Political Science

The  election of Barrack Obama as the 44th President ff the United States, The first African-American to occupy the highest political office in the country, has profound implications for people of US, various groups in the American polity and the international system.

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones weve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek 
(barrack obama httpwwwbrainy quote.com)                                                                                                                     
With the arrival of the first truly technologically savvy President in Washington DC many people have high expectations of both the President and Congress.

Before and after being elected Obama made many promises to change USA to make what he said he see as improvements. This has led to people being impatient to see that the promises that effect and improve their lives in the way they want is not at the top of the list of priorities. Obama had actually placed him self into a position of too much responsibility on each  promise made and thats because citizens expect too much change in a very short space of time.

The Senate voted Tuesday March 2, 2010 1025 p.m. EST to pass a 10 billion measure to extend benefits for unemployed workers and fund road projects after Sen. Jim Bunning agreed to end his filibuster. We cant do everything wed like to do, Bunning said. We dont have the money.( washington (CNN) --)

Moderating job loss is a step,but the crucial thing, the happy days gonna be when theyre not negative, when theyre finally positive again, and that is absolutely what were gonna have our eye on.the White House is watching the economy like a hawk and would not rest until the country is on its way back to full employment.(Christina Romer, chairwoman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers),   (msnbc)

Obama administration economists reckon the jobless rate will hover around 10 percent this year, and now say the U.S. economy will generate an average of just 95,000 jobs a month. That tally with Team Obamas forecast of anemic 3.0 percent GDP growth. Monthly job growth of 125,000 to 150,000 is needed to start bringing the unemployment rate down from its current 9.7 percent. Thats what would normally be expected more than two years after the onset of a recession. Its not happening  at least not yet.

Enter the U.S. Senate. The centerpiece jobs proposal would spare businesses from paying payroll taxes on some new hires for the rest of 2010. Based on a Congressional Budget Office analysis, this measure might create a feeble 50,000 to 90,000 jobs.

3) Aside from the bills limited potential effects, short-term fixes are not whats needed. Americas job machine didnt suddenly break down in 2008. It has been sputtering since the Internet bubble burst. Some economists now think a decline in education, innovation and other former U.S. advantages means the realistic minimum unemployment rate has gone up from 4-5 percent to as much as 7 percent.
 That suggests legislative efforts at improving the employment picture should focus on long-term measures to improve education and help innovative businesses. Options in the latter category include a reduction in the U.S. corporate tax rate, targeted infrastructure spending and long-term tax credits for research and development. Its a shame Washington seems able to set politics aside to accommodate special interests, but not for whats really needed.
                                               
2. National Security
Barack Obama and Joe Biden will take swift action to strengthen security for all Americans... Their strategy will draw on the insights and experience of state, local and private sector leaders to better protect American families and communities.

Obama and Biden will responsibly end the war in Iraq and focus on Afghanistan, the refuge for the terrorists who attacked us on September 11. He will send at least two additional combat brigades, more special operations forces, and 1 billion in additional non-military aid to Afghanistan.
 
Barack Obama will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America. Obama and Biden will ensure that our military becomes more stealthy, agile, and lethal in its ability to capture or kill terrorists. Secure Nuclear Weapons Materials in Four Years Barack Obama and Joe Biden will lead a global effort

To work with other countries to secure all nuclear weapons materials at vulnerable sites within four years adding 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines to the active duty military. They will bolster our militarys ability to speak different languages, navigate different cultures and coordinate complex missions with our civilian agencies.

Overseas, they will establish a Shared Security Partnership Program to invest 5 billion over three years to help foreign intelligence and law enforcement agencies to target and disrupt al Qaeda and its affiliates. (httpwww.barackobama.com)

A CNN poll released on Jan. 11 2010 shows that 65 percent of the 1,025 respondents said they had either a great deal of or moderate confidence in Obama administration to keep them safe from future attacks. The number is six points higher than a similar CNN poll in August 2006 when President George W. Bush was in the White House. The margin of error in CNNs poll was three points. In a statement by Keep America Safes board of directors criticise the president Obamas administration, President Obama has weakened American security by treating terror as a law enforcement matter and has taken his eyes off the ball, said the statement released on Jan. 11. Americas homeland security and counterterrorism systems will continue to erode in the absence of strong, consistent, unwavering presidential stewardship. Its time for the President to make defending this nation his top priority.
Keep America Safe describes its mission as working to enhance the national security of the U.S. More than half of the CBS News poll respondents said that the administration should keep open the Guantanamo Bay prison, where alleged terror suspects are held.

Shortly after his inauguration, President Obama had signed an executive order to close the prison within a year. (httpwww.globalissues.orgnews)
 
Brzezinski , former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski said Friday,  the only way to break the stalemate is for Obama to take the lead.

The president can show leadership, he said, by persuasively going to the country directly, mobilizing the support, taking on some difficult foreign challenge, and prevailing.Brzezinski cited Iran as an example of key challenges Obama ought to tackle.

Obama should not abandon it prematurely, he said, noting the complexities of the internal Iranian situation could give the United States room for maneuver, and perhaps some basis for expecting an eventual partial accommodation.

Brzezinski also cited the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a key challenge because it revolutionizes, radicalizes the Middle East, and maximizes the number of enemies the United States has.Asked how he would grade the Obama administrations performance on Iran and the Middle East, he said, Well, rhetorically, A in terms of performance, B, B-minus.Despite the United States  HYPERLINK httptopics.cnn.comtopicsForeign_Policy foreign policy problems, Brzezinski said, the nation has the resources to deal with new global security threats in cyberspace, outer space and on the high seas.(Obamas foreign policy in gridlock former national security adviser
By Meghan Rafferty, CNN) February 5, 2010 1015 p.m. EST

3. Bailouts
President Obamas mortgage bailout announcement directs 75 billion in government funds to bail out certain borrowers who are behind on mortgage payments or at risk of falling behind (httpwww.cbsnews.com) Although the president said that it will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible, theres no requirement that that U.S. Treasury deny bailouts to Americans who took outsize risks in hopes that their homes would continue to appreciate. Which is why Obamas announcement has drawn a howl of protest from renters and those people -- yes, they exist -- who bought cheaper, modest homes they could comfortably afford.

BuckNakedPolitics writes I have little sympathy in one sense with the moans of homeowners stuck with negative equity as a result of a gamble that the value of homes would always go up, up, up. One reason Im living in an apartment is that I recognized that this myth was a myth. Conservative blogger Michelle Malkin describes it as a new massive mortgage entitlement campaign. Housing bubble blog Patrick.net dubbed it a plan to reward debtors at the expense of savers. NewsRantsAndReviews saysObama has one word for those who didnt get in over their heads during the recent housing boom and have paid their mortgages on time Suckers

The administration says that using government funds to lower the mortgage payments for some homeowners is necessary to curb foreclosures foreclosures tend to depress nearby property prices, and banks generally lose significant sums when forced to repossess a property through foreclosure.

The American Bankers Association praised Obamas plan as a constructive, flexible and multifaceted initiative likely to have a positive effect. On the other hand, critics have said the Obama housing plan means that those who were prudent, saved their pennies, and chose not to take excessive risks will be taxed to bail out borrowers who were not as frugal.

Homeowners who wrote checks for a significant down payment wont benefit as much as those who took 100 percent financing. Homeowners in states without significant foreclosures will subsidize those in states like California, Arizona, and Florida. And borrowers who initially had affordable mortgages -- but then refinanced during the housing bubble and used their homes as ATMs -- stand to benefit.A reader post at the New York Times says I should have lied about my income and
refinanced in 2005 for the full value of the loan with a low, low teaser rate. Than I should have used the cash for new appliances, vacations, flat screen TVs. Oh and I could have financed all of my sons college instead of taking out all those loans. httpwww.cbsnews.com

Now that 2010 is officially here, its interesting to look back at the year of hope and change Barrack Obamas presidency was supposed to usher in.Call 2009 the year of the bailout. All the corporate giants seemed to have gotten one. AIGs bailout was so generous it provided multi-million dollar retention bonuses to the same group of employees that caused the companys collapse. The loophole allowing the bonuses to be paid was written into the bill courtesy of Sen. Chris Dodd.General Motors received a bailout only to wind up in bankruptcy court months later. Miraculously, the Unions wound up owning nearly half the company. Campaign promise   fulfilled.Then there were an endless succession of bailouts for the financial sector - and they havent stopped yet. Wasnt this guy supposed to clean up Wall Street The President seems hell bent on bailing out big business ever chance he gets. Creating and saving jobs seems to be a distant priority. As if people arent suffering enough right now.        httpwww.redcountry.com (Analyzing Obamas First Year By  HYPERLINK httpwww.redcounty.comuser1410 Nadia Naffe )

4. Taxes Cuts or lack of
Obama repeatedly vowed during the 2008 presidential election campaign that he would not raise taxes on individuals making less than 200,000 and households earning less than 250,000 a year. When senior White House economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner suggested in August that the administration might be open to going back on that pledge, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs quickly reiterated the presidents promise. In an interview, Obama said that putting preconditions on the agenda of a bipartisan advisory commission, which he said he would soon establish, would just undermine its purpose. What I cant do is to set the thing up where a whole bunch of things are off the table, Obama said. Some would say we cant look at entitlements. There are going to be some that say we cant look at taxes, and pretty soon, you just cant solve the problem.

The Obama administrations budget already takes that route with its proposed 970 billion tax increase over the next decade on Americans earning more than 200,000 a year, largely by not extending former President George W. Bushs tax cuts for the wealthy beyond 2010. Even with those revenues -- and a proposed three-year freeze on some discretionary spending by the government -- the administration still projects a deficit of 752 billion in 2015, equivalent to 3.9 percent of gross domestic product. Thats above the 3 percent mark that White House budget director Peter Orszag has said is necessary to stop the rise in government debt as a proportion of the economy. Analysts say that middle-class taxes will need to be increased because the government cant raise enough money from the wealthy alone to close the budget gap. Its just not possible to get the revenue you need only from this group, said Joel Slemrod, director of the Office of Tax Policy Research at the University of Michigan. Going back on his campaign pledge would be fraught with risks for Obama.

Former President George H.W. Bush paid a steep political price when he abandoned his 1988 campaign promise not to raise taxes, losing out in his bid for a second term to Bill Clinton. (rmiller28bloomberg.net)It would be politically risky for Obama to abandon his promise not to increase taxes on the middle class. Only 26 percent of Americans surveyed in a December poll by Bloomberg News said they favored such a step as a way to reduce the budget shortfall. Many economists, including conservatives such as former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, argue that tax increases will be necessary as part of a broad package to control the deficit, which the White House projects will hit a record 1.6 trillion in the fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. Obama said the U.S. was faced with a structural deficit that was in place before the recession began and that was only made worse by the deepest drop in the economy since the 1930s.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer warned that America faces a Greek-style economic implosion if the U.S. doesnt get its debt under control soon.

It is enough to look across the Atlantic at Greeces extreme economic crisis and understand It can happen here, unthinkable as that may have been, Hoyer said, in an afternoon speech at the Brookings Institution. If we dont change our course, it will happen here. Hoyer said tax increases should be part of a balanced approach, arguing that relying on spending cuts alone could hurt seniors who depend on Medicare.

No one likes raising revenue, and understandably so, he said. But if youre going to buy, you need to pay.

Hoyer insisted, though, that Obama and Congress already take the deficit seriously. He said Obamas proposed budget would cut the deficit by more than half by 2013 and that health reform will eventually reduce the deficit. He said the recently enacted statutory pay-as-you-go prevents Congress from making the problem worse. Hoyer hopes the bipartisan fiscal commission, which is now forming, will come up with recommendations that force tough choices. Obama announced his picks last week, but congressional Democrats havent nominated anyone for the panel yet.

5. Health Care Reform
President Obama recently put health care reform back into the spotlight by putting forth his own plan, loosely based on the legislation drafted by the House and Senate over the past year. In order to pay for the high price of reform, Obamas proposal includes a number of tax increases.
                                                                   
Basics of the Legislation
Obamas plan would cost an estimated 950 billion over the next ten years, and according to WhiteHouse.gov it would extend coverage to 31 million Americans. It would end discrimination against Americans with pre-existing conditions, and bring greater accountability to the health care industry. The President even claims the plan would reduce the deficit by 100 billion in the next decade and 1 trillion during the second decade New Obama health plan moves hard in wrong direction.

 It costs 75 billion more than the Senate plan. It delays the one sure-fire cost-control measure, the tax on high-end plans. And it gives the federal government new authority to block insurers from increasing premiums. That last one is particularly wrong-headed.

The policy thrust of Obama Care was supposed to be to reduce costs by changing how healthcare was delivered, not through rationing. But price caps are nothing more than rationing. As Mike Cannon puts it artificially limiting premium growth allows the government to curtail spending while leaving the dirty work of withholding medical care to private insurers Premium caps, which Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick is currently threatening to impose, force private insurers to manage care more tightly  i.e., to deny coverage for more services. No doubt the Obama administration would lay the blame for coverage denials on private insurers and claim that such denials demonstrate the need for a so-called public option.

Who knows if this thing can actually pass, but using reconciliation to do it will only amp up the partisan and polarized nature of Congress. (httpblogs.reuters.com healthcare reformobamacare)
                                                             
Some progressive groups and Democratic congressmen are applauding President Obamas appeal for an up-or-down vote on his health care reform proposal, even though it falls far short of the goals they once had for reform. The president today said he has asked Congress to vote on his proposal within a matter of weeks because Congress owes that to the American people. The plan is for the House
 to pass the Senate bill and then for both chambers to take an up-or-down vote on a separate fix it reconciliation bill.

Some Democratic senators, including Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), have criticized the consideration of reconciliation. Landrieu today, however, signaled shes on board with the presidents plan. From the start, I have been clear that passing the entire bill using reconciliation was not something I could support, and it is not what President Obama is asking us to do, Landrieu said in a statement. With only a few tweaks to the Senate bill remaining to be approved, the American people deserve an up or down vote on health care legislation. Referring to reconciliation, Landrieu notes, This is a process that has been used 22 times before, 16 of which were led by Republicans. Along with the process of passing the bill, certain provisions are less than ideal for reform advocates. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, released a statement decrying the provisions in the health care bills that restrict abortion coverage but praising the bills overall.  March 3, 2010 608 PM (httpwww.cbsnews.com)
 
Conclusion
We heed to rethink about our opinion on Mr. Obamas tax proposals, bail out measures for banks and to other financial institution for further falling or ending their business career and so on.For any troubled economical scenes and low cash flow to government funds, jobless situations in organized sectors, health reform, for day today expenditure to government servants, and lastly running the government, they need finance and by constant manner by some taxations to high income and high wealth groups, collecting some big amounts by taxes to rich, some concessions to workers, army personnel and to get things in order of the day of any government.

We can question and criticize governments policies by now and then we have to provide new solid proof system for new measures to tackle sudden, unexpected huge deficit in planning and its execution stages.