If this is “a government of the people” then there should have been a referendum on tuition fees as this was a controversial subject that affected a lot of people. If there was a referendum then people would either choose no to a rise in tuition fees or for a rise in tuition fees. The fact that the government just implemented this rule on us is what made this topic controversial as in a democracy people should have a choice and should be able to have their say. If there was a referendum on tuition fees then maybe there would have been fewer protests, as the people would feel that the politicians had listened to them. On the other hand using referendums to improve democracy in the UK has a lot of disadvantages.
Not voting could be a benefit because of the voter’s lack of knowledge. Voting is not meant for everyone. Not everyone watches the news or C-SPAN. Not everyone watches the presidents give their speeches or go to their campaign rallies. The people that do go should vote because they know what’s going on.
It would ban the political use of money deducted from paychecks by unions or corporations. And it would ban government contractors from contributing to the campaigns of public officials who control the awarding of those contracts (The Sun). By eliminating the payroll deduction union members contributions to political activity will be their decision. Proposition 32 would cut money ties between big unions and politicians and also gets corporate big money out of the politician’s pocket. The measure will curb unions’ outsized political influence everywhere, too often resulting in laws that benefit union members over the interest of all Californians.
To what extent should leaders rely on polling results to guide them in voting on legislation? Partially it will depend on how well the pollster informs the public on the Leader’s issues. It is not important to correct the prevailing opinion on popular questions as much as correcting the inaccuracies of polling results. Eighty-one percent say when making "an important decision" government leaders "should pay attention to public opinion polls because this will help them get a sense of the public's views." Only 18 percent of the public said "leaders should not pay attention to public opinion polls because this will distract them from deciding what they think is right."
The Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional because it did not give the presidential administrations the power to remove board members (Younglai et al., 2010). Another major con of SOX is the cost to comply with the audit requirement. Many lawmakers fear that these costs are pushing firms to move their operation oversees (Sarbanes-Oxley Act. (n.d.). Overall, SOX has caused companies to be more forthcoming with their financial data at the same time instilling more confidence from the public.
as a result, the money states earn from being out of the liquor retail business could be used for healthcare, education and protecting the environment.the initiative supports political growth as well. obrien states, "under 1183, Washington would join 42 other states that allow consumers to purchase alcohol from licensed grocery or retail stores."(O`Brien). this will create lesser tax passed onto consumers when the state does not need taxpayers money to run liquor stores. economic growth will also therefore result from this initiative being passed. O`Brien states "with 1183`s passage, the city of seattle will receive an estimated 25.7 million in new revenues over 6 years.
The endorsement groups offer bribes and ask for unnecessary promises to the politicians running for office. The temptation of falling into these traps is monstrous. According to Obama, these politicians feel that if they do not accept these bribes or arguments then they will lose out on endorsement deals as well as votes. Taking endorsements are not bad in anyway. However, a company endorses a certain individual for reasons such as political similarities or to help promote their product.
Some issues put forward by the government may be too complicated for the people to understand, which means they may have difficulty deciding on their opinion due to lack of knowledge. Referendums may encourage giving power to the people, however, making important decisions should probably be left for the elected MP’s to conclude, simply for the fact that they are experts. Another advantage of using referendums is that they stop the government from making decisions which aren’t suited, or are unpopular with the public when an issue raised has had a large population vote ‘no’. If the government change a referendum’s verdict, then the public are less likely to conform to it which means the government have no choice in which to carry out their final decision. The second disadvantage of holding more referendums is that
He mention what is the president and public want from gun control laws even the public think all new government laws will not work to reduce the illegal used of gun. I agree with Wilson criticism of gun control legislation in same time I agree with the public of the effective of the new laws. Wilson tries to propose some solutions of illegal gun and should control and ban the use of these guns. Wilson has some ideas and major actions to solve gun control debate. He mentions the relating between shrinking the stock of legally purchased guns and people self defend.
Both companies are not real people so they shouldn’t have the right to say why there company is better that’s ridiculous. Without people knowing who is the better TV provider or better candidate all depends on what kind of advertisement that company puts out. So all the ads you see on TV will either make fun of the company or say how bad they are on what they produce or they will do. Big ways corporations get their ads out are on social media nowadays. With Facebook the top social media website you know companies are going to get their ads on there.