This was established to ensure that our representatives could be renewed as often as needed to reflect the public’s beliefs. Proponents for term limitations feel that officials can become corrupt and abusive of their position. These groups wish to limit the overall time that an official can hold office to ensure that new blood will be able to inject new ideas and beliefs. The opposite to this thought is that by injecting new blood we will lose the experienced politicians that know how to get things done in the complex world of politics. There is a sharp learning curve that comes with holding
One main point is that without voter identification laws, such as registering in your home state, Americans will try to vote in several states in hopes of increasing their candidates chance of winning the election. This would create in unfair advantage to the candidates at the polls and would not result in an honest election. Another argument is that these laws reduce the chances of Americans voting under fake names or under deceased names. If someone is using another person’s identity or making up a name, it can only be concluded that they do not want their actual identity discovered or known for whatever reason. Not only is it dishonest but it’s also against the law to use a deceased persons information for any reason.
In their research paper, the economists also argue that a balanced budget amendment likely would inspire the government to increase savings to hedge against future problems in the broader economy. Crisis Response A key concern frequently raised about a balanced budget amendment is the lack of flexibility it allows. Because the budget is required by law to be balanced, the federal government has fewer options for responding to economic developments as they arise. Although an
Becoming a republic, citizens of Australia might feel unsafe and leave the country. Do we really want that happening because of one little change? People might say, do we really need their help anyway? All I can say is, the more help, the better. Britain and Australia share so much history together; it would be disgraceful just to ditch them.
Discursive Essay “To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” Louis L’Amour In many countries around the world individuals can choose to vote, or not to vote, as they see fit. In some countries; Australia, Switzerland and Singapore for example, it is compulsory to vote in elections and is a punishable offence if you do not. Some say it would benefit our country if citizens were forced to vote others say that it would compromise our rights to do so, in this essay I intend to bring forward arguments for both for and against compulsory voting in Britain. Firstly an argument for compulsory voting in Britain is that in all democracies around the world, voter apathy is highest amongst the poor and uneducated.
However, there are inevitably some questions arising about the electoral college and whether it still works best for the US today. Some say it should be completely scrapped, with a more democratic direct election taking it's place; others day that it can be mended by reforming it, and the final argument is to defend it, and leave it as it is. One reason to end the electoral college system is because it is not democratic enough. The winner of the nationwide vote could in fact lose the election because of the way the electoral college works. Popular vote winners have been denied the presidency in 1824, 1876, 1888 and 2000.
This would help keep the issue from arising into view with the public. As for the contract, if IKEA decides to keep the contract they could risk bad publicity regarding the issues that arose. They could even tarnish their brand name because of associating with suppliers who condone child labor. If IKEA were to terminate the contract they could face a slight financial instability in the short run. IKEA could easily drop Rangan Exports as a supplier and only suffer a short run deficit because they have more than 2,000 suppliers.
And while it may increase the number of voter turnouts, it could also possibly take away the significance of an individual’s vote all together. It could also very well discourage the level of political education among voters, rather than develop it. After all, is a government really more justifiable if the high voter turnout is against the will of the voters? It has been proven that forcing people to vote only results in an increased number of invalid and blank votes, compared to countries with no mandatory voting laws. People who
By voting and being active within our government we can continue limiting the power to our advantage and by involving those who don’t; we can begin creating more citizens that help create a better nation. Thoreau did exactly this, he believed that the government was over expanding their power and taking away natural rights from people based on their aboriginality. He believed that people were followers of one central belief and if you could convince them that what they were doing was wrong, you could sway them to begin a movement. Thoreau saw potential in civil disobedience and by refusing to pay taxes it would stop the funding for slavery.
Evaluate the usefulness of referendums. Referendums are useful in some instances but have many faults and I will explore these further on in the essay. In the UK we only have referendums when the government decides it cannot make the decision and wants to ask the citizens of the state, sometime this has worked and sometime it has not. The only way that a referendum will be useful is if the government educates the citizens, so they can make an informed decision. As otherwise the whole Idea of having a referendum will be useless as the decisions made by the citizens could change the way this country runs.