equality over equity. It is not fair to give someone extra or to deny them of something based on their race, gender, or anything of that matter. Affirmative action does just that gives extra to some and not to all.

1 note · View note

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

Political Interest Groups and PACs Assessment

Race Forward

Race forward was founded in 1981 and, “Brings systemic analysis and an innovative approach to complex race issues to help people take effective action toward racial equity”(Race Forward). Race Forward is the creator of the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE). GARE is a, “National network of local governments working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all”. They are also the publishers of the daily news site Colorlines, which is an award winning site which, “Brings a critical racial lens to its journalism, as it covers breaking news, offers context and analysis for fast-moving stories and digs deeper with investigative reporting”. For the last 15 years Race Forward has hosted Facing Race. Facing Race is the largest intergenerational, and multicultural conference on racial justice in the U.S., and provides many seasoned speakers who speak on a wide range of racial justice issues. In past years the conference has brought in, “Over 4,000 attendees from all over the world to convene, organize, and mobilize for a more equitable future”. Through the Race Forward Racial Justice Leadership Action Network they give, “Online and in-person training and consulting in areas of mobilization, skill-building, leadership development, organization- and alliance-building, issue-framing, messaging, and advancing solutions”. Race Forward also engages in action-oriented campaigns, one of which is their Drop the I-Word Campaign. The campaign sought to, “ Eliminate the widespread usage of the inhumane and derogatory word “illegal” in reference to immigrants, demonstrating the links between racially charged language and racially unjust policies”. Race Forward released a statement after Joe Biden had been elected that stated that they are celebrating, “President-elect Joseph Biden and the historic election of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris as the first Black and Asian American woman to hold that office. Race Forward also calls upon the Biden administration to center racial justice in the development of its policy platform for the first 100 days and beyond”. Race Forward is from New York, but has an office located in Oakland as well. They also provide a number and email address in order to contact them. They also offer training programs that you can attend, but you do have to pay a fee to attend.

Black PAC

This is a Pac that supports the Liberal agenda, and spent a grand total of $26,549,387 on 2020 federal elections. They had $4,549,387 of independent expenditures. They spent 26 millions dollars for the Democratic party, and 4 million against the Republican party. This is not a surprise as they follow the liberal agenda. An organization called the Unite the Country and America Votes are donors to the PAC which show that the PAC is for the progression of the country.

1 note · View note

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

Election 2020 Presidential Candidates Assessment

Howie Hawkins/Angela Nicole Walker, Green

This candidate had a good section of bullet points on their views on some social and racial injustice issues. They seem to be with the norm on most of the topics left leaning slightly. Hawkins is pro open border and legal for undocumented immigrants. Most of it was equality for all and anti discrimination for all. I agree with all of the racial related topics except for the legal status for undocumented immigrants and open borders like within the European union. I believe that people should be heavely documented before coming in because the United States already has a very high unemployment rate, along with thousands of undocumented immigrants who have jobs which they lawfully should not have. The party’s views, and the candidate views match up perfectly; Both are pro immigrant, pro equality for all, including natives, blacks, Mexican, etc.

Donald J. Trump/Michael R. Pence, Republican

Trump’s site looked good obviously, but did not give anything that Trump wanted to do or is going to do, it only had accomplishments that he had. I know that he is running for his second term so most people know his stance on most topics, but for all new voters just young people in general it can seem arrogant to just have your accomplishments on your campaign site. There was not a section of the site that really covered my topic which follows the pattern of Trump not supporting the different ethnic groups and races. With what has been going on recently within the nation as the president there should be a huge section of what you have done with racial injustice issues if you want to have a chance winning the election. They did have a section on immigration which deals with ethnicity and race, but the section was mostly anti immigration views. Which some I agreed with, but some were just a little extreme.

Gloria La Riva/Sunil Freeman, Peace and Freedom

This sight was very straightforward and easy to see their basic views and what they wanted in the future for the country. She is a section titled, “ End racism, police brutality and mass incarceration-Pay reparations to the African American community”. This states their view of the racial problems within the country and also what they want to fix or mend the broken relationship between the different races. Though I do not agree with paying reparations to black people with slave ancestors because it is almost impossible to track and truly give compensation with money. Also as a country that is in 21 plus trillion dollars of debt, we are not in the position to create this money to just give away. The candidate site and the party site were very similar, in both having the same stance on racial injustice, and also both being very well organized and straightforward.

Roque De La Fuente "Rocky" Guerra/Kanye Omari West, American Independent

This person did not have anything on racial issues of any sort. Their site looked good but was slim and didn't actually have much within it. I sent an email to the candidate asking for his stance on the issues at hand.

Dear, Roque De La Fuente "Rocky" Guerra

The issue I am concerned about is Racial injustice in America. I am concerned about this issue because of what has happened in our country's recent past. I am currently a senior at Acalanes High School and I am researching this issue for my senior Government class. Please clarify your stance on this issue. Thank you so much for your time and good luck.

Sincerely,

Brayden Clarkson

[email protected]

Jo Jorgensen/Jeremy "Spike" Cohen, Libertarian

Jo had a terrific site, which had bundles of info on her stances and views. Though the site was well made, there was not a direct spot about racial injustice, but after reading it seemed that the candidate believed that poverty, crime, and incarceration problems were racial problems which is insulting. I don't like calling people racist, but to think that black, Mexicans, or anyone that is not white and those issues go hand and hand is a close minded viewing of the topic.

Dear Jo Jorgensen,

The issue I am concerned about is Racial injustice. I am concerned about this issue because your website does not have a specific section on the racial problems within the country as of late. I am currently a senior at Acalanes High School and I am researching this issue for my senior Government class. Please clarify your stance on this issue. Thank you so much for your time and good luck.

Sincerely,

Brayden Clarkson

[email protected]

Joseph R. Biden/Kamala D. Harris, Democratic

Biden’s site is well put together, and gives a clear stance and view on a lot of different topics. There is a section titled, “THE BIDEN PLAN TO BUILD BACK BETTER BY ADVANCING RACIAL EQUITY ACROSS THE AMERICAN ECONOMY”. This section explains his plan to reform the racial injustice problems of today. I agree with the base that the black community along with native Americans, and any other races, ethnicities, or nationalities are have been discriminated against for hundreds of years and it needs to stop. But I do not agree with giving these people extra because I believe in equality not equity. Under the law all are created equal no matter your race or nationality. As long as you are a citizen you are equal under the law. His plan to stop racial problems is to just give, “Black and brown” people more which creates an unequal system. Which could just be turned the other way when white people start to say that it is unfair that black and brown people get all this extra stuff. Also if the country just gives black and brown people compensation, the white racist and anti semist are not going to change or alter their views, it might actually create a larger divide. The party and candidate site are on par with each other almost matching views perfectly.

2 notes · View notes

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

Political Party Action

Republican:

The Republican party is the party of the constitution, and the constitution along with the Declaration of independence insure that all American citizens are equal under the law. Some people may not agree with this statement even though it is fact. The Republican party has stated that, “We[the Republican Party] denounce bigotry, racism, anti- Semitism, ethnics prejudice...”(9). The republican party does not support racism in any way and for people to be so close minded and say things like, “All Republicans are racist, and all Trump supporters are racist”. I agree with the party's view because it is logical and based on evidence and facts. The document in which all citizens have to follow states clearly that under the law all are created equal. Now that has been left up to interpretation over the years, but I see it as a very literal statement and I do not see any other meaning that could be seen. As the party of Abraham Lincoln, the Republican party, “Continues to encourage equality for all citizens.”

Democrat:

The Democratic party believes that because of America’s long history of systemic racism, has created, “Lasting inequities in income, wealth, education, employment, housing, environmental quality, and health care for communities of color.” They also stated that they are, “ Democrats are committed to standing up to racism and bigotry in our laws, in our culture, in our politics, and in our society”. Although I agree with the overarching idea of their position I believe that they are more closed minded than some may see. First, I agree that long systemic racism has filled America for a long time, and there still is racism today. I am not trying to knit pick, but people of color are not the only people who have been put down in America’s history. The Japanese were put into internment camps, the Asian forced to work on the railroads, and many nationalities who are Caucasian have been oppressed as well. Also, when they state that the laws have racism and bigotry I would like to disagree with that statement. I will agree that our culture, politics, and overall society are filled with racism, but the law which includes the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights included say that under the law all men - does not say women but also women - are created equal.

Libertarian:

Libertarians agree that bigotry is, “Irrational and repugnant”. They believe that, “Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual’s human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference, or sexual orientation.” I agree with this statement 100%, but believe that this should be something that everyone should just know. To label someone as a decent human being I think that this should be the bare minimum. I feel as though it is obvious that everyone should be treated the same under the law. The party also stated that because private corporations retain their rights to set all standards and associations they deem appropriate, if the individuals who work at the company can, “Respond with ostracism, boycotts, and other free market solutions”, which is also their right. Their section for this topic was small and condensed, but it seemed as though all the topics were structured like that. Though it was short I believe that they conveyed everything they wanted to, and in all honesty I think that it was perfect. It was straight to the point, and made me think they also believed that this should not even be a discussion if all people should have the same rights because one they do, and two if they did not then the problems in the country as of now would be 100 times worse.

Green:

The green party seems to have the most extensive section of rights of all kinds. They believe that racism of not only the black community, but that also recognize the other people of color along with a section on native Hawaiians, and Native Americans. They believe in compensation for those with ancestors who were slaves. I do not agree with this because one, the true amount of slaves is unknown, and there is little info on a large majority of the slaves. This would make it almost impossible to truly give fair compensation to everyone who deserved it. They also, “Strongly support the vigorous enforcement of civil-rights laws, the aggressive prosecution of hate crimes, and the strengthening of legal services for the poor.” Although I agree with this, to have this in the section of Rights for African and black Americans, and then saying they will help the poor is insulting. Saying that to help the poor as a whole would help the black community is insulting, and though the black community around the country is poorer as a whole it is just an insult to say something like that whether it was intended or not. Overall i would say that I agree with the overarching idea that racism is bad, has been for years, and can still be seen and needs to be stopped, but I do not agree with their moves to help.

Peace and Freedom:

This party seems to be more against capitalism than the actual problem, but they stated that, “They demand equal treatment of all people by employers, businesses and government. We stand for a world free from all forms of oppression.” I agree with this because to me it seems like a very obvious thing. I do not believe that there should even be a discussion about whether people should be treated equal under the law. This party claimed that, “ Minority families are disproportionately victimized by cutbacks in health care, education, child care, welfare, food stamps and jobs”, and demanded that America has to, “End all forms of racial discrimination. Enforce non-discrimination in hiring and promotion with affirmative action where necessary. Prosecute and punish police and prison officials who brutalize and murder.” I agree with most of what they are saying here. I agree that it is outrageous that the police officers who are killing innocent civilians should be put in court and sent to jail for their crime because just how the president is not above any laws, the police still have to be held accountable for the crimes. I have to say though that after doing some research and watching the news, I came to find that some of the recent civilian murders by the police were not on so-called “innocent” civilians, and I think that is what most people do not see or understand. One part that I do not agree with is to install affirmative action in companies and corporations because I believe in equality not equity.

Reflect:

I would say I agree with the Republican and Libertarian views the most. Both say that under the law all are created equal, but understand that there is racism in the nation. I also got from both of the parties a sense that they both knew that racism is a problem, but it is obvious that people should be treated equally and did not need to prove that they are not racist parties. I would not vote for Trump because I believe him to be a sexist and racist human.

Presidential Debates:

My topic did come up in the debate. The most notable time was when Trump was asked about Anti - Semitism in America, and he seemed to sort of dodge the question. He did not give a clear answer on such a softball type of question. Do you think racism is bad and will you stop it? Trump’s answer should have been yes and then had a set plan because how did he not see a question like that coming. I believe that he should have been better prepared for such an easy question that really could have solidified a non racist tag for Trump. His answer contradicted his party's stance that they, ”Denounce bigotry, racism, anti- Semitism, ethnics prejudice...”(9).

2 notes · View notes

bclarkson21ahsgov · 5 years ago

Text

Media Assessment of Issue

Article #1: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/racial-injustice-protests-across-country-lead-clashes-police-arrests-n1234936

Racial Injustice Protest Across the Country Lead to Clashes with Police, Arrests

The article told the reader of all the recent riots and protest, and it had a recap of most of the shootings. It gave dates and locations of many shootings and also one stabbing. It also spoke about how Trump has been sending federal forces to help the police with the protests and riots. Andrew Blankstein is an investigative reporter for NBC News. He covers the Western United States, specializing in crime, courts and homeland security. His view seemed to be more conservative just because he talked more about civilian against civilian, but not as much about cop shooting civilian. This made me believe that he is more conservative because he seems to be more behind the cops, and not telling there wrongs, although in the beginning the author spoke of Breonna Taylor’s murder which was down my the police. This article was published July 25, 2020, by NBC News. NBS News is known to be slightly left leaning, but mainly a very neutral and subtle news source. The audience for this article could have been anyone trying to learn more about the racial injustice issues within the nation recently, and wanted to see some date and events of the protests, riots, and presidential actions. The text was objective because it had a neutral view that maybe could be skewed to be seen a slightly conservative, but it was mostly stating events. The entire article is verifiable facts, and I did not see much of an overarching theme of than events of recent racial protests, riots, and some of Trump’s actions towards those events.

Article #2: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/515811-poll-most-americans-support-athletes-kneeling-in-protest-say

Poll: Most support athletes kneeling in Protest, Speaking out on Social Issues

The main point of the article was based around a poll done by the Washington Post which covered people views on many topics. “ The Washington Post poll was conducted Sept. 1-6 among a population of 1,001 adults. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points”(Mise).The poll consisted of questions about athletes kneeling during the National Anthem. The author comes out strong with the first sentence stating, “ A majority of Americans say they think it is appropriate for professional athletes to kneel during the national anthem in protest and use their platforms to speak out on social issues”(Mise). This statement is made based on the poll which said that 56% of American think that kneeling is appropriate, while 42% said the opposite. Although this statement was made early in the article the author gave a contrasting poll done in 2018 by NBC-Wall Street Journal. This contrasting poll, “ found that a majority of Americans — 54 percent — found it inappropriate for athletes to kneel during the national anthem in protest “(Mise). The author of the article was Justin Wise is a political writer for The Hill, and seems to be a very neutral and fair writer. The source was published September 190, 2020 posted on The Hill news site. The Hill is known to be a subtle and neutral news source that sometimes can skew conservative. Made for most viewers, was a easy to read, and kept a neutral theme throughout. It gave evidence for both sides, and was pointed towards readers looking for knowledge on the racial issues surrounded around sports and kneeling during the anthem. The text is objective because like i said before it is neutral and uses the facts of the polls to make points. The two competing perspectives were the contrasting polls which demonstrated how the views on the topic had changed over just a two year period. I agree with the Washington Post poll in which states that the majority thought that it was appropriate to kneel during the anthem. The polls speak for themselves because they show how the county has changed dramatically in just a two year period, which shows great progression as a nation.

Article #3: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/08/understanding-racism-inequality-america/?arc404=true

Resources to understand America’s long history of injustice and inequality

This article gives an extensive background and overall info on the topic of racial Injustice throughout the history of the United States. The article is trying to convey that racial injustice did not just start, that it has been here for hundreds of years, and unless people are willing to change our country will continue to have problems. The article does not have a single author as it is made up of many, “Deeply reported stories, videos, photo essays, audio and graphics”(WPS). This means that the article is written by many people in collaboration, which is good because it allows for hopefully many contrasting views that can help someone decide their own personal views. The source was produced on August 18, 2020 on the Washington Post. The Washington Post is known to be a subtle and neutral news source, but can sometimes be skewed liberal. This article is quite liberal, and the intro was very one sided towards there is only bad and no good. Which in my opinion is ignorant to believe. This article was intended for someone who is looking to do long and extensive research as it gives numerous, “Deeply reported stories, videos, photo essays, audio and graphics”(WPS). The article is subjective because it does not not give contrasting views, but it does give a credible history of events the articles used are mostly liberal leaning and view contrasting views showed.

These three articles have many similarities; They all speak on the topic of recent racial injustices in America, all come from somewhat neutral sources, each sort of leaning in the opposite direction in which to all for contrasting views on the topics. I related to The Hill’s article the most because it gave numbers and facts which are facts which allow my mind to think how it likes which is factually and logically. The 1st article would be a close second with the third coming in last because of its’ biased view.

0 notes