Should Doug Gansler Have Done More About Underage Drinking Party?

25 October 2013
Interest Groups
Article found here

A photograph of Attorney General Gansler of Maryland at a party with underage drinkers was discovered. Upon the finding of the picture, Gansler stated that he was there to check on his son. This raised the question of whether or not it was Gansler's responsibility to stop the teenagers from their illegal activities.

In the article, the argument was that Gansler was just compromising and was justified in his actions because he was being a reasonable parent. However, many argued that he should not have let such things happen without taking action. I thought this was an interesting juxtaposition of the groups supporting traditional morals and values and the groups willing to take a modern stance. I honestly think that he should have stopped the kids from what they were doing because it was illegal and dangerous (though the parents of the teens had rules in place, there is never a guarantee that kids will listen). I also thought that Gansler's initial response to questioning, that "there could be Kool-Aid in the red cups," was, quite frankly, embarrassing. No matter how you look at it, underage drinking is still illegal, and the laws stating that should be upheld.

Obama: If We Can Afford Shutdown, We Can Afford to Fund Education

25 October 2013

Interest Groups

Article found here

Last Friday after visiting an advanced Brooklyn high school, President Obama stated that he thinks that he thinks we need to focus more on investing in education over prioritizing spending cuts in other areas. His reasoning was that, if we wish to be globally competitive, we need to up our educational game by incorporating more innovative methods into our education system. 

As a student in high school, education is something that I think about every day. Initially, I was very excited to see that there had been some statements made about improving our country's education system; what student wouldn't be? After reading the article, however, it soon became apparent that the desires stated were a little too good to actually happen. Education is a tricky topic; while people want their children to be educated and for other people to pay for it, most are not willing to pay for the same thing for other people's children. Americans say that we need to spend more on education, but are they willing to pay the higher taxes required in order to make improvements? Are they willing to give teachers higher salaries and therefore better incentive for others to become teachers, even if that means money out of their own pockets? I think that Obama's ideas are nice, but that they will probably stay just that: ideas. There might be a few minor changes made, but at the rate that things are going in Congress, I doubt that the changes will be drastic. 

New Jersey Supreme Court to Allow Same-Sex Marriages

October 18 2013
Article found here

Last month, a judge in New Jersey ruled that the state "must recognize same-sex marriage." The judge also stated that Monday, October 21st will be the day on which the gay weddings start. Many say that the delay for same-sex marriage legality in the state is due to Gov. Christie and his veto last year on a bill legalizing same-sex marriage. It has not been decided yet what will come of the same-sex marriages performed in the "waiting period" before the issue is determined if the ban should be kept.

In continuing with the theme of the last post, I thought this was another great example of the same interest group once again using the court system to get what they want. This issue is bigger than ever, with 14 states now having legalized gay marriage and several more in the midst of deciding. Again, I don't know of an answer to give the people on either side of the issue; this is a moral issue, and with questions of morality there is never an answer to satisfy everyone.

Federal Judge: Michigan Gay Marriage Ban Will Go to Trial

16 October 2013
Article found here
Interest Groups

A lesbian couple from Michigan, wanting to adopt each other's children, has decided to challenge the state's law banning same-sex marriage by taking their case to trial. In doing this, they hope to gain the same legal rights for themselves and their children enjoyed by same-sex couples in other states.

I'm not sure how I feel about this issue. On the one hand, I can understand where these women are coming from; they feel that this would be the best thing for their children, and are willing to do what it takes to procure the legal binds needed to fully parent each other's children. I can also see why this is such a heated topic nationwide; the people of this interest group feel that they have a right to marry whomever they choose, and that they deserve the same legal rights as choosing traditional marriage. Given my religious beliefs, I don't agree with gay marriage or adoption rights for same-sex couples, but from a legal perspective, I'm not sure that government has the right to decide such things. This then raises the question, "Well, who does?" I can't answer this question, and apparently no one else can give a satisfactory answer either, or else the issues of gay marriage and adoption laws would no longer be under debate.

Grand Canyon Reopens in National Parks Deal with States

12 October 2013
Interest Groups

Article found here
Synopsis
The government and several states, including Arizona, Utah, Colorado, New York, and South Dakota, have worked out a deal to reopen (or partially reopen) the states' National Parks with the stipulation that they must pay for it. The states have also been told that there is little guarantee of them being reimbursed for this. Though paying for the parks is a large cost (the partially reopened Grand Canyon will cost $93,000 per day), these states have decided that the revenue they will get outweighs these costs.
Analysis
I think this is an excellent example of an interest group. These states all get significant revenue from their National Parks, and the shutting down of these parks has already had a huge impact (the Grand Canyon alone gets about $1 million per day at this time of year). The longer these parks are shut down, the more money the local and state economies lose. Although this compromise is expensive, I think that these states made the right decision in taking the offer proposed by the Obama administration. It will be interesting to see if other states (possibly Oregon?) follow suit in reopening their National Parks.