Franklin Delano Roosevelt And The World War II - 1165 Words

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, born on January 30, 1882, in Hyde Park, New York became the 32nd U.S. president in 1933. He was diagnosed with polio in the year 1921, making him paralyzed from the waist down. This, however, did not impede him from being the only person who has run for, and won, the presidency four times. Franklin died in 1945 from his illness but with great honor. FDR led this country through the Great Depression by implementing government spending programs that provided jobs in local areas, as well as leading the U.S through World War II with the help of this fine speech. December 7th, 1941, the Japanese launched a surprise attack on the U.S naval base, Pearl Harbor, near Hawaii. In efforts to disable the U.S, they used†¦show more content†¦After immediately meeting with members of his cabin, he was advised by Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, to address the matter aggressively and by deteriorating any U.S-Japan domestic relations. Roosevelt decided against it. Within hours, he instead dictated a short and emotional appeal to the people of the United States, as well as Congress. The speech was made at 12:30 pm on Monday December 8th, 1941 in Washington, D.C. Nicknamed the â€Å"Date of Infamy Speech,† it is one of the most famous political speeches of the 20th century. Franklin was heard by the largest audience in radio history. It pulled the nation together and away from their fear and dismay only hours previous to learning about the crippling event. The Japanese calculated one of the most daring and successful raids in all history, it was brilliant. Michael Slackman described the attack as â€Å"almost textbook perfect† in his book Target: Pearl Harbor (1990). â€Å"Toward the end of 1941. With the Soviets seemingly on the verge of defeat by the Axis powers, Japan seized the opportunity to try to take the oil resources of Southeast Asia. The U.S wanted to stop Japanese expansion but the American people were not willing to go to stop it.† With the U.S looking for an agreement, no one saw the attack coming. The age of new imperialism began in the 1870s when European states established vast empires mainly in Africa, but also in Asia and the Middle East. The United

Salt Gases Essay - 776 Words

for the inclusion of gases in salt deposits are outlined shortly in the following. Fig. 2-16 shows schematically the geological conditions in marginal areas of the Zechstein basin which provided the prerequisites for the inclusion of gases: tectonic events created passage ways (fissures) through the salt sequence, allowing gases and brines to escape from their host formations below the consolidated — and therefore impermeable — salt sequences. When contacting potash beds, the brines caused alterations of the potash beds, dissolving the most soluble potash minerals and precipitating less soluble salts; as the result, carnallite was replaced by sylvite and halite. In cases where such processes extended laterally into potash beds, sylvite was†¦show more content†¦Although gas inclusions in salt rocks are extremely important in some salt and potash mining districts for their effects on mining operations, they received little attention in textbooks which are now available in English translations, e.g., Borchert and Muir (1964) and Braitsch (1971). This may be due to the fact that, at the time when the German originals were written, these matters were still under controversial discussion; see Gimm and Pforr (1964) with contributions by Obert, Ignatieff, Panek, Baar. More recent publications (e.g., Gimm, 1968) indicate that the views expressed by Baar (1954d, 1958,1962) have been generally accepted. As the formation of gas inclusions in salt rocks requires special conditions, as outlined, such inclusions are rare in salt sequences without potash salts, as no reaction salts could form. This is the reason why the salt domes of the Gulf Coast are free from gas inclusions, with the exception of some cases where gases were occluded in recrystallizing halite, or secondary halite which may have crystallized from migrating solutions due to cooling. In contrast, the salt domes of northern Europe are loaded with pockets of salt rocks with abundant gas inclusions; as a matter of fact, several potash mines were abandoned at the beginning of this century because of the problems caused by gas outbursts (Gimm, 1968, p. 553). To date, no gas inclusions have been encountered in the Prairie Evaporites, in spite ofShow MoreRelatedThe Respiratory System And The Digestive System1640 Words   |  7 Pagesbody has a smaller surface area to volume ratio in comparison to smaller organisms, which are able to gain all gases that are needed though simple diffusion, and therefore is not able to complete all of the exchanges of the materials it requires in the same way. To ensure that it obtains all of the materials that are needed, specialised systems are present within it to allow this. This essay will be focusing particularly on the respiratory system, the renal system and the digestive system and howRead MoreHuman Interference Of The Atmosphere1156 Words   |  5 Pagesheat is trapped by greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere to keep the Earth warm. The planet’s atmosphere contains these radiatively active gases, that radiate energy in all direction. Greenhouse gases are already present in the atmosp here; without them the Earth would be significantly cold enough to freeze the oceans. To understand how important and harmful the greenhouse gases can be for the planet, we need to answer these questions. Do extra greenhouse gases upset the Earth’s natural balanceRead MoreThe Solubility As A Measure835 Words   |  4 PagesScience Fair Essay -chemist understands solubility as a measure -a chemist would say that solubility is the max solute that can be dissolved in the solvent until it reaches equilibrium -when the solution reaches equilibrium, there can be no more solute added to the solvent: it won t dissolve anymore, it will just rest at the bottom as residue -the chemical formula of salt is NaCI -1 ATM is standard air pressure for earth -the unit for solubility of water it for ex: 357.00 g/L -when the solubilityRead MorePreventing Global Warming Essay1219 Words   |  5 Pagesrevolution during the 18th century. During this time heat-trapping gases began to load in the atmosphere, gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. Global warming will have many negative consequences to humans, animals, and even plants. The effects of global warming will throw human lifestyles into jeopardy. Agriculture would be thrown into turmoil. Public heath could suffer. Rising seas could contaminate water supplies with salt. Stronger sunlight and warmer temperature could cause respiratory illnessRead More Melting Glaciers are Devastating for Wetlands Essay1493 Words   |  6 PagesMelting Glaciers: Great News for Titanic, Devastating for Wetlands Overview This essay is dedicated to the importance of wetlands and the impending danger of rising sea levels due to global warming. Historically we humans have taken for granted the numerous vital roles played by wetlands in our ecosystem and viewed them only as unpleasant and undesirable. So we have destroyed much of our wetlands, and now that we finally see how important they are we are going to lose what little wetlandsRead MoreEnvironmental Characteristics of Net Zero 720 Words   |  3 PagesWeekly assignment - Topic: Environmental characteristics of Net Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB) 1000 words research essay A net zero energy building has a system to immensely reduce the total energy of a building by implementing energy efficient technologies which gives counterbalance to the functional energy needs supportive with renewable energy thus reducing the total energy consumption to roughly zero. Zero energy buildings have certain characteristics, such as effective thermal insulation, usingRead MoreDrinking Water Pollution and the Earths Rising Sea Level Essay1270 Words   |  6 Pageshas it taken so long for us to open our eyes to both its splendor and fragility? We as a people seem to understand that existence is impossible without water, yet we continue to sabotage it both consciously and unconsciously. The purpose of this essay is to heighten awareness of a couple of problems as they relate to the continuation of life on Earth for ALL species. It is not the continuation of human life that matters; this is not our Earth to have. Life flourished here before humans arrivedRead MoreThe Effects Of Sea Levels On The Environment And Humans1140 Words   |  5 Pagesalso means that there are more cases of frequent nuisance flooding. While we can describe the rising of the sea levels as a natural process, the recent trends are a major cause of concern because the sea level is increasing at a very high rate. This essay seeks to examine what is the cause of change in sea level and what effect the rise of sea level has on the environment and humans. Causes of Rising Sea level A change in sea level means a change of water in the oceans. The changes have been linkedRead MoreEssay on Popular Theories of the Origns of Life on Earth852 Words   |  4 Pageslayer, the harsh conditions on Earth was incapable of supporting any life form we know today. Due to the intense activities on early Earth, basic chemicals would have start to react with each other. Chemicals and element such as Ammonia, Phosphoric salt, light, heat, and electricity (lightning) is present during early Earth period which made life possible. Life after this phase can be easily explained through Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. However, the unexplainable explosion of life in suchRead MoreTask 1a Periodic Table Essay1503 Words   |  7 PagesPeriodic table essay Also you should organise into F blocks and S, P, D blocks. Which groups and blocks belong too? NA- Sodium K- Potassium CA- Calcium MG- Magnesium C- Carbon O- Oxygen N- Nitrogen F- Fluorine CL- Chorine FE- Iron H- Hydrogen S- Sulphur Groups Group 1= Alkali metals Group 2= Alkaline earth metals Transition metals Group 3 = Boron family Group 4= Carbon family Group 5= Nitrogen family Group 6= Oxygen family Group 7= Halogen family Group 8= Noble gases Rare earth materials

Cohesion and Discipline of the Party in Government Free Essays

string(157) " is because the party policy positions that are part of the brand with which each member is associated are influenced by the positions of all party members\." Parties matter in part because they influence the actions of elected officials. But scholars also note that lawmakers from the same party may not vote together. Party cohesion has varied over time – sometimes party members stick together on many key votes, at other times they are no more likely to vote with fellow party members than with the opposition. We will write a custom essay sample on Cohesion and Discipline of the Party in Government or any similar topic only for you Order Now Parties have various means at their disposal to encourage members to cooperate in achieving a party program. Sometimes these tools are sufficiently compelling that individual members may back the party program at the expense of their constituents’ interest. However the case is quite different in European Parliamentary systems of government where party cohesion is essential for the implementing of government policies that the party in power wishes to impose. Although party cohesion in American government has risen because of intraparty heterogeneity and the realignment of the South (Hetherington and Larson), the party discipline and unity is not nearly as cohesive as those found in Parliamentary systems. This is in large part due to the fact that the tools of the party leaders in each system are different. In Parliamentary systems, because the risk of not voting in terms of party could lead to the collapse of the present regime and government system, party leaders tend to have more effective tools at their disposal to use in encouraging party cohesion/discipline. Party discipline or cohesion  is the ability of a  political party  to get its members to support the policies of their party leadership. Party discipline is essential for all systems of  government  that allow parties to hold  political power  because it determines the degree to which the governmental organization will be affected by the political processes. Party cohesion is closely related to party discipline (Aldrich). Distinctly, however, it is essentially â€Å"coordinated† behavior reflecting the interacting incentives of individual legislators, whereas party discipline is the outcome of a strategic game played within political parties, in which legislators who are party members respond to rewards and punishments determined by some internal party decision-making regime. In political systems other than American presidential democratic system, straying from the party lines can result in the fine and/or expulsion of members such as in the  People’s Republic of China (Aldrich). Party discipline tends to be extremely strong in  Parliamentary systems such as in  European countries in which a vote by the legislature against their party is understood to cause the governmental â€Å"collapse† of the present regime (Huber). In these situations, it is extremely rare for a member to vote against the wishes of their party. Party leaders in such governments often have the authority to expel members of the party who violate the party line. Weak party discipline is usually more frequent in congressional systems  such as the  United States Congress where power within in the party is more democratic than the authoritarian system seen in parliamentary governments, with leaders dictating order to the members to follow suit. In these American legislatures, it is routine for members to cross party lines on a given vote, typically following the interests of their region (constituents) or following other members of a borderline group within their party. In America the risk is not that high, with party disagreement just results in the upsetting of the party elites without true damaging costs except for the withdrawal of their support. Party cohesion and party discipline are very distinctive under parliamentary government, where a lack of cohesion and/or indiscipline among parliamentarians belonging to government parties may jeopardize the very existence of the government. Certainly from the perspective of making and breaking governments, levels of party discipline are very high in European parliamentary democracies. There are very few examples indeed of parties that have been â€Å"half-in, half-out† of government, in the sense that legislators from the same government party have voted in different ways on key legislative motions of confidence and/or investiture. In this sense parties do go into and come out of government in a unified manner. In the American democracy, this just isn’t the case. Politicians have more allegiance to their regions and constituents than to their party. Because of the way the nomination system works. Party nominations no longer rest in the hands of party elites but in those of the public. Thus it’s better for one’s political career to appeal to the public and not to party. According to other scholars enhance this opinion by adding â€Å"the main influence of party discipline is not on the votes on specific roll calls but on the choice ideologically of the party† (McCarty, Poole and Rosenthal). This suggests that members will vote in line with their ideals rather than their leadership. To come to this conclusion they observed changing patterns of roll call voting among party-switchers and inferred that legislators appear o coordinate on roll calls because they change policy preferences to reflect those of their parties. Thus the question becomes, why do members of political parties even bother to behave in cohesive manners? Political scientists and elites have attributed this behavior to a trinity of solutions. Electoral incentives for legislators that arise from the value of a party label, strategic incentives within the legislature that reward le gislators who behave in a coordinated fashion, and the ability of party leaders to implement a system of rewards and punishments are all attributed reasons (Hix and Simon). Political scientists argue that electoral incentives might generate emergent party cohesion. By creating a type or brand that politicos can blanket themselves under in order for voters to infer information about candidates in elections. Recognized legislators join political parties to signal policy positions to voters, doing this so long as it increases their chances of election or re-election. Voters make inferences about candidates’ policy preferences only by observing their party membership. Identifying candidates with their party and ignoring what candidates might actually say about their own policy preferences. Candidates in these models do have underlying policy preferences and thus prefer to join parties comprising like-minded colleagues (Krehbiel). This is because the party policy positions that are part of the brand with which each member is associated are influenced by the positions of all party members. You read "Cohesion and Discipline of the Party in Government" in category "Essay examples" In this system it benefits a candidate to vote along party lines in order to be associated with a specific regime policies, outcomes, and therefore successes. Party membership involves costs that arise from this incentive. There are costs arising from associating with a party label indicating a unique policy position that differs from the ideal point of the member – and of being associated with a party that will actually implement this position if it is in a position to do so(Snyder and Ting). Since the primary focus of this type of work is on the electoral phase of the political game, and despite occasional references to â€Å"party discipline†, this approach involves no explicit model of intraparty politics– except for the assumption that the party policy platform is chosen by either a dictatorial leader or simple majority voting by party members (Snyder and Ting). In addition, this incentive assumes that politicians are allowed to join, and to remain within, any party they choose. The only â€Å"filter† on party entry in such odels is party policy itself which, combined with the deadweight costs of party membership, discourages legislators with very divergent policy positions from joining the party (Snyder and Ting 2002: 95) This means that the underlying process being modeled is a type of sorting or the partitioning of voters between parties, but the logical engine of this model could also be applied to explain the sorting of politicians between pa rties on the assumptions that party positions are some function of the positions of party members and that politicians want to affiliate to the party with the closest position. While this large body of work gives us useful intuitions about electoral incentives for legislators to affiliate to parties, the main lesson is that electoral incentives may well make a party label a valuable commodity. Thus, if a party’s decision-making regime can intensely threaten to withdraw the party label from party legislators if they fail to abide by party decisions about legislative behavior, then this will make those decisions easier to enforce. On this perspective, party discipline is about legislators responding to explicit or implicit threats by party leaders to impose electoral costs by withdrawing the party label, by casting votes in otherwise costly compliance with party policy. The resources party leaders in both parliamentary and US federal government and parliamentary government context can deploy to structure the incentives of legislatures in a way that ensures party discipline include control over electorally valuable party labels (party identity) and control over sought-after perquisites in the legislature. However, this incentive structure has an important new dimension under parliamentary government, arising from the fact that the legislature typically functions as a recruitment pool for the executive, and political ambition of its members are at the forefront. In Parliamentary governmental system, party leaders have the tools at their disposal to make or break candidates if they dissent, because the stakes are so high. If government parties cannot maintain firm party discipline, then they cannot retain a secure hold upon office. When legislative parties do move into government, control over the allocation of important government jobs, whether these are cabinet or junior ministries or other key patronage appointments, typically rests in the hands of a very small number of senior party politicians, who can and do use these offices to reward loyal party members and who can and do punish mavericks by denying them the rewards of office. However, in American politics party leaders do not have the authority to simply dismiss a candidate. They may only throw their endorsement or support candidates with funds and become â€Å"king makers†. It is unrealistic to think that Nancy Pelosi can tell a conservative democrat to go away. She can allow withhold resources (money and her name recognition support). But this won’t be enough if the candidates’ constituents carry him through to victory. Legislative incentives also coexist which derives from improved expectations in relation to a range of legislative payoffs that accrue to legislators who belong to larger rather than smaller cartels or coalitions of legislators. A large part of the relevant literature has been concerned with the role of party in the US Congress, and how the main concern of those elected is to pass legislature and having a single legislative party commands a majority position. The main legislative resource is the ability to capture a majority coalition of legislators. This is achieved by controlling the allocation between legislators of agenda setting legislative offices, such as committee chairs. On this argument, the power to make such allocations is delegated by party members to the party hierarchy, which can use this power to enhance party discipline, which in turn feeds back to enhance the value of the party label in the electoral game. This is important because the legislature is the main political arena in which legislators seek to fulfill their objectives, policy and otherwise. US parties impose discipline on their members by manipulating scarce agenda-control resources is in contrast an alternative influential argument, ( Krehbiel (1993, 1998). This holds that what looks like legislative party discipline is an essentially emergent phenomenon. US legislators choose which party to affiliate to on the basis of their intrinsic policy preferences – in effect joining a party of like-minded individuals and then quite voluntarily behaving in the same way as these on the floor of the House without the need for any â€Å"externally† imposed party effect. Legislators are voting the same way because they like the same policies, or because they are responding to the same non-policy incentive structure put in place by the party hierarchy. There are two roll calls put in place to ensure this outcome (Snyder and Groseclose). On one hand there are â€Å"lop sided† roll calls. In which first, legislators will treat these as a forgone conclusion and, second, that party leaders will see them as offering no rationale for the (by assumption costly) deployment of party discipline. On the other hand there are â€Å"close† roll calls, for which coordinated legislator behavior makes the difference between winning and losing. There is strong evidence suggesting that the â€Å"party effect† is much higher for close than for lop-sided roll calls. They infer from this that US parties can and do influence the behavior of their legislative members when this makes a real difference, and do not attempt to do so when it does not. Cohesion seems to be closest when the party leadership has publicly identified as a priority, and find much more of a party effect on these than on issues that are not party priorities. Party cohesion in parliamentary government is important to the proper function of government because it essentially in lamest terms â€Å"makes or breaks government†. Under the constitutional regime of parliamentary government, that is pervasive in Europe, almost certainly the most important role for the legislature arises from the fact that the executive gains and retains office as long as it maintains the confidence of the legislature. This requirement is constitutionally manifested in the parliamentary vote of confidence/no confidence in the government (Huber 1996; Lijphart 1992, 1999). The executive under parliamentary government, furthermore, the â€Å"cabinet† of ministers bound together under the constitutionally embedded rule of collective cabinet responsibility. The stability and effectiveness of the government thus depends upon the ability of government parties to maintain disciplined behavior by party legislators. Effective party discipline means that a government is not defeated – either on votes of confidence/no confidence or on key pieces of legislation – because some legislators who belong to government parties vote against the government. Thus, while the vote of no confidence is the constitutional foundation of parliamentary government, the behavioral foundation can be seen as party discipline. If the government parties maintain firm discipline on the part of their legislators, and if they control sufficient legislative support to take office in the first place, then they can maintain themselves in office, with firm control over the entire political process and facing few legislative impediments to the implementation of their policy and other objectives. Conversely, if government parties cannot maintain firm party discipline, then they cannot retain a secure hold upon office. The key point in all of his concerns the huge incentive in a parliamentary government system for senior party politicians – who themselves will often be members of the government – to maintain firm discipline over the members of their party. What is so striking about incentives for party cohesion and discipline under parliamentary government, as opposed to presidential government, is that these incentives cast the role of party leaders in a completely new light. â€Å"Party leaders† tend to play explicit and implicit roles. Party leaders tend to be seen as managers who essentially offer coordination and enforcement services to party members. As agents of their party, such party leaders have incentives to shirk. Imposing party discipline, by whatever means, is thus the fulfillment of obligation The reason such models of party discipline can look bizarre and unrealistic in the context of parliamentary government is that an â€Å"agency/expensive-discipline† model of party leadership (Cox McCubbins) seems implausible in a constitutional environment where party leaders are senior politicians who are the key players in a series of interlocking at the essence of the political process. Not only do party leaders make the really key decisions – about making and breaking governments, elections, but they also enjoy the benefits of office when this is achieved – whether these are perquisites such as the hefty check, the government jet, or the ministerial Mercedes, or opportunities to shift policy outputs in preferred directions as a result of controlling vetoes and agendas. In a nutshell, maintaining tight party discipline is highly incentive compatible for party leaders under parliamentary democracy. Indeed it is difficult to think of reasons why party leaders in a parliamentary government system would not want to maintain tight party discipline. Except in the matter of a voting on a highly divisive, sensitive, and cross-cutting issue, such as gay marriage or stem cell research for which it is against party interests to be identified with a single unambiguous position – then a legislative â€Å"free vote† can be declared on the matter and legislators can be allowed to vote with their â€Å"consciences†. But the orderly ability to switch free votes on and off is an indicator of firm party control over the behavior of party legislators (Aldrich). Parties are institutions in their own right. They are endogenous institutions, but parliamentary governmental parties are more deeply embedded into the constitutional rules of the political game of parliamentary government than a mere behavioral coalition of legislators. They are â€Å"political clubs† with their own set of rules to abide by. They are guided by their own system of rewards and punishment. In parliamentary government, membership of the party is completely dependent on the party label and the incentive of legislatives to be associated with the party brand or label. Cohesion and coordinated voting produce this benefit. In which individual members have an incentive to take part in coordinated behavior if they can get away with doing so. As mentioned before, if members choose not to act in this fashion, they can be exiled from the party and thereby denied access to the party label. Acting in accordance to party can result in the placement of one’s name on the party ballot. Parties have the right to endorse particular candidates as official party candidates. Under the list-Proportional Representation electoral systems that are very common in parliamentary democracies, parties absolutely control access to and candidate placement on the party list. Therefore, parties in parliamentary democracies directly control access to the party label on the ballot. If denied this, a putative candidate must be admitted to and endorsed by another party, or must form a new party, or must run as an independent. In addition, access to legislative perquisites, whether these are physical office accommodation, speaking time on the floor of the house (perhaps to impress constituents at the next election), or paid positions with access to considerable resources, such as committee chairs. There are thus plenty of opportunities for party hierarchs to reward and punish individual legislative party members as they go about their daily lives. No doubt in the U. S. A. the movement towards the establishment of a disciplined and responsible party system is largely confined to the academic world. In the presidential system in US government rewards and punishment do indeed exist but not on the same level as in the parliamentary government (Cox and McCubbins). Party elites cannot simply cast away political hopefuls directly due to the constitution and the format of the political system. Power is not solely in the hands of elites, but the major American parties, national and state, are not based on mass memberships. â€Å"Only here and there in the United States are attempts made to fix a large-scale party membership on a regular dues-paying basis and thus to correspond to the European parliamentary scale (Jackson Moselle). † Party cohesion is absent even among the party workers and all the discipline that exists among party organizers before elections ceases to exist after elections. The problem stems from American attitudes about party. Most Americans identify themselves with a particular party but do not feel that they are obliged thereby to work actively for that party’s nominees (Laver). Anyone can legally qualify himself as a party member just by going through some registration procedure. Unlike the parliamentary system where you must pledge party allegiance before even having one’s name considered on the ballot. No state demands work on behalf of a party’s candidates or contributions to its campaign funds as prerequisites for becoming a legal party member (Giannetti and Laver). Structure of the American party has impact on party cohesion. The party structure in America consists of â€Å"a hierarchy of permanent party committees from precinct to national committee†. The National Committee which stands at the apex is made up of one man and one woman from each of the states picked by some kind of machinery within its State organization. The seemingly hierarchical structure does not produce party cohesion for power is decentralized and each unit is independent and needs not approval form the others. For example, the Chairman of the County Committee does not depend for his post on the State Committee and the latter hardly depends for its tenure or powers on the National Committee. To add to decentralization of power is the absence of uniformity in structure. The most striking feature in the party organization in the U. S. A. is that it is regulated by State laws while in all other democracies party structure is determined by the party itself. Diversity in State laws regarding party organizations naturally does not give scope for political discipline for the parties in America. In addition, primaries took the power of selection away from a band of leaders and activists and placed in by law in the hands of the voters. Unlike in Parliamentary systems where the local party organization selects the candidates, the national party organization is finally obeyed. V. O. Key express the view that â€Å"by the adoption of the direct primary the organization was stripped of its most important function, that of nomination†. Every political party has two divisions, the organizational and legislative, and party discipline is as essential in the latter as in the former. If party cohesion is judged on the basis of the roll-call vote and the frequency with which members of a party differ among themselves, the index of cohesion in U. S. A. may be said to be very low. â€Å"The relatively low cohesion among Republican and among Democratic Congressmen† is mainly due to the non- parliamentary system of Government. The Congressman in U. S. A. need have no fear that division in the ranks of the party will lead to the dissolution of the legislature unlike in the Parliamentary system. So the significant feature with the roll-call vote in the American Congress is the absence of party cohesion. Each of the two parties is divided into several factions and the factions in the two parties join or oppose one another irrespective of party labels, depending on the issue put for voting (Krehbiel). The decentralized structure of the parties makes a member depend for his success in elections more on his constituency than on his party. However, party cohesion in American government is not nonexistent, even though it is not as strong as those under the parliamentary democracies system. Each party selects a floor leader, whips and a Caucus Chairman creating a somewhat centralized structure that in practice increase party cohesion. Commonly, the party groups cohere more tightly on some party dividing issues than on others. For example 4,658 members of the House in 11 selected modern sessions only 181 or less than 41 per cent voted with the opposing party more often than with their own. The proportion was slightly higher in the Senate. Out of 847 senators in 9 sessions, 63 percent secured their parties on a majority of the votes. (Jackson and Moselle)† For there is a tendency for most Republicans to be in voting opposition to most Democrats on controversial issues, showing strong party discipline. Indeed, American party cohesion is on the up rise. Realignment of the South played a role as the South has consistently voted conservatively since the Nixon years (Hetherington and Larson). Another key piece is the ideological differences among the two major parties (Democrats and Republicans) are greater today than they have been in years pass. Scholars have noted that the more ideologically extreme, the higher the cohesion. As parties have more interparty heterogeneity, each party has developed more intraparty homogeneity, which has given rise to roll-call voting (Hetherington and Larson). Strong party leaders also play a role in this phenomenon. Members in each party endow their respective party leaders with powers to advance the policy agenda. Ideological unity in the 1970s with House Democrats, cause them to place the Rules Committee under the control of party leaders. Thus giving the house Democratic Caucus more power to oust wayward committee chairs who stood in the progress of the party’s initiatives. Demonstrating, American parties have been adjusting to their weak party model, and adapting in a way to influence party cohesive as exhibited so strongly in the American government. It is the clear consensus that Parliamentary government is indeed stronger in party discipline and cohesiveness than its American presidential system counterparts. The main reason for this phenomenon rests in the power of the political elites in each party system and the tools the system provides for their disposal-party label, patronage, etc.. In American politics, elites can only indirectly influence party-line voting as granted to the present political system. However, in parliamentary government, elites directly have the authority to dismiss or elevate the position of their members, thus encouraging party cohesion. Bibliography Aldrich, John H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cox,Gary, and Mathew McCubbins 1993. Legislative Leviathan. Berkeley: University of California Press. Cox, Gary, and Mathew McCubbins. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the US House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming. Gallagher, Michael, Michael Laver and Peter Mair. 2005. Representative Government in Modern Giannetti, Daniela and Michael Laver. 2005. Policy positions and jobs in the government. European Journal of Political Research. 44: 1-30. Hetherington and Larson. Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America. 11th edition. 2009 Hix, Simon. 2001. Legislative behaviour and party competition in the European Parliament: an application of Nominate to the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies 39:4 (November 2001), 663-688 Huber, John. 1996. Rationalizing parliament: legislative institutions and party politics in France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jackson, Matthew O. and Boaz Moselle. 2002. Coalition and Party Formation in a Legislative Voting Game Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 103, No. 1, pp 49-87. Kollman, Ken, John Miller and Scott Page. 1992. Adaptive parties in spatial elections. American Krehbiel, Keith. 1993. â€Å"Where’s the Party? † British Journal of Political Science 23 (1): 235–6 Political Science Review. 86 (December) 929-937. Laver, Michael. 2005. Policy and the dynamics of political competition. American Political Science Review, forthcoming. Snyder, James M. , Jr. , and Tim Groseclose. 2001. â€Å"Estimating Party Influence on Roll Call Voting: Regression Coefficients versus Classification Success † American Political Science Review. Vol. 95, No. 3, 689-698 V. O. Key:  Politics, Parties and Pressure Groups. p. 12. How to cite Cohesion and Discipline of the Party in Government, Essay examples

West And Torgovnick Essays - Discrimination, Racism,

West And Torgovnick West and Torgovnick: Manichean Ideologies Both Cornel West and Marianna De Marco Torgovnick discuss the idea of supremacy, Manichean theologies, and authoritarian behavior in their essays. However, they deal with these ideas differently and for different reasons. In West's essay, ?Malcolm X and Black Rage?, he explains Mal? colm X's views on how to transfer black rage in such a way that it would reject supremacy. In Torgovnick's essay, ?On Being White, Female, and Born in Bensonhurst?, she writes how her hometown held supremacist ideas and how this af? fected her. West is still pursuing the goal of black free? dom by looking into the past, especially Malcolm X's writ? ings. Whereas, Torgovnick kind of runs away from things and refers to living in Bensonhurst as having ?simultaneously choking and nutritive power. This difference is mainly due because West wants to try to make things better, while Torgovnick leaves her hometown feeling that she needs to start things over. Torgovnick writes about supremacist ideas in her cul? tural background. For example, she says, ?Italian Americans in Bensonhurst are notable for their cohesiveness and pro? vinciality; the slightest pressure turns those qualities into prejudice and racism? (Torgovnick 123). In other words there is a lot of racism and prejudice, especially towards Hawash 2 blacks, in Bensonhurst. Torgovnick's father also held supremacist ideas. Her father reacted with indifference to the death of a black man in Bensonhurst. As Torgovnick writes, ? ?Oh, no,' my father says when he hears the news about the shooting...He has no trouble acknowledging the wrongness of the death...The explanation is right before him but, ?Yeah,' he says, still shaking his head, ?yeah, but what were they doing there? (Torgovnick 125). Even though, he recognizes the wrongness of the death, he says the blacks weren't supposed to be there. His reason for his death holds supremacist ideas, because here he is being a racist. To say that blacks don't belong in a cer? tain neighborhood, is just like saying that they aren't good enough. Thus, Torgovnick father is being a racist. Torgovnick's hometown also holds Manichean ideologies, which means to see things only as black and white, right and wrong. In other words people who hold Manichean ideologies usually don't see things in between. She writes, ?Bensonhurst is a neighborhood dedicated to believing that its values are the only values; it tends to towards certain forms of inertia? (Torgovnick 124). Thus, the people of Bensonhurst believe that any other values are wrong, and their values are right. Here you can see how Torgovnick's hometown held Manichean ideologies because the people feel Hawash 3 that there values are the only right values. Any other values would be viewed as unacceptable to the people of Bensonhurst. Authoritarian behavior also exists in Bensonhurst. For example, when she was entering high school, her parents and counselor recommended a secretarial track despite her high scores. Torgovnick writes, ?Although my scores are superb, the guidance counselor has recommend the secretarial track...My mother's preference is clear: the secretarial track...My father also prefers the secretarial track? (Torgovnick 128). This is authoritarian behavior because rather that asking Torgovnick which track she wanted to follow, they wanted to choose it for her. Just because she is a girl, they wanted to put her in a track that is below her standards. Cornel West uses Malcolm X's writings to explain su? premacy, Manichean ideologies, and authoritarian behavior. West agrees with most of Malcolm X's ideas, however he disagrees with Malcolm X's rejection of black church and music. West argues by using the metaphor of jazz that, ?an improvisational mode of protean, fluid, and flexible dispo? sitions toward reality suspicious of ?either/or' viewpoints, dogmatic pronouncements, or supremacist ideologies? (West 119). In other words, to West the black church and black music represents freedom, something that Malcolm X does not realize. Hawash 4 In order to explain Manichean ideologies and authori? tarian behavior, one must look at Malcolm X's fear of cul? tural hybridity. West writes, ?Malcolm X's fear of cultural hybridity rests upon two political concerns: that cultural hybridity downplayed the vicious character of white supremacy and that cultural hybridity intimately linked the destinies of black and white people such that the possibility of black freedom was far-fetched? (West 117). Meaning that if blacks and whites are to share things (cultural hybridity) whites will always have the advantage. Therefore, blacks will never achieve total freedom. Malcolm X saw this as a weakness, which does seem understandable. However, Malcolm X fails to realize that if blacks are to go off on their own, this would lead to supremacy and Manichean ideologies. West says, ?Furthermore, the cultural hybrid character of black

Analyzing Guy de Maupassants The Necklace

Analyzing Guy de Maupassant's 'The Necklace' The Necklace is a short story by  19th-century French author Guy de Maupassant, who is regarded as one of the early masters of the short story. Its often studied in English and world literature classes. Maupassant is known for writing about the travails of average people in French society and their efforts to get ahead, often with unhappy results. Read on for a summary and analysis of The Necklace. Characters The story centers on three characters: Mathilde Loisel, Monsieur  Loisel,  and Madame Forestier. Mathilde, the main character, is beautiful and social, and she wants expensive items to match her  sophisticated taste. But she was born into a clerks family and ends up marrying another clerk, so she cant afford the clothing, accessories, and household items that she wants, which makes her unhappy. Monsieur Loisel, Mathildes husband, is a man of simple pleasures who is happy with his life. He loves Mathilde and tries to mitigate her unhappiness by getting her an invitation to a fancy party. Madame Forestier is Mathildes friend. She is wealthy, which makes Mathilde very jealous. Summary Monsieur Loisel presents Mathilde with an invitation to the Ministry of Educations formal party, which he expects will make Mathilde happy because she will be able to mingle with high society. Mathilde is immediately upset, however, because she doesnt have a gown that she believes is nice enough to wear to the event.   Mathildes tears sway Monsieur  Loisel into offering to pay for a new dress despite their money being tight. Mathilde asks for 400 francs. Monsieur Loisel had planned to use the money he had saved on a gun for hunting but agrees to give the money to his wife. Near the date of the party, Mathilde decides to borrow jewelry from Madame Forestier. She picks a diamond necklace from her friends jewelry box.   Mathilde is the belle of the ball. When the night ends and the couple returns home, Mathilde is saddened by the humble state of her life compared with the fairy-tale party. This emotion quickly turns into panic as she realizes she has lost the necklace Madame Forestier lent her. The Loisels search unsuccessfully for the necklace and ultimately decide to replace it without telling Madame Forestier that Mathilde lost the original. They find a similar necklace, but to afford it they go deeply into debt. For the next 10 years, the Loisels live in poverty. Monsieur  Loisel works three jobs and Mathilde does heavy housework until their debts are repaid. But Mathildes beauty has faded from a decade of hardship. One day, Mathilde and Madame Forestier meet on the street. At first, Madame Forestier doesnt recognize Mathilde and is shocked when she realizes it is her. Mathilde explains to Madame Forestier that she lost the necklace, replaced it, and worked for 10 years to pay for the substitute. The story ends with Madame Forestier sadly telling Mathilde that the necklace she had lent her was fake and worth almost nothing. Symbols Given its central role in the short story, the necklace is an important symbol of deception. Mathilde had dressed for the party in expensive clothes and a sparkling but borrowed accessory to briefly escape her humble life by pretending to a station she did not hold. Similarly, the jewelry represents the illusion of wealth in which Madame Forestier and the aristocratic class indulge. While Madame Forestier knew the jewels were fake, she did not tell Mathilde because she enjoyed the illusion of appearing wealthy and generous in lending a seemingly expensive item. People often admire the wealthy, aristocratic class, but sometimes their wealth is an illusion. Theme The short storys theme involves the pitfalls of pride. Mathildes pride in her beauty prompts her to buy an expensive dress and borrow seemingly expensive jewelry, which triggers her downfall. She fed her pride for one night but paid for it over the next 10 years of hardship, which destroyed her beauty. Pride also prevented her friend from acknowledging initially that the necklace was a fake, which would have prevented Mathildes downfall.

Discussing Temperatures in Spanish

Discussing Temperatures in Spanish The most common way of indicating temperature in Spanish is to use a form of estar a followed by the number of degrees (grados). Estar is a verb that typically means to be. Expressions Used With  Temperature In the present tense, it is usual to use the phrase estamos a (literally, we are) to discuss the temperature being experienced by the speaker and the persons around him or her. Est a (literally, it is) is used to discuss the temperature of other places. See the following examples: Estamos a 30 grados. (Its 30 degrees.)Si la temperatura est a 2 grados o ms, los nià ±os juegan afuera excepto si llueve o nieve. (If the temperature is 2 degrees or higher, the children play outside unless its raining or snowing.)Estamos a 10 bajo cero. (Its 10 below zero.)Hace una semana estaban a 30 grados, pero ahora estamos a 10. (A week ago it was 30 degrees, but now its 10.) ¡Cuntas veces el aire est a 15 grados mientras que el agua est a 17! (How often the air is 15 degrees while the water is 17!) Temperatures can be discussed in other ways. As in the following examples, the temperature is frequently preceded by a preposition: Oscila entre 8 y 20 grados centà ­grados. (Temperatures vary between 8 and 20 degrees Celsius. You also could use the phrase grados Celsius here.)Colocar en horno a 200 grados durante 15 minutos. (Set in a 200-degree oven for 15 minutes.)El agua del mar Mediterrneo alcanza los 32 grados de temperatura. (The water of the Mediterranean Sea reaches a temperature of 32 degrees.)Las bacterias se reproducen a una temperatura entre 20 y 30 grados. (The bacteria reproduce at a temperature of 20 to 30 degrees.)Una temperatura normal del cuerpo humano es aquella que se encuentra entre los 36,6 grados y los 37 grados. (A normal temperature for the human body is one between 36.6 and 37 degrees.)Tenà ­a una temperatura de 36.8 grados. (She had a temperature of 36.8 degrees.) Metric System Widely Used Keep in mind that most of the Spanish-speaking world (indeed, nearly the entire world) uses temperatures in Celsius rather than the Fahrenheit youre used to if you live in the United States. To convert temperatures from Fahrenheit to Celsius, subtract 32 and multiply the result by 0.555 (or five-ninths). To convert temperatures from Celsius to Fahrenheit, multiply the temperature by 1.8 and add 32. Mathematically, the formulas look like this: C 5(F-32)/9F 9C/5 32 If you try these formulas, youll find that a body temperature of 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit is the same as 37 degrees Celsius, and vice versa. And the 200-degree oven in one of the examples above is the same as one thats set at a bit under 400 degrees Fahrenheit. Approximating Temperatures Of course, mathematical precision isnt always necessary. Heres one way to think of temperatures in Celsius. Of course, you may see it differently if you come from an extreme climate: -20 degrees C or below (-4 degrees F or below): frigid (muy frà ­o).-20 to 0 degrees C (-4 to 32 degrees F): cold (frà ­o).0 to 10 degrees C (32 to 50 degrees F): cool (fresco).10 to 20 degrees C (50 to 68 degrees F): mild (templado).20 to 30 degrees C (68 to 86 degrees F): warm (caliente).30 to 40 degrees C (86 to 104 degrees F): hot (muy caliente).40 degrees C and above (104 degrees F and above): unbearably hot (insoportablemente caliente). Temperature-Related Vocabulary Here are some words and phrases that may come in handy when discussing temperatures: calor asfixiante o calor abrasador (scorching or blistering heat) - El cuerpo ve el calor asfixiante como una amenaza y reacciona aumentando el estrà ©s. (The body sees scorching heat as a danger and reacts with increased stress.) frà ­o intenso (bitter cold) - Por frà ­o intenso activan alerta roja en cinco ciudades. (They are activating a red alert in five cities because of the bitter cold.) ola de calor (heat wave) - Hay una advertencia meteorolà ³gica por ola de calor en el centro y norte del Uruguay. (There is a meteorological warning for a heat wave in central and northern Uruguay.) ola de frà ­o (cold snap) - Una ola de frà ­o sin precedentes dejà ³ ms de 20 muertos. (An unprecedented cold snap left more than 20 dead.)

Impact Of 14-19 Reform on SEN Students Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Impact Of 14-19 Reform on SEN Students - Essay Example As the report stresses in the last four years, there have been significant changes. It has become a normal part of life in schools in this country that some young people are studying and achieving recognised qualifications in vocational subjects before 16. New GCSEs in vocational subjects have been launched and the first group of young people have just succeeded in obtaining their qualifications. The Increased Flexibility Programme has given around 90,000 young people the opportunity to spend some time learning subjects in colleges which cannot easily be offered in schools. And from September 2004, for the first time, 14 year olds are pursuing Young Apprenticeships, giving them the chance to combine school studies with learning alongside skilled workers. Work-related learning is now a statutore requirement and the entitlement to enterprise education will be in place by September 2005. This discussion explores that in some parts of the country, designated as 14-19 pathfinder areas, the process has gone even further. Schools and colleges have worked with local authorities and the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to offer young people a range of options which goes beyond what any one institution can provide and which is succeeding in attracting many more young people to learning. In other places, new sixth forms and colleges are being opened, boosting participation and choice.