zj05gAaC

1
2
3Government Current Events Journal - AP US Government
4
5Throughout this school year, you are expected to read a reputable news publication every day to provide you with real wo
6
7
8rld examples of the often abstract topics that we will discuss in class.  You will then describe how the article’s political topic ties to the practice of our Constitution or to the material we are currently discussing in class.
9
10You will be reading 15 newspaper articles over the course of this quarter.  These must be reputable news sources (NY Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, Wall Street Journal, NPR)
11
12You must choose an article that you feel demonstrates a specific function, right, role, power, or theory of government in action.
13Create a journal entry for each article which must include
14A complete bibliography first (MLA8 Format)
15A  short summary of the article
16Most importantly: A specific, separate explanation stating what the article demonstrates (“This is an example of....”) Explain how it exemplifies something from AP Government and/or explain where the right of government is derived from within the US Constitution.
17At the end of the 15 articles, you will type a 1-2 page response paper focusing on one specific article.  This paper should include the following:
18Introduction: What article are you focusing on?  What branches of the government or powers did this article involve?
19Connection: How did the events in your article connect to the topics we have been discussing in class?
20Argument: Explain the importance of the topic covered in your article, and why it matters
21Future Conclusions: How will the events in the articles impact future political decisions?  Does it have international, national, or state implications- explain which one(s) it has, and how it could impact the future
22Article 1
23MLA Citation:
24Connors, Elizabeth. "There May Have Been Shy Trump Supporters after All." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 12 Nov. 2016. Web. 12 Nov. 2016.
25
26Link:
27https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/11/12/there-may-have-been-shy-trump-supporters-after-all/
28
29
30Journal Entry:
31The article talked about how even though almost everyone was predicting that Hillary Clinton would win the election, and Trump’s victory could be comparable to Truman’s victory over Dewey. However, the article stated that one reason why the poll predictions were off was because many Trump supporters probably did not want to openly state it, in what is called “social desirability bias”, as Trump has been painted by the media in a negative light, so many Trump supporters who still voted for him on election day were not accounted for in predictions. It is unclear right now exactly what happened, as there are many potential scenarios, such as Trump supporters not participating in polls, or Republicans not being willing to associate with Trump on polls, or simply having more undecided voters this year. However, it is important to note that the polls were only off by a bit in the swing states, which ultimately decided the election. 
32
33Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
34Although a lot of people were extremely surprised or shocked by Trump’s win in the election, the polls did have it as a possibility since a Trump win was within the margin of error of most polls. Another possible reason I thought of was that there may have been more turnout among Trump supporters or less turnout among Clinton supporters that swung the election, or the polls possibly did not incorporate random sampling which may have made it seem like there were more Clinton supporters than there were in actuality. Finally, the way that the Electoral college works favored Trump for winning key states that gave him more electoral votes, because even though Clinton won more of the popular vote, Trump won by getting 270 electoral votes. As a result, because there is a Republican Congress and Republican president, there will no longer be a divided government which occurred when Obama was president. 
35
36Article 2
37MLA Citation:
38Gold, Matea. "Pro-Trump Super PAC Aims to Serve as New President’s Main outside Ally - Even against Republicans, If Necessary." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 11 Nov. 2016. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.
39
40Link:
41https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/11/pro-trump-super-pac-aims-to-serve-as-new-presidents-main-outside-ally-even-against-republicans-if-necessary/
42
43
44Journal Entry:
45The article was about a Super PAC,Great America, that had backed Donald Trump during his campaign, spending 30 million dollars on ads from 250,000 donors. Now it will also be an outside organization that continues to support Trump in issues such as reelection. Unlike many other Super PACs, Great America would be willing to even go against Republicans if they oppose Trump, which could cause a divide in the party. While some of the money, 7.8 million dollars, raised was from many small donations, 9 million dollars were donated by just three donors in the final week of the election. Because of this, Great America built up a data file of many voters and contacted many voters directly. As a result of the Super PACs work, it has received the approval of Trump and it will continue to work for the furthering of Trump’s agenda. 
46
47Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
48The Super PAC is very powerful because as a 527 Organization, it has no restrictions on spending and raising money, unlike a normal PAC. This was why Great America was able to raise 30 million dollars to spend. The 9 million dollars donated by just a few wealthy contributors may have been for issue advocacy, to get Trump’s attention on what they want, or patronage, to get a government position. Either way, the Super PAC was definitely able to significantly boost voter turnout for Trump because they went out and directly contacted many voters, which could have swung the election in his favor. I thought that even though the Super PAC was going to support Trump’s agenda against anyone of either party, it will probably be forced into issue advocacy as well given how it relied a lot on major donations by the wealthy who may have conflicts with parts of Trump’s agenda. The Super PAC was also trying to work towards Trump’s reelection, which will be important because while Trump may have a honeymoon at the start of his presidency, his actions as President will determine how many supporters he will gain or lose when it is time for the next election. 
49Article 3
50MLA Citation:
51Cheney, Kyle. "2 Presidential Electors Encourage Colleagues to Sideline Trump." Politico. N.p., 14 Nov. 2016. Web. 15 Nov. 2016.
52Link:
53http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/electoral-college-effort-stop-trump-231350
54
55
56Journal Entry:
57The article talked about how two Democratic electors for the Electoral College were trying to get Republican electors to not vote for Trump so that he will be blocked from becoming President. Their strategy was to get 37 Republicans to write in for Mitt Romney or John Kasich so that no one would get 270 electoral votes, and then the election would go over to the House of Representatives. The article also talked about how there were a lot of Republican electors that did not really support Trump, but they would probably end up voting for him anyways. Even if the plan does not work out, which is a very likely scenario, it could end up causing debate against the Electoral College. This is important because Democrats recently lost two elections with Clinton vs Trump and Gore vs Bush because of how the Electoral College works. The last time there was a significant number of  faithless electors in the Electoral College was in 1872, where the candidate had died and as a result the electors changed their votes. 
58
59Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
60The article was talking about faithless electors, which was one of the reasons for opposition to the Electoral College. However, I thought that the faithless elector issue was not a major issue against the Electoral College, as 29 states have laws that threaten faithless electors, and the act of being a faithless elector will hurt one’s political future. As a result, no election has been swung by faithless electors. I thought the argument against the Electoral College because it went against the popular vote was more valid, but the counter argument would be that the popular vote isn’t a completely accurate representation, for example, a lot of Republicans in California probably didn’t bother with voting. The plan was to prevent Donald Trump from winning by not giving him 270 electoral votes and making sure another candidate was written in. I thought this really showed how the Electoral College is heavily biased against 3rd parties. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein ran for president, and they did have some support, but neither got a single electoral vote, but if this plan works out then someone like Mitt Romney who was not even running for President could potentially be chosen by the House of Representatives. 
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78Article 4
79MLA Citation:
80Weigel, David. "Why Are People Giving Jill Stein Millions of Dollars for an Election Recount?" Washington Post. The Washington Post, 24 Nov. 2016. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.
81
82Link:
83https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/24/why-are-people-giving-jill-stein-millions-of-dollars-for-an-election-recount/
84
85
86Journal Entry:
87The article talked about how the Green Party candidate Jill Stein was trying to get vote recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Maine. Although she only wanted to raise 2.5 million dollars, she was actually able to raise 3.8 million. However, the costs of having a recount are very high, and she might need as much as 7 million dollars. This is surprising when considering that Jill Stein only raised 3.5 million dollars for her presidential campaign. The article tries to make it clear that a recount will not make a difference, as the chance of voting machines having been hacked is basically 0, and a previous recount with John Kerry and George Bush had made no difference. Stein’s response was that the election might have been “hacked”, and although she was not a Clinton supporter, many Democrats have donated to help her, and she was praised by the leader of a Democratic PAC. Other Democrats were asking people to not spend their money on donations to Stein, but to try and save it for more important things, such as the Louisiana Senate race runoff. 
88
89Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
90The article talked about how this was the largest donation drive for a 3rd Party candidate in history, which was surprising because 3rd parties usually do not get much attention in the US due to the winner take all system and single member districts, which severely limit their influence below the proportion of the population that supports them. The article also quoted that “voting is the heart of the Democratic process” which I agreed with. Different states have different ways of doing the vote, such as having it completely electronic or having paper evidence, which would be an example of federalism, as the federal government lets the states decide on how they do their counting of the votes. Democratic PACs would probably praise Jill Stein’s efforts, because it may reverse the election if they could actually have the recount prove that there was a hacked election. However, it also made more sense that they should try to fight for safe seats elsewhere because the likelihood of the recount working out is very low. 
91Article 5
92MLA Citation:
93Heersink, Boris. "Why There’s a Battle Royale to Lead the Democratic Party, and What It Means for the Trump Era." The Washington Post. WP Company, 19 Dec. 2016. Web. 19 Dec. 2016.
94
95Link:
96https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/19/why-theres-a-battle-royale-to-lead-the-democratic-party-and-what-it-means-for-the-trump-era/?utm_term=.530f23b5a6de
97
98Journal Entry:
99The article talked about how after this election cycle, there will be new party chairs for both the Republican and Democratic parties. Trump chose Ronna Romney McDaniel, who is related to Mitt Romney and who was the former chair of the Michigan Republican Party. There are two candidates for the Democratic Party Chair; Tom Perez who is representative of Obama and Clinton’s policies, and Keith Ellison who is more liberal and is endorsed by Bernie Sanders. The article discussed how much party the party chairs really have, and while it is true that sometimes party chairs do little other than help candidates get elected, other party chairs have shaped party policy, such as Bill Brock who tried to build connections between black voters and the RNC. After Trump’s win in the election, the Democrats are now starting to focus more on the election for party chair, as the winner will probably be able to exert a lot of control over future policy over the next few years. 
100
101Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
102The national party chair is the head of the party, however, their power depends a lot on the election results. The party that wins usually ends up having a chair that is determined by the president, but does not have much of a say in matters and ends up doing what the president tells them to. For example, Reince Priebus, the previous national party chair, will now be Trump’s chief of staff, and McDaniel will likely not have much power compared to him, as she will have to obey Trump’s orders. For the Democratic side, the party chair will have a lot more power and can even decide future policies, because there is no president that will limit their power. The National Party Committee and National Party Chair can help to determine the party platform, and this is why there is competition for the National Party Chair. For example, if Perez becomes the chair, then the Democrats will follow the same platform as they did with Obama and Clinton, but if Ellison becomes the chair, then Democrats might try to focus more on the blue collar workers and follow the policies of Bernie Sanders. The frequent changing of party chairs following elections can be seen as one of the main reasons of why political parties often end up changing their platforms. 
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116Article 6
117MLA Citation:
118Cohn, Nate. "Why Trump Had an Edge in the Electoral College." The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 Dec. 2016. Web. 19 Dec. 2016.
119
120Link:
121http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/upshot/why-trump-had-an-edge-in-the-electoral-college.html?ref=politics&_r=0
122
123
124Journal Entry:
125The article talked about how Trump was able to win the election despite losing the popular vote by a significant margin. The article explained that the background states were very important in the election, and Trump won almost all of them. One example of an election where the popular vote didn’t matter was the election of 1888, where Grover Cleveland won the popular vote because of voting laws that prevented Southern blacks from voting, but he didn’t have that much support in the rest of the country. Clinton won by a large margin in states she won, but she lost by a small margin in states she lost. Another explanation was that the electoral college is more biased towards small states, but this wasn’t true for this election because Clinton won most of the small states. One interesting thing the article talked about was a 19th century border dispute between Michigan and Ohio called the Toledo War, where the way the borders ended up being drawn helped Trump win both states. The article concluded by stating that it was somewhat unrepresentative that a few swing states can decide the election outcome. 
126
127Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
128This was related to how the Founding Fathers wanted the electoral college to work, as the electoral college is somewhat biased towards small states, because they get two votes from senators no matter what. However, this had to be done to give smaller states an equal say. The electoral college exists also to prevent regional issues like the 1888 election, because having a large power base in one region should not be the only reason a candidate gets elected. This was probably due to issues like factions, where one candidate could have a large support base due to some faction they were backed by. The winner take all system was also one reason the article didn’t talk about for why Trump won. This makes it near impossible for a third party to win, but it also makes it possible to win without winning the popular vote. The Electoral College forces candidates to appeal to states with large populations, but when these states are basically decided, it is true that the system is not that representative of the country overall because voters in smaller swing states have more power with their vote than say a Democrat in California. To change the Electoral College, the state would have to vote on it, but this would be unlikely to happen because the party in power would not agree to do so. 
129
130Article 7
131MLA Citation:
132Goldmacher, Shane. "Trump’s Ex-campaign Manager Starts Lobbying Firm." POLITICO. N.p., 21 Dec. 2016. Web. 21 Dec. 2016.
133
134Link:
135http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/corey-lewandowski-consulting-firm-232888
136
137
138Journal Entry:
139The article talked about how Corey Lewandowski, who was Trump’s first campaign manager, is starting a political consulting firm along with another one of Trump’s former advisors. He at first tried to get a job as one of Trump’s advisors, but he decided that he would continue to support Trump but from outside of the government. Even though he was denied a job due to his previous aggressive behavior, he still supports Trump and says he only wants to work with clients that are not against Trump. The new firm is called Avenue Strategies, and it is located one block from the White House. A lot of other Trump supporters such as Rudy Giuliani also are starting lobbying firms using their connections, but this is going against Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp”. The article also mentioned that Lewandowski was previously a lobbyist already from 2005 to 2011. 
140
141Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
142This would be an example of the “revolving door” where someone who has a position or influence in the government back out but then becomes involved with lobbying. This is furthered by the fact that Lewandowski was already a lobbyist before he worked with Trump. As a lobbyist, he will also be backing Trump’s policies, so it will help to further the Republican influence in the government, which is already large because there is no longer a divided government. Lewandowski also may be a member of an issue network, where lobbyists, government officials, and agencies share common interests, to basically become a subgovernment. Despite not having a government job, Lewandowski will probably still have a lot of influence in the government, working with interest groups. Finally, as there are many interest groups from Trump supporters as a result of Trump’s victory, there may be competition amongst interest groups creating a situation of pluralism, where one interest group does not end up having influential levels of power. Thus, one interest group will not have all of a policy area under its control, which may be a beneficial situation. 
143
144
145Article 8
146MLA Citation:
147Weigel, David. "Why the Democrats’ 2017 Comeback Dream Is like Nothing We’ve Seen before." The Washington Post. WP Company, 31 Dec. 2016. Web. 02 Jan. 2017.
148
149Link:
150https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/12/31/why-the-democrats-2017-comeback-dream-is-like-nothing-weve-seen-before/?utm_term=.f1641e87d52e
151
152
153Journal Entry:
154The article talked about how when the Democrats lost the election of 2004, they attempted to change their strategy by having a more moderate nominee. This was seen as a good strategy by many political analysts, however they have been proven wrong recently. In both 2008 and 2016, the strategy of the winning party was to target the failures of the incumbent and point them out to gain more support. In both the 2008 and 2016 elections, one group that was the deciding factor was the white rural working class. They supported any candidate that offered policies appealing to them. Looking at states like Wisconsin, the percentages for Democrats and Republicans were essentially flipped from 2008 to 2016. In conclusion, the article explained that the Democrats will have to completely change their policies to win back voters, starting with issues like who is going to become the next National Chair, and they will need to take advantage of the unpopularity of a Trump presidency to make a comeback. 
155
156Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
157I thought that the Democrat’s strategy related to how winning in the general election is based off of appealing to many people, so extreme views are generally not good for winning. The flip in party support in this election shows that it could be considered as a realigning election, with the rural working class becoming more aligned with the Republicans. The article also mentioned gerrymandering, which is definitely a reason why elections are important, because the winning party can use gerrymandering to make it easier for them to get re-elected. The strategy that the article talked about for targeting the failures of the incumbent would be retrospective issue voting, where people try to hold the incumbent accountable. After this election, the article describe how the Republicans are essentially all white moderates or conservatives, and Democrats are almost all non whites or progressives. This would be an example of reinforcing cleavages for the whites vs non white ethnicity, but it is also an example of cross cutting cleavages as many people of the same ethnicity are divided over being conservative or liberal. 
158
159
160Article 9
161MLA Citation:
162Kane, Paul. "Donald Trump, Meet Your Toughest Hurdle: The U.S. Senate." The Washington Post. WP Company, 03 Jan. 2017. Web. 03 Jan. 2017.
163
164Link:
165https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/donald-trump-meet-your-toughest-hurdle-the-us-senate/2017/01/03/43f348a4-d12c-11e6-a783-cd3fa950f2fd_story.html?utm_term=.bdd77285158b
166
167
168Journal Entry:
169The article talked about the new Senate and how it could have a large impact on Trump’s presidency. There is a small Republican majority, which will help Trump with some minor issues, but the Democrats still have power in the Senate, and this was emphasized by Charles Schumer’s statement that the Senate must continue to hold the President accountable to the law, referring to Trump’s controversy over his tax returns. The article also mentioned how Obama had tried to push for a partisan agenda, which led to this being used against Democrats in later elections. Many Senators also have their own agendas and will not agree with Trump on all issues just because he is from their party. In the past, even with the Senate and the President being in the same party, there have been notable disagreements, such as Bill Clinton’s fight with Democrats to change health care. 
170
171Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
172The relationship between the Senate and the President is part of the system of checks and balances, as the Senate can approve Supreme Court appointments and help override Presidential vetoes of laws. When Schumer stated that the Senate must hold the President accountable to the law, he was referring to the Rule of Law, where laws apply equally to every citizen no matter their status. When Democratic senators tried to support Obama’s partisan agenda, this was used as evidence against them in the following election, demonstrating how making certain decisions in office can lead to retrospective issue voting. When the article mentioned some Senators that were likely to disagree with Trump, this was partially due to them not being affected by the coattail effect, where lesser known candidates are voted for only because voters also support the Presidential candidate. People getting into office through the coattail effect are more likely to support the decisions of the President, but Senators like Rubio and McCain who won in large margins, considered as safe seats, are likely to disagree with Trump. While there is currently not a divided government, the examples in the article showed that this does not necessarily mean that everything the President wants accomplished will be achieved. 
173
174
175
176
177Article 10
178MLA Citation:
179Demirjian, Karoun. "Senate GOP’s Biggest Trump Critic to Lead Congress’s Most Public Russian Hacking Investigation." The Washington Post. WP Company, 06 Jan. 2017. Web. 07 Jan. 2017.
180
181Link:
182https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/06/senate-gops-biggest-trump-critic-to-lead-congress-most-public-russian-hacking-investigation/?utm_term=.3909ee835018
183Journal Entry:
184Due to the recent controversy over Russian interference in the election, the Senate Armed Services Committee is creating a new subcommittee on cyber threats, and Lindsey Graham was picked by John McCain to be the leader of the new subcommittee. McCain himself is the chairman for the Armed Services Committee, and he picked Graham, who is eager to set up countermeasures such as new sanctions. Graham hopes to create a policy on the “rules of engagement” for cyber attacks, as there is currently no such policy, which was emphasized at a recent hearing. Graham also was a critic of Trump during his election campaign, and he also has been trying to get a tougher stance against cyber attacks. There was also debate over whether the investigation should be left up to another intelligence committee, but it was agreed that a separate subcommittee would be created. Finally, Graham hopes to create new counter-propaganda efforts to deal with Russia. 
185
186Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
187This new committee would be an example of special or select committee, which is a committee created for a specific purpose, such as an investigation. A committee like this would focus on a specific issue, but its power to create legislation is limited. The new committee is also a subcommittee of the Senate Authorizing Committee, which means it will have more power due to the looser rules and regulations in the Senate. While a lot of committee chairs are chosen due to the seniority rule, Graham was probably picked because he has strong motivation on this issue and is trusted by McCain, who is his friend. Even though Graham is motivated, I believe the committee won’t be able to pass too much legislation, as it will have a Republican majority, due to the Senate having a Republican majority, and as a result the Republicans will probably be more on Trump’s side. One thing that the Senate authorizing committees will have to do is approve Trump’s cabinet picks, and they may also have to review the Republican’s plan for ending Obamacare. 
188
189
190Article 11
191MLA Citation:
192Kurtzleben, Danielle. "Nonreligious Americans Remain Far Underrepresented In Congress."NPR. NPR, 3 Jan. 2017. Web. 15 Jan. 2017.
193
194Link:
195http://www.npr.org/2017/01/03/508037656/non-religious-americans-remain-far-underrepresented-in-congress
196
197
198Journal Entry:
199The article talked about how although a significant amount of the American population is atheist or nonreligious, only 1 out of 535 members of Congress is not religiously affiliated. Another interesting statistic is that while 71% of Americans are Christians, 91% of Congressmen are, including important leaders such as Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, and Harry Reid.The article also talked about why this gap may exist. One of the major reasons is that most non religious people are young, which is not representative of Congress, which has an average age of around 60. There are not many young people in Congress, and it may not be a coincidence that the only non religious Congress member is 40 years old, which is quite young for a member of Congress. Another reason given is that atheists are not well organized and not politically cohesive. The last reason given is that atheism in general simply does not go well with voters, as most voters agreed that they would be more likely to vote for a Christian candidate, or a Mormon candidate, compared to an atheist.
200 
201Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
202I thought that this large difference between the religious views of the population and Congress may become a problem, although given how some members of Congress act as delegates, where they represent the views of constituents, this may balance things out. This is because delegates are willing to represent their constituents, even if this goes against their own personal views. Another issue that was touched on in the article was how atheists are less likely than religious people to vote, and young people, who are more likely to be atheist, are less likely to vote compared to old people, who are more likely to be religious. This hurts the chances of atheists getting representation for their views in Congress. This was true in my opinion, as I thought of groups like the Evangelical Right, who are actively involved in politics. I also think that some of the statistics in the article have to be viewed carefully, as they can easily involve large margins of error or not be using representative samples.Another important thing is that the leadership is also all Christian, which could lead to them influencing party policy in a way that can affect atheists.  In conclusion, while the constituents of many districts may be atheists, a lot of different factors contribute to them being unable to create a unified voting bloc, which hurts their representation in Congress. 
203
204
205Article 12
206MLA Citation:
207Costa, Robert. "Trump Vows 'insurance for Everybody' in Obamacare Replacement Plan." The Washington Post. WP Company, 15 Jan. 2017. Web. 15 Jan. 2017.
208
209Link:
210https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-vows-insurance-for-everybody-in-obamacare-replacement-plan/2017/01/15/5f2b1e18-db5d-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.ddbbb69bfd4a
211
212
213Journal Entry:
214 The article talked about a lot of Trump’s future plans as President, especially focusing on his plans for Obamacare. He hopes to replace Obamacare with a new insurance that will be provided to everyone, while tightening restrictions on private companies. For example, he hopes to force drug companies to lower their prices on drugs. The article mentioned that while Trump plans on providing insurance to more people, this will cause an increase in healthcare costs. Trump also is willing to use presidential power to force Congress to get things done, saying they “can’t get cold feet”. While the details of Trump’s new plan have not been revealed yet, he himself is confident that it will be passed. It was interesting that the article cited how there have been about 60 votes in the House in recent years on limiting or killing Obamacare. On his other plans, such as cutting taxes and stopping illegal immigration, Trump also claims that he is making significant progress, but he has still not revealed many specifics about his plans. 
215
216Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
217I thought that while Trump does have advantages such as not having a divided government, it will still be difficult for him to get his plans passed. This is because he is advocating a strong central government, which is not a typical conservative policy that Republicans support, as evidenced by their support for things like the Devolution Revolution. Republicans will likely not support a plan to interfere with businesses like drug companies, preferring to limit government involvement. I think Trump is also overconfident about how fast it will take his plans to get passed in Congress, as they will have to pass through committee and be debated on the floor, then go through both the House and the Senate. The plans can easily get stuck at any one of these stages for a long time, as evidenced by how Obamacare took over a year to pass. However, he is right that he has some leverage over Congress, as he can make use of presidential power through things like vetoes and pocket vetoes. If he can create good relationships with party leadership such as Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Majority Whip Steve Scalise, then his chances of getting his plans passed may improve by a lot. 
218
219
220Article 13
221MLA Citation:
222Baker, Peter. "Trump Entering the White House Unbent and Unpopular." New York Times, 17 Jan. 2017. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.
223
224Link:
225https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/us/politics/donald-trump-obama-approval-rating.html?ref=politics&_r=0
226
227
228Journal Entry:
229The article talked about how Trump is entering the presidency at around a 44% approval rate, which is one of the lowest out of all modern presidents. While many presidents try to unify the country and take care of divisions after they win the election, Trump has had conflicts with many others, including John Lewis, a civil rights icon, and he continues to attack Obama. It was interesting how the two previous presidents, Obama and Bush, had tried to bridge the gap between the parties after they got elected, and as a result they enjoyed much higher approval than Trump currently has. Trump claims the polls were rigged, just like he thinks the election predictions were. Trump may be worried over the poll numbers because historically, Congress has been more willing to compromise with popular presidents compared to unpopular ones. However, many supporters still support Trump despite his low approval rate, and he still remains confident that he can pass his plans. Finally, some analysts are speculating that Trump has rewritten the rules, by disregarding polls but still winning, proving that polls can no longer be trusted now. 
230
231Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
232I thought that the examples given of how Obama and Bush had high approval when first entering office would be good examples of honeymoon, where the President, media, and Congress enjoy a good relationship at first. This period wears off after a while, which was evidenced by how both Obama and Bush had their approval ratings drop off later on. It is surprising that Trump does not have this honeymoon period, which almost all Presidents have for some time. I thought it might be true that Trump is proving how polls can be wrong, which may mean there is some kind of problem with our polls. For example, they may not be representative, because many of Trump’s supporters come from a rural background, a poll given in a city may not be an accurate sample. The margin of error on polls may also be larger than expected, and this could lead to us being surprised by poll results, when the result was possible due to it being within the margin of error.  I also thought it made sense that Congress was willing to compromise with popular presidents, because if the Congressmen acted as delegates, representing their constituent’s interests, they would agree with the President that was supported by their constituents. 
233
234
235Article 14
236MLA Citation:
237Lamothe, Dan. "Pentagon Nominee's Ties to Private Firms Embody Revolving-door Culture of Washington." The Washington Post. WP Company, 19 Jan. 2017. Web. 20 Jan. 2017.
238
239Link:
240https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pentagon-nominees-ties-to-private-firms-embody-revolving-door-culture-of-washington/2017/01/19/3524e8f4-dcf9-11e6-918c-99ede3c8cafa_story.html?utm_term=.8bd65d58880a
241
242
243Journal Entry:
244The article was about Donald Trump’s nominee for Defense Secretary, James Mattis. Mattis was a Marine Corps general, and after he retired, he continued to work for a big defense contractor, General Dynamics. Mattis also has a lot of money in stocks for General Dynamics, which led to the question of having a conflict of interests, especially since Trump has announced that he wants to increase defense spending. For example, General Dynamics has been contracted to build new submarines, costing 2 billion each. Mattis also worked with another company, Theranos, soon after retiring from the military. While his role with the company was unclear, now Theranos is under a lot of trouble, with the owner of the company being banned from owning a laboratory, and the company faces many lawsuits. However, the article also mentioned how this is somewhat normal, as the previous Defense secretary, Ashton Carter, also held positions with two Silicon Valley firms, where he was forced to resign after becoming the Defense secretary.
245
246Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
247I thought the article showed how the revolving door is still a common phenomenon in our government. For example, Mattis first worked with the Marines, but then he started working with defense contractors, who will provide for the Marines and will benefit from increasing defense spending. Now that Mattis is being picked to be the Defense Secretary, he has the influence to get increased defense spending to benefit his former employers. This would create an issue network, due to all of these sharing common policy concerns, and Mattis would have a conflict of interest. I think this also would show how the Senate has checks and balances to counter the President, as if the Senate Armed Services Committee believed Mattis would not be a good candidate for Defense Secretary despite Trump’s nomination, they could have refused to confirm the appointment. The hearing conducted also allows the Senate to get a better idea of whether or not the nominee is fit for the job. I also thought it was interesting how the Senate Armed Services Committee never asked Mattis about his previous connections. This could be the Iron Triangle at work, because certain interest groups may be trying to influence Congress to allow Mattis to become Defense Secretary, since he may be a beneficial choice for them.  
248
249
250Article 15
251MLA Citation:
252Gold, Matea. "The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun." The Washington Post. WP Company, 20 Jan. 2017. Web. 20 Jan. 2017.
253
254Link:
255https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/20/the-campaign-to-impeach-president-trump-has-begun/?utm_term=.acac075720bb#comments
256
257
258Journal Entry:
259The article talked about how there are already campaigns to get Trump impeached, even though he was just sworn in today. The campaign is organized by Free Speech for People and RootsAction, and they are claiming that one way they could try to impeach Trump is due to his conflicts of interests, such as his hotels and golf courses. The groups organizing the campaign also cited how they “have the same old system of checks and balances” which they can use if Trump makes any Constitutional violations. The groups also named some potential conflicts, such as how the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has to pay rent for its space in Trump Tower, and foreign diplomats who will be staying at the Trump hotel. These would violate the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, because presidents can’t accept gifts from foreign governments. However, Trump has already stated that he will be donating these profits to the US Treasury. The article also talked about previous impeachments, where several federal judges have been impeached, and President Andrew Johnson was almost impeached in 1868. 
260
261Connection to AP Government/ Constitution:
262I thought that it was interesting how there are already movements to impeach Trump, demonstrating how he is not really experiencing a honeymoon period like most other presidents, where he has good relations with the people, media and Congress. The clause in the Constitution that these groups are trying to use against Trump is in Article 1 Section 9, where it says “and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present…”. However, even if Trump is violating this part of the Constitution, it will be difficult to impeach him when there is no divided government between the President and the Congress, as the Republicans hold the majority in both Houses. To impeach Trump, according to Article II of the Constitution, first the judiciary committee in the House will decide the grounds on which the President is being impeached, and then for each article of impeachment, ½ of the House has to support it to indict the President. Then in the Senate, ⅔ of the Senators need to support the impeachment to remove the President from office. This would be very unlikely given the Republican strength in Congress, and they would be unlikely to want to remove Trump from office, at least not so early on. 
263
264
265Response Paper
266MLA Citation:
267Kane, Paul. "Donald Trump, Meet Your Toughest Hurdle: The U.S. Senate." The Washington Post. WP Company, 03 Jan. 2017. Web. 03 Jan. 2017.
268
269Response:
270The article I was focusing on was about Donald Trump and his relationship with the Senate. The branches of government involved were the executive branch and the legislative branch, and it talked about the powers of both branches through checks and balances on each other. The events in the article connected to checks and balances, as the article talked about how the Senate can approve Supreme Court appointments, appointments to the cabinet, and override a Presidential veto of a law. Another topic was the Rule of Law, which applies to all citizens including the President, and this means that is possible for the President to get impeached by Congress. Some other topics were divided government, which existed during Obama’s administration, but currently is no longer occurring due to the Executive and Legislative branches both being Republican. Retrospective issue voting was mentioned, when the article talked about how Obama’s policies had led to many incumbents who supported them losing office due to their support for issues such as Obamacare. As a result, the dissatisfied voters elected the Republicans to a majority in both houses of Congress. Finally, the coattail effect was referenced, as the Senate is less likely to go along with Trump because not many Senators were elected due to the coattail effect. If a Senator is only elected because of the coattail effect, they would probably be more likely to support Trump’s policies. For example, Senators like John McCain who hold safe seats probably will not go along with Trump solely for the purpose of getting re elected, because they know they likely will get re elected no matter what. 
271
272	The topic of Donald Trump and his working with the Senate is important because it could affect a lot of future legislation. If Trump and the Senate decide to work together, they could easily push through a lot of legislation due to the Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. However, if Trump and the Senate don’t get along, then the Senate can block Trump’s plans, while it could work with the House to push through its own bills, or it could even impeach Trump if the House brings up the charges. I think that Trump’s relationship with the Senate could determine a lot about the nation’s future, as the Senate has the same if not more influence than him. The Senate also has the power to hold hearings for Trump’s cabinet and approve or deny these nominations. Trump’s cabinet will definitely influence him in some ways, and the Senate thus has a way to indirectly influence Trump through his cabinet. The Senate is especially significant compared to the House because the Republicans have a smaller majority here, and the Senators will be in office for longer than members in the House.  
273
274	Some impacts of the events in this article could be that existing legislation could be removed, or new legislation could be blocked or passed. An immediate national implication could be the removal of Obamacare, which would impact a lot of people benefitting from it. Trump hopes to replace Obamacare with private healthcare for everyone, which has some benefits such as greater choice for consumers, and it can reduce inefficiency from government healthcare being too bureaucratic, but it will probably lead to more costs for consumers as well. State implications also exist, as Senators from different states will be affected depending on how they vote for Trump’s policies, which will show through in retrospective issue voting. For example, a Republican who opposes Trump’s policies may lose in the next election cycle because his constituents support Trump, and the attentive public will find out about voting records and stances on certain issues. Finally, international issues may be affected, as Trump has a lot of plans for international problems as well. The Senate could approve or deny Trump’s plans to move jobs back to the US, build his wall to stop illegal immigration, and his decisions on Russia and China. This could even affect Trump’s reelection, because if the Senate allows Trump to go through with his policies, and they end up succeeding, Trump has a good chance for reelection. However, if they fail, Trump will probably lose another election. Trump’s election this year could be considered a realigning election, and he may be able to keep up that trend in the next election, especially if he can keep good relations with the Senate and House. Even without an actual vote, the Senate can still influence Trump’s decisions by threatening to reject them, similar to how the threat of a filibuster can force one party to get a supermajority so it can be ended through cloture. This is significant because there are only 54 Republicans in the Senate, which means that if a filibuster were to occur they would not really have a good way of dealing with it. 
275
276	In conclusion, Trump has a lot of ambitious plans that will need to go through the Senate, and their decisions will have a great impact on his presidency, while also strongly impacting issues on the international, national, and state level. The Senate has a lot of checks and balances with the President given to them in the Constitution, and they can make use of them against Trump if he does not do a good job in office.