The Pros And Cons Of President Clinton

On the research I conducted many economist agree that the Clinton presidency deserves some credit for the economic rise of the mid 90’s. According to multiple opinions the fact that Clinton allowed the Federal Reserve to manage interest rates in the way they deemed necessary, perfectly timed the market and avoided inflation, thus maintaining and even increasing the value of the US dollar. Effective interest rate management proved to be the key to maintain a low inflation rate. Each rise in the inflation rate was met by an even larger rise in the nominal interest rate. This kept the inflation rate from being volatile, for the more the Federal Reserve (Fed) responds to inflationary pressures, the less problematic inflation becomes.

In her response lecture, Professor West identifies two very significant inconsistencies in Dr. Scott's lecture on the Judiciary. Professor West says, "You can tell a lot about a teacher by what they lecture. You can also tell a lot about a teacher by what they don't lecture or what they leave out"(West, 2:27). This idea is very apparent when it comes to Dr. Scott's lecture. Not only does Dr. Scott leave out some very vital information in his lectures, but he provides misinformation and makes contradictory points in his lecture.

There have been only two presidents throughout American History that have been impeached. These two presidents were William (Bill) Clinton and Andrew Johnson. Andrew Johnson was the vice president and shortly became the 17th president in 1865 after the assassination of Lincoln. Bill Clinton was elected the 42nd president in 1992, after being the governor of Arkansas. Both of these impeachments were different in several ways.

Throughout United States history there have been several influential Presidents. Many modern day Presidents such as Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagen and Barack Obama, have made remarkable impacts on society. They have worked and created programs to positively affect our nation. Some of these actions include the Family and Medical Leave Act, Violence Against Women Act, minimum wage increase, Tax Reform Act of 1986, Environmental Protection Agency, deregulation, SDI, Affordable Care Act, and the Dont Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010. These are just a few of numerous actions/programs these men enacted.

Concern over security issues prevented FDR and his administration from disclosing certain information to Congress. Nevertheless, Congress had the right to be informed on the progress of the programs established to increase the nation’s military might, FDR stated: “New circumstances are constantly be getting new needs for our safety. I shall ask this Congress for greatly increased new appropriations and authorizations to carry on what we have begun. I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient to manufacture additional munitions and war supplies of many kinds, to be turned over to those nations which are now an actual war with aggressor nations.”

A fair and unbiased court system is necessary for the legal system. The role of the court is to correct any injustice, not to compound it. When prejudice and corruption leak into the courts, what recourse do we have for eradicating them from society? Our judges must be stalwarts of integrity because the power to move our country forward or hold our country back often lies in their hands. Judge Persky had the power to bring justice to a victim, to help her and her family move forward.

Judges must possess these characteristics to be effective because they need to have the to make sure every person has a fair trial in the eyes of the law. Danforth was biased and all through Act 3 we can see that he is ineffective by not be law-abiding, far, or willing to listen to the

Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.

As the president of United States of America it can be a little hard to make certain decisions. What the people want and what is for the best for them is very different. Yet this President is for. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were presidents of the United States, who may have done good or bad throughout their time serving in office. Both presidents will be compared to determine who brought the best for United States.

The article Broken Bench explains the controversy over having “tiny courts” in New York State. The author, William Glaberson argues that the idea of justice within the jurisdiction of these tiny courts is unfairly decided among the justices in charge. Due to the lack of experience of these justices, it is difficult for fair justice to be dealt out. One of the major causes explained by the author for unfair justice is that the justices of the court are very inexperienced. For example, William Glaberson states, “Nearly three-quarters of the judges are not lawyers, and many — truck drivers, sewer workers or laborers — have scant grasp of the most basic legal principles.

I assume that the polls showed Hillary Clinton winning because they would think she 's a better candidate. Most of the media were hoping that Hillary would win. In my opinion, Hillary Clinton would not have been a suitable president. A majority of Hillary 's supporters were women. Apparently, Hillary said she would 've done many things for women.

Under President Thomas Jefferson, the politics and direction of the Nation began to change in a huge way. The Jefferson Presidency was a very dynamic one, as President Adams (a Federalist) had stacked the cards against Jefferson in the presidential election of 1800 (Shultz, 2013). President Adams appointed several U.S. Supreme Court judges that held onto Federalist ideas. Thomas Jefferson, however, was considered a Democratic-Republican. Democratic-Republicans, in general, sought to limit the power of the national government and military (Feldmeth, n.d.).

I deem it is interesting that in the wake of this election, Hillary Clinton is going to be let off scot-free for her email scandals. Hillary should be indicted with perjury for her testimony of the emails. As an American citizen I can not fathom how anyone would vote for Hillary after she has been exposed. I realize all government officials have secrets and play games behind the heads of all Americans, but like the saying goes out of sight out of mind. Americans should feel betrayed and have zero sympathy for her.

Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

A judiciary should represent the diversity of society as well as the diversity of the legal