Mr. Smith, a skidmark on the underpants of society...

In today’s political environment it is impossible for the everyday man who has an average income to get elected and elections are therefore not democratic. People are supposed to have equal opportunities in America and without the everyday man helping to run the country, how are people supposed to be happy. The government is controlled by multi-million dollar men who run the government according to what they think is right and are ignoring the needs of the less fortunate. While it is more difficult for them to get elected because of the illegalization of hard money from big businesses that funded whoever they wanted to win and simply padded the elections, these men can still win because they already have tons of money to spend on their campaigning while the “every man” is stuck campaigning for himself, going door to door. In addition, if the “every man” who was running did get someone who wanted to give him some money, the laws against soft and hard money prevent him from getting it from them. Such as if a company wanted to give money to a candidate but because of the hard money law they could not do it directly, they would use soft money strategy and give money to a party, or organization, and then the “every man” would use the money from there. Unfortunately people are unable to gain power if they do not have money due to the simple fact that no matter the law, the people starting with money will have more supporters. Hard money can only do so much in that a company can only give 2000 dollars to a person and anything else is illegal. Media Bias also plays a large role because people are watching a news station such as Fox and they see only republicans and how good of a decision it is to vote for a certain candidate. This leaves half of the story out and people miss out on the good points that other candidates have. Also, people with money are able to get into the news more simply because they are able to do more things such as fundraisers and other public activities that the candidates without money aren’t able to perform. Political Action Committees or PACs are also very influential in the run for office. They are made to help elect or defeat a candidate. Mudslinging and commercials are made by PAC’s and depending on the amount of money you have, the better the PAC that is around you. Money increases the quality of any campaign and since candidates need so much publicity and time, those with money will always win. Political parties will often influence an election because some candidates of similar parties will try to help a member of their party win in order to keep more of one party in office. Republicans and Democrats have recently been very childish in that they are unable to agree on anything and no one can pass a bill because the other party will immediately vote against it due to the simple fact that the bill was proposed by the other party. Voter turnout is very important because in order to win, a person needs people to vote for them. Although, it is, in my opinion, better if there is low voter turnout due to the simple fact that if people don’t care about an election, they shouldn’t vote for some random person because that isn’t an accurate representation of what the voters want. Those who care about who is in power should be voting, and those who don’t shouldn’t be skewing the results of the vote simply because they feel obligated to vote.

Test Post

When freedoms and protections collide, the US government is forced to react according to the amendments of the Bill of Rights. This allows for impartial decision making and a fair justice system for all, in which everyone is protected to the same extent.
In Texas V. Johnosn, Johnson burned a flag in protest of Reagan’s policies and was arrested under Texas law and fined $2000 along with a year in jail. His rights under the first amendment protected him from prosecution and the Supreme Court overruled his conviction because his freedom of speech and expression did not violate anyone else’s rights; it was simply offensive to many people. This freedom of speech is essential in our democracy because it allows for people to express their opinions in ways that are able to receive attention. As long as those around us aren’t affected or forced to listen to our protests, their protections are not being violated and the government must step back.
Although Johnson’s act was legal, doing something profane in a public institution such as a school, is illegal due to the fact that others are forced to witness the event and said event could be considered offensive. In Bethel V. Fraser, Matthew Fraser made a profane speech in front of his fellow classmates at a school assembly and was suspended for it. Because of his choice to make so many sexual inuendos in the middle of a school speech, the Supreme Court decided it was legal for him to be suspended. Although he had freedom of speech, the people’s protections who were listening to the speech were more powerful because his speech was “inconsistent with the fundamental values of public school education”.
Without our protections, the government would be simply too powerful and people would be unable to do anything without fear of prosecution. Not only do protections apply to citizens, but to the government as well. In Gideon V. Wainright, Gideon was charged with breaking and entering but was not given representation by the Florida court because it was going to be a quick case due to him pleading guilty. Under the 14th amendment, Gideon had the right to a lawyer and since he was not given one, it also violated his rights under the 6th amendment. Without representation, people would be unable to win in a court case or at least defend themselves if they did not have the proper funds. The government would be able to punish anyone they felt necessary and our freedoms would be held back dramatically.
In order to protect ourselves from the government, we are protected by the 4th amendment which protects against illegal search and seizure. If this didn’t exist government officials could search homes and disrupt our freedoms constantly and without opposition. Mapp V. Ohio solidified this amendment because Mapp was accused of having obscene materials after an illegal police search. People cannot be prosecuted because the police have done an illegal act to prosecute them. Mapp could not be convicted because she had her rights under the 4th amendment and therefore all evidence was void in the case.
In conclusion, when freedoms and protections collide, the government must step in with impartial decisions and follow the bill of rights as well as they can in order to protect the freedoms of everyone.