For much of history and times, the United States has been premiered by the prominence of two political parties. Each political party has its own levels and degrees of success. The two main political parties are the Republican Party and the Democrats party. Although there influence can be witnessed from the production of prominent leaders, there are also minor parties which play a part too in American politics. The Republican Party has produced great leaders such as Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan and George Bush. On the other hand, democrats have had leaders too such as Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter.
Most of the differences in these parties are ideological. The democrats have their own ideologies which always define its choice of leaders. On the other hand, republicans have an almost equal measure based on their ideologies.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Many government operations affects direct the citizens it governs. The people of the United States have had many exposures on these experiences and impacts of the said decisions. Most of the times, the government does its work while considering the general wellbeing of its people. Contrasting instances may not be easily avoided. As such, the next step after the execution of such a law defines how the people view the government on a big picture. It doesn’t have to be a single persons’ decision to make, but the effects are equally the same. Different administrations have done things differently (DeMuth et al., 1986). The differently don’t have align with other and subsequent administrations may decide to do away with the formers’ executions. The government on this side should therefore be careful how it handles its people and the information.
Research Methodologies and Reviews
Based on online research on operational aspects, many aspects of the United States government have been analyzed. The different points of view taken indicate a different scenario most times depending on the nature of the said operation. For instance, when a party in power tries to maximize its ideological influences on many aspects of the American people, their implications define their entire course of life. These ideologies bring social, economic and political differences.
More evidently, their differences can be proved by the launch of Obama care foundation. The reactions from both sides have shown the differences in the medical opinion for the country. Introduced by the Obama's administration, the program's idea was to provide a basis for Americans to be medically insured. The mandatory nature of the program which states that a person must be insured for at least 9 months out of 12 in a year or face fines didn't go well with the republicans (Tesler, 2012). They felt that individuals must care for their own health on their own terms. Privatizing medical care would give Americans the freedom entitled to them by the constitution opposed to a total government control.
This program has brought several ethical issues amongst Americans and state institutions. There are people who feel that the government is interfering with their lives. Others see this as an opportunity for health issues and the sector itself to grow. Addressing the health issues means that there is always conflict amongst high ranking American politicians. These conflicts affect the well-being of the American people. Lose of this program, most certainly during the current regime of republicans, can mean endangering some of American lives.
Secondly, implementation of policies has been in contradiction. Social life aspects such as gender base laws have led both different forms of governance collide. For instance, on February 22nd, 2017, president trump rescinded gender protection regulations which had allowed students to use bathrooms which corresponded with their gender identity. Subsequent decisions to fire the education secretary compounded it all. Obama’s administration had passed the law which made students feel equal. Trump’s regime felt that this law violated human cultures and the dignity each gender upholds.
For many students, this was a violation of their rights. They pose the question and the idea of morally abused based on gender. They felt that the regulation was giving them an equal opportunity to their counterpart. Their ideas and lines of thinking stand a chance of changing. They may feel that this violation was extreme. They may become more biased on the other gender and pose social constrictions based on that. Ethically, Trump’s idea would have been tabled and discussed on the levels of the students. Their general view would have then helped in the making and execution of his decision. That ability to make final paramount decisions can affect the ethical and moral stability of a given group of affected individuals.
Media, like many other agencies in the US plays are major role. They keep people informed on what is happening within their country and its operational units. The information they pass can be damaging. In the second half part of January 2017, Trump’s administration ordered its employees operating in different agencies to only release information that was in line with the president’s agenda. The ban came through banning of official social media releases. An example was the Environment Protection Agency. These bans are mostly for the good and protection of the agencies from extreme criticism by the public which affects its operations. The ban can be supported as many press releases are understood differently by the republic (Green, 1991). By making on point press releases, the process increases people’s faith on the agency to handle its operations. Trumps decision has so far helped the agency work in peace as less attention is pointed towards it.
Again, the press release from the white house on March 2017 which seemed to be copied from a previous press release by Exxon Mobil few days earlier created different scenarios. The company, whose former CEO Rexx Tillerson had been confirmed as the state secretary showed similar content. It led to Trump’s administration being criticized for its inabilities to prove to the American people that power was not consolidated on former friends. This kind of negativity was not good for the president and his administration. Had they considered going through the press release with no indication that it was no possibly plagiarized may be they could have convinced the country of the administration’s good intentions.
Depending on the kind of information reaching the people, the weight determines their reaction levels. The decisions made by different heads of states regarding the levels of the living standards of the American people define their futures. As such, these decisions should be less paramount and should let people exercise their lifestyles as they feel comfortable and right. It will help them lead healthy lives while at the same time helping the government stay on its toes. Again, media releases and decisions should also be in consideration of both the wellbeing of the country and those of the countrymen. They should not be reactive but rather proactive so as to accommodate everyone.
DeMuth, C. C., & Ginsburg, D. H. (1986). White House review of agency rulemaking. Harvard Law Review, 99 (5), 1075-1088.
Green, H. P. (1991). Constitutional Implications of Federal Restrictions on Scientific Research and Communication. UMKC L. Rev., 60 , 619.
Tesler, M. (2012). The spillover of racialization into health care: How President Obama polarized public opinion by racial attitudes and race. American Journal of Political Science ,56 (3), 690-704