Widener Students on Politics

by

ObamaCare, the Supreme Court & Partisanship

by Michael Acciavatti
Widener University Political Science Major
This week is a historical week in our nation’s history. This week the Supreme Court is hearing a case about the not so recently passed health insurance bill. There are several facets to the argument but as the Supreme Court does, they will be judging the constitutionality of it. President Obama spent his entire first year in office striving to get this passed and with a little deal making he finally did get this passed. From the start the constitutionality of certain parts of the bill came into question. The real issue is the individual mandate. This is essentially the federal government forcing people to buy a product in this case health insurance. The Republicans and Democrats each obviously have conflicting views about what to do. Most Republicans feel this is a violation of the people’s constitutional rights, they believe that the federal government cannot put their hands into people lives and force them to buy a product. Some people do not even  wish to buy health insurance considering that they are young and healthy and that theres no way they will get seriously ill anytime soon. This is a major conflict because with the passing of the bill we see that the government is clearly condemning people for choosing and having a free will. The Supreme Court will hear this case for 5 hours which is 5 times longer than they usually hear a case for, but because of the high profile of this case it is understandable. This is why it is historic and will be a historic judgment no matter what.
by

Politics, the Team Sport

by Scott Hill

Widener University Political Science Major

On February 22 there was another GOP debate in Arizona. The first half of this debate seemed to be a fight of who could claim the title of “the most conservative”. During the primary, Republican candidates will try and prove that they are conservative because they know the people that vote in the primaries are the most active and generally most conservative.

Ron Paul attempted to show that Rick Santorum was a “fake” conservative during the debate based on his activities as a Senator. The issue arose from an audience question on what the candidates would do about No Child Left Behind. Santorum voted for the No Child Left Behind Act and during his answer he said he would repeal it. One of the issues is, why vote for something that you do not believe in? During his response, he said that politics is a team sport and even though it was against his principles he still voted for it. While I do agree that not much can get done without support but do we want someone who will go against what they believe in just to go along with their party?

I believe that Ron Paul is right when he says that the problem is that the people in Washington are just going along. They shouldn’t follow the obligation of the oath to the party but the obligation of the oath to the people. If something is against your principles do not vote for it. It is easy to make excuses but it is hard to follow what you believe. I think Ron Paul shows that best in his argument against preemptive warfare. He is against it and while his view might not be the most popular, he has his reasons and believes firmly in them. If we are going to send troops into war where soldiers will die we must go to the people and we need a declaration of war by congress who represent the people to get it.

by

Appeal to the Base, Lose Everyone Else

by John Vuotto

Widener University Political Science Major

There have been plenty of televised Republican Presidential debates in this primary season. Usually the main topics are the obvious choices; the economy, jobs, foreign policy, etc. A big portion of Wednesday’s debate and the current GOP race as a whole has been focused on women and contraception.

Surely issues such as abortion and the use of contraception are very important to Conservative Republican voters, but they could get the candidates in trouble. If electability is a main quality that Republican voters are looking for in a candidate, the champion of these issues, Rick Santorum, could find himself in big trouble in a general election.

Santorum has always been openly pro-life and now this is being highlighted in the Republican race. This seems to be a time when all of the candidates are trying to appeal to the base to prove they are the most “Conservative” candidate. Recently, Newt Gingrich, referring to the Obama administration pushing more fuel-efficient cars, said “You can’t put a gun rack in a [Chevy] Volt.”

This kind of rhetoric can certainly hurt whichever candidate comes out of the Republican field. Many voters, women in particular, may be put-off by some of Senator Santorum’s beliefs on the use of contraception and abortion. If the GOP candidates want to win the very important Independent vote, they need to be more careful when trying to appeal to the base. In today’s world of 24 news and cameras everywhere, anything the candidates say can come back to bite them. Senator Santorum is on a hot streak right now but with more talk of his strong positions on contraception, it could cost him.

by

The Perfect Situation: A Return to the Media State of Nature

by John Kyle MacIntyre

Widener University Political Science Major

Media coverage plays a crucial part in the presidential elections that wash over America every four years.  The media is an essential safety-check on political figures and government activities because it provides transparency.  Originally, media coverage in the United States was constructed to inform the people as per the right to free press.  News today is so cluttered that it would be unrecognizable from the news that filled the streets at birth of our country.  News coverage has passed a threshold from informative to damaging.

Philosophers have often used a “state of nature” to explain the evolution of government. The tool is used to show the scenario in which people emerge from a disorganized lawless state to an organized government rooted in a constitution. It would be interesting to return the election process to a “state of nature” to purify the system of media clutter.  In this scenario the media’s part would be limited.  Candidates would campaign much like they do now: by campaigning for a couple of days followed by a candidate debate and then concluding with citizens voting. The media’s role in this scenario would be to provide the people a time and place of rallies or debates.  This strategy would be an attempt to coax voters to show up to candidates’ functions while providing the unique opportunity to form an individual opinion.  Without the outside influences this scenario would provide an interesting look into the true nature of how people vote.  The media has become unimportant with reports like how Romney works-out in the morning, what Newt had for breakfast, or Obama’s singing ability.  Also, this scenario provides an interesting look into the voting habits from state to state.  Overall this situation would present the nature of how people independently develop a candidate that represents them.

by

Worse than the Horserace

by Hope Dean

Widener University Political Science Major

With the public at large growing more disillusioned with Presidential races and the lack of policies talked about in the political sphere it is a wonder that anyone pays attention at all. The foundation for campaigns and electoral goals should be policies and what candidates explicitly plan to do once in office. However, this has not been the case as the media has focused on what is known as the ‘horserace’. News channels and reporters talk about polls and negative ads in an attempt to spark interest in an otherwise dull process for the majority of the public. This has become the norm and despite my disinterest in the horse race I find it to be much better than an alternative I recently found: “Candidate’s Playlist”.

On Friday February 10th, CNN’s question of the day during the lunch hour was: ‘What is on the candidates playlist?’. The news casters did not just spend a few minutes on a passing fancy. No, instead they repeatedly brought up the question of the day as to what might be on the candidate’s playlist. I personally cannot understand the justification for airing something so insignificant to the presidential race and to politics in general. Where do we go from here?

by

CRATE GATE: Dogs Against the Haughty Highness

by Hannah Steinke
Widener University Political Science Major 


So this is not a new story, but this story about Romney strapping his dog Seamus (in a crate) for a 12 hour car ride from Massachusetts to Canada is coming back to haunt him. The moral of the story uncovers Romney’s single consistent theme, haughtiness. Out of the myriad of offensive things Romney has said and done to people (i.e. “I’m not concerned about the very poor, uh, we have a safety net there.,” “I like being able to fire people who provide services for me.,” “10,000 dollar bet,” and don’t forget the infamous, “Corporations are people my friend.” See video of many more ‘Romneyisms.’) the way he treats his dog overrules his disdain for humans (listen to full Story about Romney’s dog abuse).  
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” ~Gandhi (1869-1948).
Obama’s campaign communications director’s Twit Pic with caption, “how loving owners transport their pets.”
TWEETED by President Obama's campaign communications director

NPR Quotes

Even conservative Fox News, Chris Wallace, lectured Romney in an interview. Wallace said, “I have a yellow lab named Winston. I would no sooner put him in a kennel on the roof of my car than I would one of my children. Question: What were you thinking?” Romney responded, “This is a completely airtight kennel, mounted on the top of our car. He climbed up there regularly, enjoyed himself, he was in a kennel at home a great deal of the time as well. We loved the dog, it was where he was comfortable and we had five kids inside the car and my guess is he liked it a lot better in his kennel than he would have liked it inside.”

Michael Markarian of the Humane Society Legislative Fund said on NPR that, “Two-thirds of American households have pets. And the pet care industry is a $51 billion a year industry. That’s more than movies, recorded music and video games combined.” Furthermore, he points out that “there are more than 20,000 animal protection groups in the U.S…and they collectively raise about $2 billion a year. It’s an incredible expression of philanthropy from people who care about animals and want to see them protected from harm.”

NPR points out that “many of them won’t vote for someone who they perceive mistreated his dog, regardless of party. About the only good news for Romney and his dog story? Last year President Obama got only a C minus from the Humane Society for his work helping animals.”