What Is The Role Of The People In The Texas Political System?

/in /by

Students will write an essay, 500-750 words in length, from the topic below. The purpose of the project is to give students an opportunity to discuss a key political science concept, and to show a basic understanding of academic research and reporting skills. The project consists of producing a 500-750 work essay on one of the provided topics (see below), as well as a works cited page for sources containing information used in the essay. The assignment is to be formatted according to the Modern Language Association (MLA) style. Students should research this style in order to properly format the assignment; papers not formatted properly will not receive a passing grade.

Students should use Courier or New Courier 12 point as the paper’s font, double space the text, and create one inch margins on all four sides of the page. In addition, the assignment should be formatted according to MLA style for papers with no title page.

Writing Assignment Topic

What is the role of the people in the Texas political system?

Key areas to address include:

  • The role of public opinion, interest groups, and political parties;
  • The state and local election process;
  • Rights and responsibilities of citizens; and
  • Key issues and policies and political culture.

What factors influence the development of criminal justice policies?

/in /by

Response must be 100 words

 

1.  What factors influence the development of criminal justice policies?

 

2.  Do you consider a police officer to be a bureaucrat? If so how do you define that and if not why not?

 

3.   People will always have an agenda – there are some countries that have a law that you must answer the police officer and if you lie to them then you can be charged – we have some of that – for instance under oath but not so much in normal questioning unless it hinders an investigation in a way you can prove that – which can be hard. Can you think of any other ways that a lie can get you into legal problems when talking to folks?

 

4. What do you think is the biggest influence on policy and why?

 

5. Which factor(s) matter most to criminal justice policy development?

 

6. What are some of the hurdles to the implementation of criminal justice policy?

 

7. How do we set a general policy for all law enforcement in dealing with suspects of all kinds  – How do we make sure police treat everyone equally?

 

8.Last, there are officers that just plain make the wrong call for a lot of reasons – some good and some bad too. These are all symptoms – what do you think is the real problem – is it policy – procedures – civilians – police – organizational mindset – training?  What policy could be made that would either show the real issue or fix the problem?

 

POLITICAL CULTURE

/in /by

Greetings and all that jazz! This is typically the most exciting part of the course, since it’s a blank slate or potential for experience. We have to start somewhere, though, and I choose the rich pool of culture, that ispolitical culture. Thus the first assignment is more of an orientation, or prerequisite to the study of state and local government. One of the most enduring truths about this overall subject is “all politics is local” (the uniquely qualified late House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill)

I have posted in Block 1 (on the homepage)  a reading/reference about political culture. I always tell my 2306 students that political culture in a very local thing, like slang (vernacular) is to language. In a state a big and diverse as Texas, you need a good grasp of what has influenced and shaped political culture here to begin a legitimate understanding of state politics and the government itself. Big Note: when I say “good grasp” I’m not implying that you should involve opinion or that you reject or espouse the core ideas of the various (and competing) subcultures. You all probably have a formed view (by a piecemeal process called political socialization) already. For the purpose of this core degree requirement, we’re just navigating the system to understand it as such.

Whew, glad to get that out of the way. In summary, THINK OF POLITICAL CULTURE this way:

step 1: culture = why/how we do things here: food, music, dress, tradition, family norms, etc.

step 2: political culture = how we “do political things” here: government structure, priorities in law & policy, election styles, etc.

step 3: differences, or clash of political culture – based on competing priorities (public goods vs. private goods OR new ways vs. old ways) Culture explains WHY residents of a particular place prefer, want or reject policies put forth by government, or the manner in which government behaves.

Next, think SUBCULTURES—the component parts of the culture– often referred to as 1. traditionalistic, 2. individualistic, 3. moralistic….These are PATTERNS within the political culture of Texas–all three are visible in certain issues, decisions, elections, etc.

FOR ASSIGNMENT:   Please click on “political culture week 1” posted in Block 1.  Read over the excerpt and pp. 596-598 in Chapter 19 and then submit a comparative summary of the 3 cultures. This is very informal, you can word (spelling is important though) and structure your response as you like. Include the following:

1. What is the core idea/premise of each subculture?

2. How do they differ about bureaucracy and political parties/ideology

3. Which is each subculture focused on, private society, or the public community?

Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installation

/in /by

MEMORANDUM FOR Faculty Advisor, USASMA-NRC, 11291 SGT E. Churchill St, Fort Bliss, Texas 79918

SUBJECT: Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installations

1. PROBLEM. Dining facilities are no longer a viable method of feeding our Soldiers. It is a major financial loss to the government to try to continue operating.

2. RECOMMENDATION. Course of Action 2. This course of action will be the most vital at cutting costs and at the same time leaning toward the new Army. Paying Soldiers, full Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) would provide for the difference in costs with meals provided by the dining facilities and the local economy and the choice to choose better nutritional choices. This will be the cheaper route as it will save money and not waste food that the Soldiers do not eat. We will also support our local economy by allowing our Soldiers a variety of vendors they can choose from to buy.

3. BACKGROUND. Originally, dining facilities were a key asset for the Army. All of the Soldiers had easy access near their quarters for all of their meals. Soldiers are changing with the way they think about nutrition. This affects us financially trying to manage dining facilities that are just not cost effective. Soldiers like variety and meals on the go and that is what the new Army model will have to deliver to be successful.

4. FACTS.

a. The United States has incurred huge costs over the years because of managing numerous dining facilities.

b. Bacevich (2010) asserted that a majority of the United States citizens were in favor to reduce the amount of expenditures that the government incurs in foreign countries.

c. The cost is the biggest reason for reviewing the closure of the majority of the dining facilities.

5. ASSUMPTIONS.

a. Eliminating the dining facilities will ultimately lead to a reduction of the overall budget.

SUBJECT: Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installations

b. Eliminating the dining facilities will also enable the United States government to focus budget allotments on issues that are more pertinent to the citizens of the United States.

c. Eliminating the dining facilities will also enhance the delivery of services by both the national government and also the Soldiers themselves.

d. Eliminating the dining facilities will go a long way in reducing the cost of food for instant breakfast that most Soldiers ignore, yet the government has constantly incurred significant costs on the same over the years (Bernskoetter, 2005).

e. An elimination of the dining facilities aims to ensure that the government can redirect requisite resources and funds to perform more pertinent functions to the government’s operation.

6. POSSIBLE SOLUTION.

a. Course of Action 1. Program intervention. The pentagon through the defense department looked into ways of cutting costs by eliminating the dining facilities and reducing on the number of meals that are available for the Soldiers. The largest focus was on the elimination of hot breakfast and introduction of take away meals since a majority of the Soldiers skipped this meal and, therefore, made it difficult for the defense department to support the meal effectively, as it was a waste of financial resources.

b. Course of Action 2. Shut down the dining facilities and give the Soldiers their full Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS), to provide them more nutritional options and help the community, the Soldier, and the loss incurred by the government to run these facilities.

c. Course of Action 3. Government to government support programs (Bacevich, 2010). For the process to be successful, it is imperative to involve all the governments involved including those of foreign countries, since their support will be critical in ensuring that there is a successful elimination of the dining facilities without the emergence of any unprecedented costs that may emanate out of a logistical problem in the foreign country.

7. CRITERIA.

a. Screening Criteria. The COA should provide a significant reduction in cost by eliminating dining facilities from installations.

NGAL-BGA-OPS

SUBJECT: Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installations

Criteria Definition
Suitable Does it solve the problem and is it legal and ethical?
Feasible Does it fit within available resources?
Acceptable Is it worth the cost or risk?
Distinguishable Does it differ significantly from other solutions?
Complete Does it contain the critical aspects of solving the problem from start to finish?

b. Evaluation Criteria.

(1) Evaluation Criteria 1 (Cost). The government should provide a framework for the criteria on eliminating the dining facilities in order to reduce costs.

(2) Evaluation Criteria 2 (Implementation). The government should provide a framework on how to implement the program in the shortest time possible.

(3) Evaluation Criteria 3 (Effective). The government must come up with the most effective program specifically tailored for the elimination process in order to reduce costs.

c. WEIGHING CRITERIA. Weighing of Criteria. 1 is the Least amount of Importance with 3 being the Greatest. The higher total weight is the most desirable.

Evaluation Criteria Course of Action 1 Course of Action 2 Course of Action 3
Cost (1) 2 x 1 3 x 1 1 x 1
Implementation (2) 3 x 2 1 x 2 2 x 2
Appropriate (3) 2 x 2 3 x 3 1 x 1
Total 12 14 6

8. ANALYSIS.

a. Screened Out Course of Action. None.

b. COA 1. Reducing the number of meals available to Soldiers.

(1) Advantages. By not serving a hot breakfast and to introduce take away meals it would reduce costs because most of the Soldiers skip this meal.

SUBJECT: Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installations

(2) Disadvantages. Not all Soldiers skip breakfast and you should provide a hot breakfast to those who do.

c. COA 2. Giving Soldiers full Basic Allowance for Subsistence.

(1) Advantages. Soldiers will be able to choose what they want and not waste the food provided by the dining facility. Most Soldiers do prefer a variety of food and like the opportunity to eat what they want.

(2) Disadvantages. In some situations, it may not be effective for the Soldiers depending on the area they are located in order to provide for themselves, especially if they are AIT or Basic trainees.

COA 3. Government to Government, support programs.

(1) Advantages. The government will be able to implement the elimination program in the shortest time possible but also more effectively and efficiently.

(2) Disadvantages. A lack of government support from other countries and more so those where the Soldiers are deployed may hinder the efforts of the government in solving and eliminating the huge costs associated with dining facilities while still providing for the Soldiers.

9. COMPARISON. All of the methods are critical for the successful implementation of the elimination program. The COA 1 method would allow the government to save money by eliminating one meal that most Soldiers do not eat but the overall cost of maintaining a dining facility is not effective. COA 2 is the most cost effective and allows the Soldiers a choice in what and how they want to eat. COA 3 is the best used when the Soldiers are stationed or deployed in other countries, since the government will ultimately require the support of other countries in order to successfully implement the program to eliminate the dining facilities (Bacevich, 2010).

10. CONCLUSION. Dining facilities are incurring a significant cost to the government, which has affected how budgets are allocated to issues that are more pertinent. The move taken by the government in order to eliminate the dining facilities is therefore crucial in eliminating these costs. Implement COA2, pay our Soldiers full BAS and give them more nutritional choices, while eliminating waste and reducing costs.

SUBJECT: Eliminating Dining Facilities from Installations

11. COORDINATION.

ACofS, G-1 CONCUR/NONCONCUR_________CMT_________DATE__________

DPTM CONCUR/NONCONCUR_________CMT_________DATE__________

12. APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL. Course of Action 2. This course of action will be the most vital at cutting costs and at the same time leaning toward the new Army. Paying Soldiers, full Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) would provide for the difference in costs with meals provided by the dining facilities and the local economy and the choice to choose better nutritional choices. This will be the cheaper route as it will save money and not waste food that the Soldiers do not eat. We will also support our local economy by allowing our Soldiers a variety of vendors they can choose from to buy

a. That the (state the approving authority and recommended solution).

APPROVED____________DISAPPROVED___________SEE ME______________

b. That the (approving authority to sign the implementing directive(s).

APPROVED____________DISAPPROVED___________SEE ME______________

13. POINT OF CONTACT.

References

Bacevich, A. J. (2010). Washington rules: America’s path to permanent war. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.

Bernskoetter, S. A. (2005). Surviving twilight. New York, NY: Booksurge.

5