Module #7

Find and summarize an example of an effort to update or challenge a state constitution… it can be any state in the US and any time, recent or not.

I wanted to focus on California Proposition 16, which would have repealed Proposition 209, which banned the use of affirmative action in the public sector. California rejected the proposition in November 2020, with 57% of voters voting against it. While race-neutral stances appear to be an equalizer in some cases (apparently college admissions), many proponents of Proposition 16 argue that Proposition 209 simply perpetuates the harmful, apathetic belief that race is not a factor in people's lived experiences. As the supporters of Prop 16 propose, race is really at the core of American identity, and it makes no sense to be barred from considering it in the public sector, especially in education and employment. They argue that race-neutral attitudes are not remedying the rampant amount of discrimination and hate within the state itself. They argue that the recent surges in violence against minorities, especially violence against the Black and Asian communities, have made people reflect on the deep-seated disparities within the state where they were previously more oblivious due to California's race-neutral stance. I am curious to see if this proposition will be brought up again in future ballots, and whether or not it will be approved. 

Module #6

Blog Entry #9:

What was the Tea Party, and what has it become? 

The Tea Party was the incarnation of right-aligned American conservatism that arose in the wake of the November 2008 elections. Due to Obama's candidacy, as well as Democratic majorities in both the Senate and House of Representatives, The Tea Party rose to prominence in 2010, known for its vocally combative stance on the Affordable Care Act, which the party deemed a "handout" for often marginalized groups that "didn't deserve it" (opposition fueled by racial stereotyping and prejudice) while simultaneously feeling entitled to programs like Medicare. While they initially had little success outside of their incendiary proclamations, they organized to strengthen themselves and expand their influence, most notably through Republican elites and right-aligned news/media outlets. While the Party itself seems to have stemmed from a grassroots-based group (with a particularly disproportionate older, white male majority and no real sense of belonging/identity), it garnered strength through conservative media outlets which created a collective identity through shared beliefs. 

Having just learned the differences between political parties and interest groups, please reflect on how you would categorize the Tea Party both at its origin, as described in the article, and as it has evolved until today.

I suppose I would label the Tea Party as a marker of grassroots conservatism as opposed to a movement with serious political prowess. However, the Tea Party did serve as a vehicle for the rebranding of conservative Republicanism, and so they are unique in the sense that, as an initially grassroots movement, they had enough influence to become this rather enigmatic entity that took on Republican candidates during the 2010 primaries. I suppose I would also label the Tea Party as an interest group that evolved into more of a political entity, as they did attempt to influence the government and were united by the like-minded individuals who were a part of the movement. While the party as a movement may not have much traction as an entity, it certainly ignited a sense of mistrust not only in the government but also in political/social leadership. Its attitudes of anger and unrest still resound today in our current political climate (especially during the Trump administration).

Module #5

Blog Entry #8:

Part #1: Re-Read the section on subsidiarity from last week’s PowerPoint slide handout. Also do some research online to learn more about this concept. Define “subsidiarity” in your own words. How is the concept of subsidiarity as discussed in this passage related to “devolution” as described in your textbook?

"Subsidiarity" asserts that political and social issues should be handled at the most local level, as opposed to by an overarching central authority. A central, or in this case, federal/state authority should only become involved in local matters when the local entities themselves cannot handle it/do it themselves. Subsidiarity, in a way, promotes a more intimate relationship between the public and the localities they reside under, as they have, theoretically, more freedom of input. While subsidiarity can seem rather farfetched in today's times, it actually became a reality during the Clinton administration in the form of devolution, where power was delegated from the federal government to state governments and localities (fueled by citizens' beliefs that state/local governments provided more efficient delivery of service and did a better job spending money). Both subsidiarity and devolution appear to be terms that describe something very similar: both terms discuss the delegation of power from a central authority to more local entities and stress the idea that a central authority should involve itself with lower/local institutions only when the local entities cannot perform their duties themselves. 

Part #2: Google “devolution in Kenya” for an ambitious example of how governments might use devolution to achieve desirable level of subsidiarity. Can you think of some examples of devolution from the US? Any time you hear the Federal government say (paraphrasing) “leave it up to the states,” that might be an example of devolution. Similarly, a state government saying “leave it up to the counties,” or a county government saying “leave it up to the individual cities.”

While initially reading about the devolution in Kenya, a turning point within the country that essentially recalibrated the three branches of government, allocating power from the national government to more local county governments, devolution can almost appear as a concept detached from our current notion of government. However, one example that comes to mind is the legalization of same-sex marriage in California. California allowed for same-sex marriage to be legalized, and yet the federal government allowed other states to mark these marriages as invalid/void if they wanted to.

The issue surrounding immigration heavily contrasts the devolution that took place when same-sex marriage was legalized. For example, San Francisco passed the Sanctuary Ordinance in 1989, adding to it the "Due Process for All Ordinance" in 2013 (last amended in 2016) that stressed that city employees could not use city resources to assist ICE in the enforcement of immigration law unless absolutely required by the state/federal government. While this only means that the city declines to take part in active immigration enforcement as opposed to shielding immigrants from said immigration enforcement, it's at least something. With the Trump administration's insistent immigration policy, it targeted sanctuary cities in an attempt to superimpose their jurisdiction on localities despite the city's ordinance. 

Module #4

Blog Entry #6: 

What problem(s) is your CP trying to address? How can members of the community in which it operates help through their participation? In what ways does this serve an end of a local government entity?

Currently, my CP trying to address the inaccessibility to free/affordable early education and child care in San Mateo County. From personal experience, San Mateo County can be quite negligible to its education system, not investing enough in its schools. As such, my CP is attempting to provide early education and childcare to families from diverse, usually low-income communities, in order to invest in the academic and social lives of students early on. My CP receives a significant amount of funding from the federal government (79%) and private donors, however, only receives about 21% of their funding from the state. A majority of my CP's revenue goes towards personnel costs (which includes teachers and general staff), and yet so much more can be done if state funding would increase. The potentiality of additional state funding is just astounding. Not only would the teachers and staff have increased salaries, but the organization itself could reach even more people, perhaps even expanding outside of San Mateo County. A challenge they are facing is trying to carry on with their programs while trying to navigate through online learning because of the pandemic. Being that their work is reliant on in-person facilities and care, the pandemic has been an increasingly challenging obstacle to work around for both the children and their families. With this being the case, my CP is currently in the process of rebranding, and while I am not privy to any concrete details, I can only assume that this rebrand is being brought on by their need to adapt to online instruction and learning. Members of the community can volunteer by working live events (though due to the pandemic these have been halted and volunteer work is to be done remotely) or donating. Being that my CP specifically serves San Mateo County, it (at least through federal grants) allows for more revenue to reach the locality. 

Blog Entry #7:

My first time reading this, I highlighted in yellow. The next day I reread, I highlighted in blue, then the third day in green. 

You don’t need to be Catholic to appreciate its nuanced discussion – do you agree with the author? Do you disagree? Why? How is the discussion of participation in this passage different from the one in your textbook? 

While I have read some Catholic and Catholic-oriented readings in the past when studying literature, I generally did not find myself putting much thought into them outside of the academic side of it. When reading this, I actually recalled some readings I had done in the past on social contract theory, specifically the difference between the ideas of the social contract philosophers (Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau). A common motif I found between them was that (at least Hobbes and Locke) thought humans are social creatures who form societies/communities because of an innate need for security and logical reason. Despite not being Catholic or really very religious, I could not help but agree with the reading that humans are innately social beings that rely on interdependence and communal actions in order to thrive. While I disagree with the discussion's point that only "responsible people" search for ways in which to improve society, I agree that if we were all to seek out ways to promote the common good within our lives (self-interest aside), the society would surely flourish. Trying to live in a way that promotes the common good would certainly "transcend the expected benefits to any given individual". I found its discussion on the natural environment and climate change especially poignant, as not only is this an issue that is crucially important in our current times, but is an issue that will have lasting effects for future generations if we do not come together to do something about it. I also found its points on participation and justice quite good as well, as it asserts that anything that stifles political/economic participation (restrictions for minorities in politics, education or employment) is a serious injustice, as they do not allow for people to have a significant role in society nor does it allow for people to reach their full potential if those obstacles were not in place. Whereas the textbook discusses participation on a larger scale (specifically representative entities and their relation to the public), this passage discusses participation on a much more personal scale, starting with the individual and their relation to the surrounding society.

Module #3

 Blog Entry #4a:

* Write a brief description of the agreement you have made with your Community Partner.

Our goal with this project is to determine how The Institute of Human and Social Development can receive more state funding, as a majority of its funding comes from the federal government (as of their 2018-2019 annual report, 69% of their revenue came from federal funding while only 21% came from the state). 

* Describe the Project or Activity – what will you be doing?

My role in the project is to understand the stark contrast between the amount of federal and state funding the organization receives in order to receive more from the state budget. I will also observe how IHSD fills in the gaps of where the general education system of San Mateo County may falter. 

* Describe your Schedule at the Partner Organization – when will you do the work?

We have agreed that I will be working at least an hour a week on this project.

* Describe your Method of Communication – will you do the work by phone? Zoom? Do you have the technology tools you will need to do the work? If not, how will you acquire them? Do you need support from NDNU in acquiring the tools you’ll need to get your work done?

Most of the work will be done via email, but they have also given the option for Zoom meetings if I need them. I have all the necessary tools at home needed to communicate.

Blog Entry #4b:

In what ways are your CP's mission and/or activities consistent with, or in conflict with the concepts outlined in the Catholic Social Teaching presentation, and/or with the Hallmarks of the SND de Namur?

IHSD is an organization that works to secure and improve the education and care of young children, and thus their values highly align with the concepts outlined in the Catholic Social Teaching presentation, as well as the NDNU Hallmarks. For example, the "Call to Family, Community, and Participation" very much encompasses what IHSD stands for, as its goal is to enrich the lives of young students via personal care and education. The organization very much follows through with these ideas through the collaborative relationship it forms between the staff, parents, and administration that is tight-knit, yet inviting. It strives for the common good, to provide care and learning to children, as well as the communities that surround them. Similarly, IHSD's values deeply reflect the NDNU Hallmarks as well, especially Hallmarks 5, 6, and 7 (We embrace the gift of diversity. We create community among those with whom we work and with those we serve. We develop holistic learning communities which educate for life) as its goal is to provide the children of San Mateo County with care no matter their race or socioeconomic background. Their influence on these children reaches far beyond academics.  

Blog Entry #5:

Due to Dillon's rule, states have a significant amount of authority over local governments. While local governments want to exert their governance and show their efficiency, they still are heavily reliant on their states supplying funding and general support. Local governments want to be more autonomous, and yet states impose their own mandates instead of letting the localities function on their own. While this is technically needed in order to achieve goals more efficiently, it is often costly, and unjustified, so much so that the mandates can be seen as an intrusion for localities. Local governments can generate their own revenue, however, they highly depend on the states as a means of income. Even as grants are given to localities, they have many strings attached, and even then, they do not really have an option as to how the grants are spent, even when there is a portion of grants distributed based on local fiscal need (intended to equalize economic disparity). 

It can be disheartening to see local governments struggle against mandates for a sense of autonomy much more of the revenue they could receive could greatly benefit localities. However, it is important to note that this tension is necessary for the regulation and stability of the system. Neither entity gets too much power (although it could be argued that states have more control), and both are obligated to collaborate with one another, sometimes even allowing for progress to be made where states increase their assistance for the benefit of localities. 

Module #2

While the U.S. federal system certainly has its flaws (especially when it comes to organizing plans of action across state and government boundaries and being adaptive and preventing delays/stagnancies in particular programs and policies), state governments are more at liberty to experiment with policies, allowing for more innovations, as they have a more direct relationship with the public via local governments. State governments also have many powers that have not been delegated to the national government, a move that would seemingly give the states more power. However, this only cemented nation-centered nationalism into the consciousness of the nation, granting the national government an almost limitless amount of control over the delegated powers it possesses and exercises. We currently have cooperative federalism in place, which technically is meant to facilitate links and arrangements between the three levels of government, however, the national government, even now, still has somewhat of a hold over state governments via federal preemption. While the federal government has many enumerated and implied powers, including regulating interstate and foreign commerce, as well as the ability to declare war (among many others), it does not have the power to change state boundaries, pass laws that contradict the Bill of Rights, nor impose religious tests or taxes on state exports. In contrast, state governments are able to conduct elections, protect public health, safety, and morals, and have all powers not given to the federal government. 

While historically the states were given power only because of the (rightful) fear of a too-powerful federal government, the federal government still has extensive control over many of the things that occur within and outside of the nation itself. With this being the case, the national government often faces the problem of regulating and coordinating actions across boundaries which often leads to political gridlock. The state governments can more easily coordinate actions within their boundaries and are more easily able to collaborate with one another both on formal and informal grounds. However, state governments struggle with managing a multitude of varied interests. State governments are creating many innovations via programs and policymaking, however, they seem to falter in distributing funding to areas where monies are most needed like health and education (although this can also be a fault of the federal government for making it especially difficult for states to follow through with these innovations because of federal mandates). 

Blog Entry #2

My CP, the Institute for Human and Social Development, (IHSD) came into being through the need for affordable early education and child care, especially in low-income communities in San Mateo County. Childcare and early education are extremely expensive and are often inaccessible. For example, when I was a child, my parents enrolled me in a preschool and childcare center that cost them $500 a month, and this was back in the early 2000s. I feel like the local government in general, but especially in San Mateo County, often neglects the school system and the needs of students. While there are waivers and applications available statewide to lessen the financial burden of early education, the task is daunting, and often the acceptance of applications is solely based on financial needs, which, while important, fails to acknowledge that families may overshoot the minimum amount of income to be eligible and still need childcare and early education. Oftentimes these families may be discouraged from applying because of language barriers as well. While the local government does partially fund programs like IHSD, they mainly rely on federal funding and private donations to function. 

I feel as though the state government, while seemingly more organized compared to the federal government (at least in the case of California), neglects these deeply important organizations. The state has the ability to locate at least a fraction of its funds to organizations like IHSD, organizations that fuel the futures of the next generation. From my experience as a student attending public school in San Mateo County, I could tell that the schools I attended, along with many others, were not getting the sufficient funding they needed (to the point where some classes were canceled or unavailable because there was not enough money there for them to keep going). Perhaps to the state legislature, education (especially early education) is something on the back burner, something that does not necessarily need the support of the state government in order to function smoothly. 

The young children (and the parents of the children) of San Mateo County are whom my CP is accountable for. Considering that the state rarely seems to invest in education in San Mateo County in general (and even less for early education), the IHSD makes finding early education and childcare much more inviting and streamlined. Children are more easily able to receive an early education that can mold the rest of their lives. Both they and their parents can get the support they need through the IHSD.