Article


   Since 2014 spending on political campaigns and in congress has gone up quite a bit. Many groups that support tax reform, trade, and retirement security have increased if not doubled their spending on lawmakers in congress. One example is the ACLI has increased its spending from $663,600 in 2014 to around $1.3 million in 2016 towards lawmakers. Some other examples are the IRI going from $139,300 to $223,700, the FSI went from $286,000 to $332,500. These are all examples of how interest groups are trying to influence legislation through funding and donating to lawmakers. These interest groups aren't pouring money into congress just to get a law passed they're trying to get the legislators to have conversations about future laws that could be passed.

   This article relates to what we're talking about in class because it is all about interest group spending. These interest groups are trying to use their money to help with the insider strategy where they get up close and personal with the lawmakers. This strategy isn't used as often as the outsider strategy since it's easier to do and to get what you want. Even though interest groups aren't the main way congressmen and candidates for any political office get their funding they are a good way to get support and votes for their campaign. Interest groups have some influence on legislation whether it be with money or support.

   I think that spending on congress from interest groups has increased is interesting. I understand that they want to voice their opinion and get laws passed, but the amount of money being spent on just getting someone to support your views is almost absurd. Spending upwards of a million dollars just to get a law passed or a candidate elected is almost just wasting money. If you put into perspective with how much was spent on either presidential campaign, Hillary's or Trump's, it seems that it is a proper amount for voicing a concern and opinion. Even though money is the go-to way to get something done in this day and age I think there are better ways to get something done and better things that money could have gone to other than just another congress member.

Article

   This week the third largest political party in Florida dissolved. The Independent party had around 250,000 members, which made it ten times larger than the Libertarian party and fifty times larger than the Green party. Some say the numbers are inflated because the actual number of voters is lower than the number of registered voters. This is because people didn't want to affiliate with a party but accidentally put Independent instead. The start of the purge dates back to 2014 when they didn't do a tax audit with a certified public accountant. When the party's account couldn't afford the CPA it dissolved. 

   This relates to what we're doing in class because it's about political parties. Supporting a party is important because it can help them with things like tax audits or funding for campaigns. Since most of the registered voters didn't actually support them, they didn't get a lot of funding and had to dissolve into nothing. Even though it was only a third party, the support wasn't really enough for it to keep a big status against the other parties. The loss of this party isn't very big since it was only a small third party that didn't have much political impact.

   I believe they deserve what they got because they should have found a way to resolve the problem before it ended them. Since they didn't do their tax audit correctly they got penalized. If you can't pay the penalty you should be punished but I think dissolving the entire party was a bit harsh. If they either had more time or got better staff and support they might still be around. Even though they are gone now they might make an appearance later on or at least be mentioned in a history book somewhere.

Article

   On Tuesday a North Carolina state panel up held part of  a new law that took power away from the new governor. The ruling was to temporarily halt the need for legislative approval on his cabinet candidates.The limits on Governor Roy Cooper's power were set by the former state governor and state government, which is mostly Republican in both chambers, right before the November election. The governor did this to handicap the next governor so they couldn't do much without consulting the general assembly first. Since the law was put into effect Mr. Cooper has filed a lawsuit and a panel of judges are considering his case because they say he has shown likelihood of success in his challenge. He has till May to continue appointing cabinet members until he needs notify lawmakers of his selections.

   This relates to what we are talking about in class by showing how political ideology and beliefs can effect a government. Since the government at the moment is mostly Republican and orthodox they don't agree with the new changes that were going to be made to the government and the state. The clash of these two political beliefs made one side act in an unprofessional manner and they passed a law that limited the powers of the next governor, who is Democratic. Another reason this ties into what we're covering in class is the different types of voters. This wouldn't of happened if voters payed attention to the names on the ballots and maybe got informed once in a while we wouldn't have a screwed up government.

   I think that Roy Cooper's decision to fight back against a heavily orthodox and republican general assembly for his powers back is a smart idea. Even if there is a lacking of a liberal presence in our state government, Cooper should still be able to carry out his duties even if the opposite party wants to be childish and handicap him just because he's Democratic and they don't have the same values or visions for this states future. In my honest opinion the states should be a little more like the federal government so that problems like this wouldn't happen often or ever.