Monday, March 26, 2012
All You Need to Know for Florida v. Dept. of Health and Human Services (oral arguments for Obamacare)
(Thanks to Ken Halla's US Government Teacher's Blog)
Today the US Supreme Court began doing something unheard of as it will be listening to oral arguments over three days (as opposed to the usual 30 minutes per side) on FL v. Dept. of Health and Human Services also known as Obamacare's individual mandate (i.e. should people be required to have health insurance). Above is a summary of the case and here are the questions being considered. The Court likes to see similar cases in multiple districts and that is true here as you can see here. here Here is a list of the amicus curiae briefs for the case and here is the petition for the writ of certiorari.
One place you might want to go for the next three days is to the SCOTUS blog which has its own page on the topic. Another resource will be CSPAN which has its own page here.
As you watch this case argued before The Supremes and in the Court of Public Opinion, consider AP Government terms: judicial activism; judicial self-restraint; amicus curiae brief; writ of certiorari; judicial precedent; federal mandate; solicitor general; commerce clause; 10th amendment.
The Economist: A Guide to the Supreme Court Health Care Case
Pope in Mexico: Preaching to a smaller chior?
On his last day in Mexico, the pope said Mass for a vibrant crowd that organizers estimated at more than 600,000 people in a sprawling park on the edge of Leon, a central city which has escaped the worst of the criminal violence plaguing the country.
Wearing purple and white vestments, the 84-year-old pope addressed the biggest crowd of his Latin American trip from a massive white altar platform on a hillside, sprinkling his sermon with words such as conversion and reconciliation.
Many in the crowd covered their heads with hats, sheets and umbrellas against the blazing sunshine as Benedict prayed that Mexicans would be given the strength "to boldly promote peace, harmony, justice and solidarity."
But The Economist reports that while the three days were preaching mainly to the converted (Mexico is one of the world’s great Catholic bastions: 83% of its 112m people are loyal to the Vatican, and Mexico City’s Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe vies with St Peter’s in Rome as the world’s most-visited Catholic church). The Pope stayed in Guanajuato, Mexico’s most devout state, where 94% of the population is Catholic. Well before his visit, posters went up to welcome the pontiff (though many depicted his predecessor).
This emerging cleavage has various sorces, including competition from other religions -- Evangelicals, Jehovah’s Witnesses or Baptists, as well as the "secular" state:
" as the state gets better at bringing basic services to distant places, the outsiders’ modest offerings are being superseded. In the past few years the Chiapas government has built a basketball court, library and market area in Bejucal. Locals say that public spending has become a bit less corrupt. And the authorities are shameless self-promoters, littering the region with billboards celebrating every ounce of investment. Whoever prevails in the battle for rural Mexico’s soul, competition may at last be starting to drive up the standard of living high in the sierra."
Rumors about what goes on behind closed doors in CCP
(From Ken Wedding's Teaching Comparative Blog)
When the best political analysis comes from people seemingly best able to interpret muffled sounds from "the next room," rumors spread rapidly. And, in a closed system, no one will officially deny them.
This analysis is by Damian Grammaticas writing on the BBC web site.
Damaging coup rumours ricochet across China
Have you heard? There's been a coup in China! Tanks have been spotted on the streets of Beijing and other cities! Shots were fired near the Communist Party's leadership compound!
OK, before you get too agitated, there is no coup. To be more exact, as far as we know there has been no attempted coup.
To be completely correct we should say we do not know what's going on. The fact is there is no evidence of a coup. But it is a subject that has obsessed many in China this week…
Many people seemed to believe something was happening, though. The thing that is fascinating is how much traction the talk gained, how far it spread, and what it suggests about China today.
What is most important is that these are not normal times in China. The political atmosphere is tense, full of talk about infighting, purges and power-struggles at the top as China's Communist Party prepares for its once-in-a-decade leadership shuffle later this year.
The Communist Party likes to portray itself as unified, in control - a competent, managerial outfit guiding China towards renewed greatness. It had wanted to show it can handle a leadership change within its ranks smoothly, but now that looks to be far from the case.
The reality of the past few weeks has been that China has been gripped by some of the most extraordinary political events in years, and they indicate significant political tensions beneath the surface…
The rumours focus on two camps battling for positions. On the one side are President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao and supporters who have risen mainly from the Communist Youth League.
On the other side are the Shanghai faction and the "princelings" including Xi Jinping, the man expected to be the next leader of the party, whose father was a hero of the Communist revolution.
The patron of the Shanghai faction is former President Jiang Zemin. The two factions are generally thought to rotate power between them, but that may be under strain…
The problem for China's Communist Party is that it has no effective way of refuting such talk. There are no official spokesmen who will go on the record, no sources briefing the media on the background. Did it happen? Nobody knows. So the rumours swirl.
It is hardly surprising that there are splits and power struggles. They happen in every organisation, not just political parties. Those who reach the very top of the Communist Party of China can control vast resources, patronage, power and access to wealth. The idea that the party can be different and avoid such cliques and factional fights seems unrealistic.
But the Communist Party still attempts to control and divide up power in the same, secretive way it has for years. Meanwhile Chinese society has been changing fast around it. The party's very success managing China's economic growth means the country today is no longer the poor, agrarian society of Chairman Mao's day…
The official media, often waiting for political guidance, can be slow and unresponsive. Many in China are now so cynical about the level of censorship that they will not believe what comes from the party's mouthpieces even if it is true. Instead they will give credence to half-truths or fabrications on the web. That is corrosive for the party's authority.
For China's Communist elite, obsessed by projecting an image of unity and stability, this is a serious problem.
The party wants to manage the coming transfer of power smoothly. But keeping things secret and keeping people's trust is not easy to achieve at the same time.
And China doesn't look quite so stable when power struggles are being fought in the dark and talk of a coup can spread so fast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the best political analysis comes from people seemingly best able to interpret muffled sounds from "the next room," rumors spread rapidly. And, in a closed system, no one will officially deny them.
This analysis is by Damian Grammaticas writing on the BBC web site.
Damaging coup rumours ricochet across China
Have you heard? There's been a coup in China! Tanks have been spotted on the streets of Beijing and other cities! Shots were fired near the Communist Party's leadership compound!
OK, before you get too agitated, there is no coup. To be more exact, as far as we know there has been no attempted coup.
To be completely correct we should say we do not know what's going on. The fact is there is no evidence of a coup. But it is a subject that has obsessed many in China this week…
Many people seemed to believe something was happening, though. The thing that is fascinating is how much traction the talk gained, how far it spread, and what it suggests about China today.
What is most important is that these are not normal times in China. The political atmosphere is tense, full of talk about infighting, purges and power-struggles at the top as China's Communist Party prepares for its once-in-a-decade leadership shuffle later this year.
The Communist Party likes to portray itself as unified, in control - a competent, managerial outfit guiding China towards renewed greatness. It had wanted to show it can handle a leadership change within its ranks smoothly, but now that looks to be far from the case.
The reality of the past few weeks has been that China has been gripped by some of the most extraordinary political events in years, and they indicate significant political tensions beneath the surface…
The rumours focus on two camps battling for positions. On the one side are President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao and supporters who have risen mainly from the Communist Youth League.
On the other side are the Shanghai faction and the "princelings" including Xi Jinping, the man expected to be the next leader of the party, whose father was a hero of the Communist revolution.
The patron of the Shanghai faction is former President Jiang Zemin. The two factions are generally thought to rotate power between them, but that may be under strain…
The problem for China's Communist Party is that it has no effective way of refuting such talk. There are no official spokesmen who will go on the record, no sources briefing the media on the background. Did it happen? Nobody knows. So the rumours swirl.
It is hardly surprising that there are splits and power struggles. They happen in every organisation, not just political parties. Those who reach the very top of the Communist Party of China can control vast resources, patronage, power and access to wealth. The idea that the party can be different and avoid such cliques and factional fights seems unrealistic.
But the Communist Party still attempts to control and divide up power in the same, secretive way it has for years. Meanwhile Chinese society has been changing fast around it. The party's very success managing China's economic growth means the country today is no longer the poor, agrarian society of Chairman Mao's day…
The official media, often waiting for political guidance, can be slow and unresponsive. Many in China are now so cynical about the level of censorship that they will not believe what comes from the party's mouthpieces even if it is true. Instead they will give credence to half-truths or fabrications on the web. That is corrosive for the party's authority.
For China's Communist elite, obsessed by projecting an image of unity and stability, this is a serious problem.
The party wants to manage the coming transfer of power smoothly. But keeping things secret and keeping people's trust is not easy to achieve at the same time.
And China doesn't look quite so stable when power struggles are being fought in the dark and talk of a coup can spread so fast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, March 24, 2012
2 year-old "Obamacare" ready to be reviewed by Supremes, with few sprectators
(From The Economist)
“HELEN R.” is an elderly woman who is currently on seven different medications. Thanks to Barack Obama’s health reforms, however, she gets cheaper medicine and cancer tests. “The health-care law is about people like me,” Helen R. explains in a new video on a government website. Republicans may deride the health law as “Obamacare.” Helen R. prefers to call it “Helencare”.
Mr Obama’s health reform turned two years old on March 23rd. The White House is doing its best to sell it as a success. The video of Helen R. is one of many. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) releases sunny data almost daily. But the campaign still feels defensive. There are good reasons for that: the law’s main provisions will not take effect until 2014, and this anniversary may be its last.
The main question is whether Congress may penalise those who do not buy health insurance, the so-called “individual mandate”. But the court will consider other questions, too: whether the law coerces states to expand Medicaid; whether the rest of the law can stand if the mandate is struck down; and even whether the whole case should be postponed until the mandate takes effect in 2014. Big rallies will coincide with the Supreme Court’s arguments, but the furore belies an increasingly obvious fact. American health care is changing, possibly for good.
Economist: Heal Thyself
(From Huffington Post)
The Supreme Court's health care cases don't begin until 10 a.m. Monday, but the line for the general public to see the action started more than 72 hours earlier. By the the middle of Friday afternoon, the line was already about 10 people deep. The only one not getting paid to be there -- that is, the first actual spectator who will gain entry to the proceedings -- was Kathie McClure.
"I originally thought that I was going to be starting here tomorrow," McClure said. "I came over here to do some recon and there were four people already in line, so I thought, 'Oh gosh.'"
McClure, an Atlanta-based trial lawyer, rushed back to her hotel room in northern Virginia, "dumped everything" into her suitcase, and took her place along the Supreme Court sidewalk to guarantee her ticket to witness history.
The wait will not be easy. Weather forecasts call for thunderstorms beginning Friday night and lasting through Sunday. No tents are allowed. Supreme Court police told HuffPost there will be a single line for all four oral arguments scheduled from Monday through Wednesday. Those at the front of the line can pass on a ticket for Monday's more technical argument to keep their prime spot for the main event -- Tuesday's test of the individual mandate's constitutionality.
McClure said she wants to attend Tuesday, if she can make it four days on the sidewalk. As president of VoteHealthcare.org, she's is in town to make a bold statement of support for the Affordable Care Act -- a sentiment that comes from own family's experience. "I have two chronically ill young adult children," she said. "My son has diabetes and my daughter has epilepsy. We need the Affordable Care Act to be upheld by the Supreme Court because people like my kids, without the Affordable Care Act, won't be able to buy health insurance" because their pre-existing conditions would make them uninsurable.
"They have insurance now because they currently have jobs, but it's been a long battle for our family," McClure said. "They were both diagnosed at 14 and we paid $35,000 a year to insure four people, which is ridiculous."
Big Supreme Court cases often draw long lines, but multi-day overnights are rare. The last such long haul was for a major Second Amendment case two years ago, which compelled a California gun-rights enthusiast and his friend to begin the queue 30 hours early.
For some, the wait is a badge of honor. McClure, however, sees her trek as a black mark upon the court's no-cameras policy. "I think it is absurd that I have to travel to Washington, D.C., and sleep on the sidewalk for three days to get a seat in front of the Supreme Court of the United States," she said. "This is our judicial branch, our institution, and it's essentially for all practical purposes closed off to the public."
Of the 400 seats in the courtroom, the court normally guarantees only 50 for members of the general public to attend a full session. Because the health care cases have commanded so much interest, 60 seats will be made available. The court also will release audio recordings of the arguments several hours after each one finishes, departing from the practice begun in 2010 to post all of the recordings at the end of the week.
“HELEN R.” is an elderly woman who is currently on seven different medications. Thanks to Barack Obama’s health reforms, however, she gets cheaper medicine and cancer tests. “The health-care law is about people like me,” Helen R. explains in a new video on a government website. Republicans may deride the health law as “Obamacare.” Helen R. prefers to call it “Helencare”.
Mr Obama’s health reform turned two years old on March 23rd. The White House is doing its best to sell it as a success. The video of Helen R. is one of many. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) releases sunny data almost daily. But the campaign still feels defensive. There are good reasons for that: the law’s main provisions will not take effect until 2014, and this anniversary may be its last.Republicans in Congress and on the campaign trail say they will scrap the law at the first opportunity. With an election in November that threat is now real. A more immediate danger looms on March 26th when the fight over the law will reach the Supreme Court.
The main question is whether Congress may penalise those who do not buy health insurance, the so-called “individual mandate”. But the court will consider other questions, too: whether the law coerces states to expand Medicaid; whether the rest of the law can stand if the mandate is struck down; and even whether the whole case should be postponed until the mandate takes effect in 2014. Big rallies will coincide with the Supreme Court’s arguments, but the furore belies an increasingly obvious fact. American health care is changing, possibly for good.
Economist: Heal Thyself
(From Huffington Post)
The Supreme Court's health care cases don't begin until 10 a.m. Monday, but the line for the general public to see the action started more than 72 hours earlier. By the the middle of Friday afternoon, the line was already about 10 people deep. The only one not getting paid to be there -- that is, the first actual spectator who will gain entry to the proceedings -- was Kathie McClure.
"I originally thought that I was going to be starting here tomorrow," McClure said. "I came over here to do some recon and there were four people already in line, so I thought, 'Oh gosh.'"
McClure, an Atlanta-based trial lawyer, rushed back to her hotel room in northern Virginia, "dumped everything" into her suitcase, and took her place along the Supreme Court sidewalk to guarantee her ticket to witness history.
The wait will not be easy. Weather forecasts call for thunderstorms beginning Friday night and lasting through Sunday. No tents are allowed. Supreme Court police told HuffPost there will be a single line for all four oral arguments scheduled from Monday through Wednesday. Those at the front of the line can pass on a ticket for Monday's more technical argument to keep their prime spot for the main event -- Tuesday's test of the individual mandate's constitutionality.
McClure said she wants to attend Tuesday, if she can make it four days on the sidewalk. As president of VoteHealthcare.org, she's is in town to make a bold statement of support for the Affordable Care Act -- a sentiment that comes from own family's experience. "I have two chronically ill young adult children," she said. "My son has diabetes and my daughter has epilepsy. We need the Affordable Care Act to be upheld by the Supreme Court because people like my kids, without the Affordable Care Act, won't be able to buy health insurance" because their pre-existing conditions would make them uninsurable.
"They have insurance now because they currently have jobs, but it's been a long battle for our family," McClure said. "They were both diagnosed at 14 and we paid $35,000 a year to insure four people, which is ridiculous."
Big Supreme Court cases often draw long lines, but multi-day overnights are rare. The last such long haul was for a major Second Amendment case two years ago, which compelled a California gun-rights enthusiast and his friend to begin the queue 30 hours early.
For some, the wait is a badge of honor. McClure, however, sees her trek as a black mark upon the court's no-cameras policy. "I think it is absurd that I have to travel to Washington, D.C., and sleep on the sidewalk for three days to get a seat in front of the Supreme Court of the United States," she said. "This is our judicial branch, our institution, and it's essentially for all practical purposes closed off to the public."
Of the 400 seats in the courtroom, the court normally guarantees only 50 for members of the general public to attend a full session. Because the health care cases have commanded so much interest, 60 seats will be made available. The court also will release audio recordings of the arguments several hours after each one finishes, departing from the practice begun in 2010 to post all of the recordings at the end of the week.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Some serious Spring Break personal policy issues: What should We the People Do?
(Two serious issues on the table to consider over break: First, what should local policy-makers do about a growing perscription drug and heroin problem in the Naperville/Aurora area? Second, what should state and federal authorities do about Stand Your Ground Self-defense laws that collide with the killing of innocent citizens and lingering racial issues. Blog your thoughts if you have time this break.....and DON'T DO the DRUGS!)
The January 2012 death of a Neuqua Valley High School senior from a heroin overdose marked the 7th death in the past year in Naperville, Illinois and highlights the changing demographic of the heroin user. In the 1970s, the average age of first use heroin was 27 years old. Today, the average age of first use heroin is 17 ½ years of age.
One reason for this change is the changing nature of heroin itself. In the 1970s heroin was so dilute (only about 2%) that new users injected the drug from the very start. Today heroin is runs between 35% to 60% purity. At that purity level, adolescents can smoke heroin off a piece of foil rather than inject the drug.
Mistakenly, adolescents believe that addiction only occurs when heroin is injected.
DuPage County is considered a heroin hotspot in that there are more heroin users than cocaine or meth users, unusual for most of Illinois. Heroin arrests also have been increasing in Naperville, with 47 last year, double the number in 2009, according to police. Among Naperville teenagers, there was a 78 percent increase in felony drug arrests in 2011 over the previous year and a 450 percent increase in heroin arrests during that time. The DuPage Metropolitan Enforcement Group reported 59 seizures and undercover purchases throughout the county in 2011, up from 16 in 2008.*
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-heroin-death-0313-20120313,0,3964259
Federal authorities have announced that they are now intervening in the investigation of the killing of Trayvon Martin in Florida. That will certainly enhance the completion of forensic evidence, which we discussed earlier as critical to a case like this one. I have previously cautioned that this is not such an easy case as has been suggested, even with the 911 tapes. One of the greatest barriers is the Florida “Stand Your Ground” law.
Continue reading ‘Florida Shooting Forces Debate Over The “Stand Your Ground” Law’
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Russia/China MC Test tomorrow
China Protest PPT post Tianamen Square and Studay guide are posted on the google docs page.
China Protests 2012
China Protests 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
AP Registration deadline March 16
Just a reminder that the AP registration deadline is Friday, March 16. Register to be eligible for $2000 or more in college tuition savings, by taking the two AP Government tests.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Presidential (with a visit from UK PM) Bracketology
For once, an American president uses a British prime minister for a photo-op
President Obama in his role as Chief Citizen (NCAA bracket fan) Chief Diplomat (earlier in the day announced a joint law suit with the UK (EU) and Japan in the World Trade Organization against China), Chief of Party (Ohio a bellweather electoral state) and Chief of State (hosted UK prime minister David Cameron on Air Force One and NCAA Tourney Game #1) on Tuesday night.
The Economist's take from Over There:
WHEN it was first announced in the British press that President Barack Obama would be taking David Cameron on Air Force One to watch a basketball match in Ohio, the newspapers did not know whether to swoon with excitement that the prime minister would be the first foreign leader to be granted a ride on the "world's coolest plane", or to sneer that Mr Obama was using the perks of incumbency to woo a swing state. Even as we crossed the Atlantic earlier today, we in the press pack accompanying Mr Cameron to America were unsure just who was using who.
The default setting of any British journalist covering a trip to Washington is to assume that their prime minister is the supplicant when it comes to photo-opportunities and signs of favour. (The position is reversed when American presidents pay state visits and are hosted by the Queen. Then the British default assumption is that the president in question is jolly lucky to be treated to a stay at Windsor Castle, horse-rides with the monarch and so on).
Adding to the confusion, the prevailing image of Mr Obama in Britain has not much changed since his election. He is still seen as cool, elegant, cerebral and a little aloof (or as one British official puts it admiringly, "he still walks on water as far as Europeans are concerned"). So the idea of Mr Obama descending into the arena and grubbing for votes is a rather alien one.
By happy chance, I was in a bar not far from the White House this evening—surrounded by busy, besuited Washington types supping Yuenglings and scoffing sushi and burgers (though not together)—when my dining companion, an old friend, suddenly pointed to the giant television high in one corner. This was showing a halftime interview with Mr Obama and Mr Cameron, live from the floor of the University of Dayton arena. The sound was down, but subtitles for the deaf were scrolling across the screen, so your blogger was able to follow the interview from his bar stool.
The president, looking cool in his shirtsleeves, and oddly unruffled by holding his own giant microphone in his hand, was explaining to the interviewer why he had brought the prime minister of Great Britain to Ohio. Too often, when foreign leaders come to America they only see the coasts, replied Mr Obama. I wanted to bring Mr Cameron to the great state of Ohio, because the heartland is where it's at.
Now, I cannot pretend to understand college basketball, the March Madness championship or the "first four" system, all the more because I was following this via subtitles, but I am pretty sure that Mr Obama then named the University of Ohio as his favourite team to win. Oh my goodness, I thought to myself, that really is Barack Obama blatantly shilling for votes in a swing state. To a sheltered European, it felt a bit like discovering an archbishop selling insurance door-to-door.
Then came the prime minister. He was wearing his unvarying casual uniform of dark polo shirt and dark trousers, an outfit that always accentuates his few excess pounds and which makes him look the epitome of the slightly unfashionable Englishman on holiday (which I suspect is the point). Thanks to the very large television in my Washington bar, I can report that he seemed a little sweaty. He also seemed less at ease than Mr Obama with his giant microphone, complete with large cube advertising the television network on which he was appearing.
Both Mr Cameron and Mr Obama are a good height, as it happens, but both had the misfortune to look titchy next to their interviewer, Clark Kellogg, a former basketball star who is very tall indeed. Mr Cameron entered into the spirit of the thing, making no bones about the fact that he was shilling for Britain. Thrown a softball question about the London Olympics, he enthused that the stadiums (or stadia as he put it, betraying his fancy education) were all on time and on budget. The British capital was ready and eager for visitors, he said, you're all welcome.
I wish I could report that other patrons in the bar were transfixed by this heroic marketing effort, but I am not sure anyone else had even noticed the interview. Yet I was happy. I felt I had the answer to the question that had been nagging the press pack on the flight across the Atlantic. As far as tonight's jaunt on Air Force One to see Mississippi Valley State play Western Kentucky was concerned, the president and the prime minister were unquestionably using each other. A British leader being used for a photo-op by a sitting American president. I felt obscurely proud.
____________
Mr. Jeff Reed, who teaches APUSH in Virgina, has pubished his historical US Presidential Bracketology. We will use these as part of a March Madness extravaganza tomorrow in class.
Source of 2006 Rankings
Source of 2010 Rankings
President Obama Picks Tar Heels
Jeff Reed's Presidential Bracktology
US, EU and Japan challenge China on rare earths at WTO
(From BBC)
The US, Japan and the European Union have filed a case against China at the World Trade Organization, challenging its restrictions on rare earth exports.
US President Barack Obama accused China of breaking agreed trade rules as he announced the case at the White House.
Beijing has set quotas for exports of rare earths, which are critical to the manufacture of high-tech products from hybrid cars to flat-screen TVs.
It is the first WTO case to be filed jointly by the US, EU and Japan.
They argue that by limiting exports, China, which produces more than 95% of the world's rare earth metals, has pushed up prices.
Follow the link to President Obama's statement, as well as a short video on China's rare earth stockpile.
US claims rule-breaking
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Lessons, Criticisms of Kony 2012
Today the New York Times Education Page posted "Activism or Slactivism? The Kony 2012 Campaign as a Teachable Moment."
Overview
What is the real story behind the “Kony 2012″ video and the “#StopKony” campaign? Do awareness campaigns promote real change or mere “slacktivism” or “clicktivism”? This lesson contains various ways to engage students in thinking deeply about the Kony2012 phenomenon and taking it further — including researching the situation in Uganda, reflecting on activism, examining criticisms of the “Kony 2012″ film or making videos about issues and causes that they care about.
Check it out and comment your opinion as students on this published educational lesson.
Kony 2012 as a Teachable Moment
Here is a link to a website that attempts to give another side of the story. By the way, great discussion in class bringing up many sides of this complicated story.
Open Letter to CEO of Invisable Children
The Daily Show: My Little Kony
Saturday, March 10, 2012
The state of the Chinese State
From Ken Wedding's Teaching Comparative blog: China's premier offers an assessment of the economy and the future.
In China’s Annual Assessment, Wen Is Optimistic
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao opened the annual meeting of China’s handpicked legislature... with a markedly upbeat assessment of the state of the nation, saying that threats posed by bad local government debt and soaring real estate prices were under control, the economy was robust and that “the people’s well-being is improving.”…
The government will focus in its final year on raising ordinary people’s incomes and rebalancing the national economy to be driven less by investment and exports and more by consumer demand, he indicated.
Mr. Wen’s annual report is the most substantive event of every opening session of the National People’s Congress... a meeting whose agenda has long been predetermined by the leadership. In it, he said that the slowdown in China’s growth is coupled with the beginning of a structural transformation toward a consumer-based economy, a change long advocated by economic experts…
It [remains] to be seen whether the government would be able to deliver on its pledge to shift economic growth to consumer demand. Promises to rebalance the economy have been a staple of Mr. Wen’s earlier addresses but many of the structural changes crucial to that goal have been hamstrung by internal political resistance…
Document: Wen Jiabao’s Report to the National People’s Congress
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In China’s Annual Assessment, Wen Is Optimistic
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao opened the annual meeting of China’s handpicked legislature... with a markedly upbeat assessment of the state of the nation, saying that threats posed by bad local government debt and soaring real estate prices were under control, the economy was robust and that “the people’s well-being is improving.”…
Mr. Wen’s annual report is the most substantive event of every opening session of the National People’s Congress... a meeting whose agenda has long been predetermined by the leadership. In it, he said that the slowdown in China’s growth is coupled with the beginning of a structural transformation toward a consumer-based economy, a change long advocated by economic experts…
It [remains] to be seen whether the government would be able to deliver on its pledge to shift economic growth to consumer demand. Promises to rebalance the economy have been a staple of Mr. Wen’s earlier addresses but many of the structural changes crucial to that goal have been hamstrung by internal political resistance…
Document: Wen Jiabao’s Report to the National People’s Congress
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP Delegate Count
Studying Comparative Blogspot
Ken Wedding's Studying Comparative Blogspot is a must-read as the countdown begins to May's AP Exam. Here are some helpful links from last year:
Question No. 22
Monday, March 5, 2012
Tears in the eyes of beholders....on both sides
WITH hundreds of military trucks, menacing police vans, hovering helicopters and tens of thousands of soldiers and riot police in full gear, Moscow felt like an occupied city last night.
And so it was. Manezh Square, in front of the Kremlin, and a good portion of Tverskaya, the city’s main shopping street, were taken by a crowd of some 100,000 grim-looking people dressed mostly in black, who were brought in to celebrate the victory of Vladimir Putin. Russia's outgoing prime minister officially won more than 64% of the vote in yesterday's presidential election.
This was a very different crowd from the privileged middle-class Muscovites normally seen on Tverskaya, who largely voted against Mr Putin. Actors and singers tried to warm up the pro-Putin crowd, but few responded with enthusiasm. This was the Moscow Mr Putin addressed with his emotional speech.
“A special thank you to those who gathered today in Moscow, who supported us in every corner of our limitless motherland, to all those who said 'yes' to our great Russia.” By “Russia”, Mr Putin meant himself. A tear—later blamed on the cold wind—rolled down his face.
“We won! We won in an open and honest battle! Thank you friends, thank you!” said Mr Putin. This was the speech of a conqueror in a hostile capital. Moscow gave Mr Putin less than half of its votes. More than 20% went to Mikhail Prokhorov, a liberal business tycoon. There were no kind words in Mr Putin's victory speech for his opponents; no promise to be a president of all the people, including those who voted against him; no offer of a compromise—only of an unrelenting fight.
Economist on Russian Presidential Election
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Monday Morning Breakfast Book Club
(This re-run post from 2010 will set the stage for Monday's book chats. Discussion questions for both books are at the bottom of this page)
Terror in Moscow
Fearing the wider consequences of a bomb attack on the Moscow metro
The Economist reports on Monday's (3/29/10) Moscow metro bombings. Quotes from President Putin returned as PM when he said the government will "destroy," the terror group. Consider the hard-line response with this from Anna Politkovskaya in 2001 -- five years before her murder.
"People in Chechnya have rights guaranteed by the Russian constitution to live, like you, me or anybody else. The western world is depriving them of these rights by supporting Putin."
___________________
"TWO terrorist bombers on the Moscow metro killed at least 37 people and injured 102 in the morning rush hour on Monday March 29th. The first explosion, which killed 22 people and injured 12, struck just before 8am at the Lubyanka metro station, a few hundred feet from the Kremlin and next to the headquarters of the Federal Security Services, the successor to the KGB. The second bomb went off at Park Kultury, by the main circular road in central Moscow, killing at least 15.....Russia has grown tragically familiar with terrorist attacks over the past two decades, during which it has fought two brutal wars in Chechnya, in the 1990s. But Moscow has not seen attacks such as these since August 2004, when a bomb on the Moscow metro killed nine people. Last November a bomb on the Nevsky express, which travels between Moscow and St Petersburg, killed 26 people and injured 100.
Chechnya itself has been relatively calm in recent years under the thumb of the local strongman Ramzan Kadyrov, installed by Mr Putin as Chechen president in 2007. But violence has spread to neighbouring republics, particularly Ingushetia and Dagestan, both of which have descended into a state resembling civil war. Yet although killings and explosions have become daily occurrences in these north Caucasian republics, in Moscow they are not considered to be attacks on Russia itself."
www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15806684
_________________________
Discussion questions for Putin's Russia
1) Big terrorist attacks have in the past been used by the Kremlin to justify tightening its grip on power and curbing the opposition. The second war in Chechnya, in 2000, which helped to propel Mr Putin into his presidency, was accompanied by a move to bring Russian television under Kremlin control. In 2004, after the school siege in Beslan, in North Ossetia, Mr Putin scrapped regional elections. Using examples from the reading, what would the author predict for Russia's new north Caucasus policy? Why would this be a mistake according to the author? Do you agree?
2) Putin's more autocratic state is supposed to be a more effective state. The author emphatically answers that fear is the only public good that Putin's Kremlin provided effectively. Explain.
3) The author devotes considerable space showing how Putin's government did little to provide most basic state services. She argues hotly that the Russian Armed Services, rather than protecting civilians from terrorism or violent crime, have themselves become perpetrators of state terrorism. How?
4) Effective States have independent courts capable of enforcing the Rule of Law. Institutionally, does Politkovskaya see Rule of Law in Putin's Russia?
5) According the the author, Russian Courts served the interests of criminals and oligarchs. From our unit of study, did that seem to be reformed in Putin's Modern Russia?
6) By the author's account, Putin does not care about the people. She criticizes the political and economic system he has consolidated with true stories and reporting that probably cost her her life. But every day an Army private is hazed to death, a middle class family in Moscow drives to Ikea to purchase furniture for their newly renovated Dacha. Russian GDP grew steadily for 6 years under Putin, and the number of people below the poverty line dropped significantly. In your opinion, do the ends justify the means in Putin's Russia?
7) JusticeforNorthCaucasus.com wrote in 2001, "That Politkovskaya herself has withstood poisoning and harassment to tell the truth about Putin's Russia should give even the most pessimistic observer of Russian affairs hope." But in 2006, the author was murdered and the president called her, "a person of no significance." What does this say about the hope for modern Russia becoming a liberal democracy?
8) Some have claimed Politkovskaya's critique of Putin's Russia is over the top. One on-line reviewer called her, "Russia's Michael Moore." Do you find this analysis objective and legitimate, or illegitimate opposition propaganda?
http://www.slate.com/id/2151209/
____________________________
Discussion questions for Red China Blues
1. Jan Wong tells us that all existing dictionaries and language textbooks were destroyed at the time of the Cultural Revolution. Why was this necessary? How effectively could a political system be shaped or controlled by such a measure?
2. When the author realises, early on, that she is not allowed the freedom to think, she says this is “only the beginning of my real awakening, a painful process that would take several years more.” Why was her awakening such a slow process?
3. If the author had grown up in China, do you think her doubts and questions would not have arisen in her student years? Or do you think her classmates went through similar “awakenings”?
4. In theory at least, the workers had better living conditions than intellectuals in China in the early 1970s. Does this strike you as any more unfair than the opposite situation?
5. Having completed the book, what are your feelings about Jan Wong’s informing on Yin (the girl who wanted help getting to the West) while she was still an unquestioning Maoist?
6. Could you characterize the four sections of the book? Do they differ in tone as well as content?
7. Broadly speaking, the first half of the book avoids overviews or hindsight, but in the second half the author adopts a more knowing perspective. What effect does this have for the reader?
8. What fresh insights have you obtained from Jan Wong’s analysis of the Tiananmen Square demonstration and the detailed description of the subsequent massacre?
9. The author says that the Tiananmen massacre could have been avoided: “An experienced mediator could have solved things so easily.” How different do you think life in China might have been after the demonstration if there had been no violence?
10. At the beginning of the book the author is writing largely about herself and her reactions to the political system. The last part of the book is more concerned with the stories of individuals living in post-Tiananmen Square China. What can you deduce from this? How much do you think she has changed, and how much has China changed?
_______________
For your 10 points of EC, make sure you complete the discussion questions and then lead small group discussion break-outs as you "drop knowledge,'' on your fellow students.
Terror in Moscow
Fearing the wider consequences of a bomb attack on the Moscow metro
The Economist reports on Monday's (3/29/10) Moscow metro bombings. Quotes from President Putin returned as PM when he said the government will "destroy," the terror group. Consider the hard-line response with this from Anna Politkovskaya in 2001 -- five years before her murder.
"People in Chechnya have rights guaranteed by the Russian constitution to live, like you, me or anybody else. The western world is depriving them of these rights by supporting Putin."
___________________
"TWO terrorist bombers on the Moscow metro killed at least 37 people and injured 102 in the morning rush hour on Monday March 29th. The first explosion, which killed 22 people and injured 12, struck just before 8am at the Lubyanka metro station, a few hundred feet from the Kremlin and next to the headquarters of the Federal Security Services, the successor to the KGB. The second bomb went off at Park Kultury, by the main circular road in central Moscow, killing at least 15.....Russia has grown tragically familiar with terrorist attacks over the past two decades, during which it has fought two brutal wars in Chechnya, in the 1990s. But Moscow has not seen attacks such as these since August 2004, when a bomb on the Moscow metro killed nine people. Last November a bomb on the Nevsky express, which travels between Moscow and St Petersburg, killed 26 people and injured 100.
Chechnya itself has been relatively calm in recent years under the thumb of the local strongman Ramzan Kadyrov, installed by Mr Putin as Chechen president in 2007. But violence has spread to neighbouring republics, particularly Ingushetia and Dagestan, both of which have descended into a state resembling civil war. Yet although killings and explosions have become daily occurrences in these north Caucasian republics, in Moscow they are not considered to be attacks on Russia itself."
www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15806684
_________________________
Discussion questions for Putin's Russia
2) Putin's more autocratic state is supposed to be a more effective state. The author emphatically answers that fear is the only public good that Putin's Kremlin provided effectively. Explain.
3) The author devotes considerable space showing how Putin's government did little to provide most basic state services. She argues hotly that the Russian Armed Services, rather than protecting civilians from terrorism or violent crime, have themselves become perpetrators of state terrorism. How?
4) Effective States have independent courts capable of enforcing the Rule of Law. Institutionally, does Politkovskaya see Rule of Law in Putin's Russia?
5) According the the author, Russian Courts served the interests of criminals and oligarchs. From our unit of study, did that seem to be reformed in Putin's Modern Russia?
6) By the author's account, Putin does not care about the people. She criticizes the political and economic system he has consolidated with true stories and reporting that probably cost her her life. But every day an Army private is hazed to death, a middle class family in Moscow drives to Ikea to purchase furniture for their newly renovated Dacha. Russian GDP grew steadily for 6 years under Putin, and the number of people below the poverty line dropped significantly. In your opinion, do the ends justify the means in Putin's Russia?
7) JusticeforNorthCaucasus.com wrote in 2001, "That Politkovskaya herself has withstood poisoning and harassment to tell the truth about Putin's Russia should give even the most pessimistic observer of Russian affairs hope." But in 2006, the author was murdered and the president called her, "a person of no significance." What does this say about the hope for modern Russia becoming a liberal democracy?
8) Some have claimed Politkovskaya's critique of Putin's Russia is over the top. One on-line reviewer called her, "Russia's Michael Moore." Do you find this analysis objective and legitimate, or illegitimate opposition propaganda?
http://www.slate.com/id/2151209/
____________________________
Discussion questions for Red China Blues
1. Jan Wong tells us that all existing dictionaries and language textbooks were destroyed at the time of the Cultural Revolution. Why was this necessary? How effectively could a political system be shaped or controlled by such a measure?
3. If the author had grown up in China, do you think her doubts and questions would not have arisen in her student years? Or do you think her classmates went through similar “awakenings”?
4. In theory at least, the workers had better living conditions than intellectuals in China in the early 1970s. Does this strike you as any more unfair than the opposite situation?
5. Having completed the book, what are your feelings about Jan Wong’s informing on Yin (the girl who wanted help getting to the West) while she was still an unquestioning Maoist?
6. Could you characterize the four sections of the book? Do they differ in tone as well as content?
7. Broadly speaking, the first half of the book avoids overviews or hindsight, but in the second half the author adopts a more knowing perspective. What effect does this have for the reader?
8. What fresh insights have you obtained from Jan Wong’s analysis of the Tiananmen Square demonstration and the detailed description of the subsequent massacre?
9. The author says that the Tiananmen massacre could have been avoided: “An experienced mediator could have solved things so easily.” How different do you think life in China might have been after the demonstration if there had been no violence?
10. At the beginning of the book the author is writing largely about herself and her reactions to the political system. The last part of the book is more concerned with the stories of individuals living in post-Tiananmen Square China. What can you deduce from this? How much do you think she has changed, and how much has China changed?
_______________
For your 10 points of EC, make sure you complete the discussion questions and then lead small group discussion break-outs as you "drop knowledge,'' on your fellow students.
Czar Putin, again
Another good video on Putin and Russia to watch here. Blog your prediction on Putin's percentage of the vote on Sunday. For fun only, no wagering.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)