The Pros And Cons Of Government Intervention

Executive order is a rule or order issued by the president to an executive branch of the government and having the force of law. Executive Order (EOs) were used since President George Washington but were not mandated to be publicly released until 1900. To date, there have been thirteen thousand eight hundred and seven executive orders. Many argue that these orders are unconstitutional as it gives one-person authority to make changes without consequences and without the consent of Congress. The term executive order is not a principle found within the Constitution. EO is derived from Article II, Section I of the Constitution in which it states, “the executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America”. The term executive power was never defined, leaving it open to the interpretation of each president. That statement coupled with Article II, Section III “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” has been the backbone of how presidents have been able to create these orders.

Under the NPM umbrella, public sector has also been experiencing a shift to greater competition. The need to remove monopoly of service delivery and create contestability, through privatization, public tendering, and term contracts, justifies the adoption of competition principle (Dunleavy 1994; Hood 1991). Insisting to do bureaucratic provision on public services instead of contracting them out, knowing that private sector can deliver them better, it is believed would only force governments to lose comparative advantages on price, efficiency, and effectiveness (Dunleavy 1994. p.49). This way, governments are able to fulfil their responsibility in providing services and the financing, while simultaneously stimulate greater competition among providers under market dynamics. However, it is hard to instigate public service ethos in private parties. Therefore, the capacity of private entities to act consistently with the public interest is greatly questioned in this scenario. Are concerns such as public health and safety, environment sustainability, and social equity likely to be sacrificed underneath market mechanisms? When power is shared with organizations which have business objectives apart from government’s goals, the fundamental issue is how to detect which missions they are carrying out. Many public services being delivered by third parties are targeted for vulnerable sections of the community which can pose a higher risk of potential abuse, neglect, exploitation, and

Two years ago, in 2013, the government was shut down due to disagreement between the two parties in Congress. There may be another closure. On September 9 at 7 A.M., The Washington Post published an article stating the possibility of government shutdown on October 1, 2015. Congress is way behind on passing spending bills that would allow funding for the government; the problem lies within the disagreement about spending and where cuts should be made: it also stems from both parties trying to push their ideology into the agenda. All the disagreement prolongs the process for these bills to be passed. The deadline for the bills to be passed is September 30. If the government doesn’t receive the funding, then the government will be shutdown.When

President Obama came into office in the aftermath of the disastrous foreign policy record of the Bush administration. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 had served as a “switchman,” leading to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Bush administration exercised unilateral use of force and reluctance to engage the international community. As a result global elites and publics viewed the US unfavorably. The US economy was negatively affected by the costs of the wars coupled with the financial crisis of 2007. It was this environment that defined the contours of the election campaign of 2008. Obama campaigned on the idea of change, which represented a regeneration of America through domestic public policy reform and a return to multilateralism in foreign policy. Both domestic and international publics and elites were galvanized by Obama’s message.

The federal budget is an annual plan created by the president of the United States that sets a certain amount of money to fund different federal expenses such as national defense, transportation, and income security, in fact; the federal expenses are divided into two categories, mandatory and discretionary spending. Mandatory spending is any expenditure that is required by legislation in which Medicare and Social Security are the main funded programs. In addition, discretionary spending is spending not mandatory but decided by congress based on appropriations in which it funds education, agriculture,and administration of justice, just to name a few. The federal budget is created using the constitution’s preamble as a guideline in order for

The outcomes of this legislation had many pros and cons many of which more serious than others for their own reasons. Some of the cons of this legislation are for one the immigrants had no right to a hearing in the court and had no right of evidence. Also, it was considered as unconstitutional according to the Republicans. Finally, another big part of this legislation is that it hindered freedom of speech and freedom of the press because some people were arrested when they spoke out against these acts or made journal articles bashing the Federalists. Some of the pros of this legislation passing somewhat came from the cons, for example, all the people who were arrested under this act were pardoned by the new president which was Thomas Jefferson.

Our country is continuously wrought with terrorist attacks by foreign-born migrants and radicalized U.S. born citizens. This causes national security issues to remain at the forefront of the news and political debates. The federal government holds the responsibility to protect our nation from those who seek to harm us. As a result, the Trump administration enacted a travel ban to counteract the issue of foreign-born migrants; who are potentially not screened properly by foreign governments. The travel ban is a controversial national security policy which began with Executive Order 13769, resulting in multiple legal battles, and legislative action should be taken.

Some say you have to spend a dollar to make a dollar, when it’s our government its called deficit spending. Deficit spending is the result in the government spending more during a period of time then they make back in revenue causing a debt. This type of spending is normally during an economic recession and is justified in order to give the economy a jump-start in reviving. The validation of this is to stop the economy from losing more money as individuals become unemployed resulting in lose of taxable revenue. This drastic strategy has its advantages and disadvantages for both long term and short-term economic effects. “There are those that argue that government borrowing and spending would create jobs and induce economic growth which would lead us out of the recession. Conservative economists on the other hand argue that government spending causes high interest rates which in turn curbs investment and economic growth.” (Hassan and Nassar, 2015) While it may help create more jobs, wages and programs it can also cause taxes and interest rates to rise. If a consumer cant afford the inflated economy then the new job starts to seem obsolete.

According to the article, The Bush Tax Cuts Have Had a Disastrous Fiscal Impact, “In the "no Bush tax cuts" alternate universe, our debt-to-GDP ratio would be less than 50 percent this year even after all the other fiscal shocks of the past 10 years.” To me this is an astonishing thing that the US economy could be in much better shape if the Bush Tax Cuts were not created. The tax cut will primarily only benefit the rich because they are paying the majority of the taxes, so if you think that imposing more tax cuts will benefit the economy as a whole then I think you need to listen up and figure out why in fact it does not benefit everybody. I definitely think there are more cons to a tax cut then a tax rise, so let me explain to you all of

For producers, price ceilings don’t have as good an impact as it does on consumers. Since the consumers are paying much less money for goods and services, they simply cannot afford to make any products. It will have a harmful effect on producers, as their surplus will decrease, resulting in them not making as much product. For example, if the price of lettuce decreases from $7 to $5, then that means a decrease in the amount of money producers are getting. They will not have enough money to grow lettuce, so there will be none or little lettuce harvested to be sold. This means that price ceilings have a large impact on producers, and not in a good way.

When a government’s spending exceeds its revenues causing or deepening a deficit it is called deficit spending. Deficit spending is only one of numerous tools used to help manage the economy. Deficit spending is presumed to stimulate consumer demand by helping the consumer to obtain more money to spend, in turn, the demand of product will rise. There are advantages and disadvantages to deficit spending that we will discuss further below.

I had never heard about executive orders before until this assignment so based on what I saw, my opinion of executive orders is dependent on the president and the specific order. Generally speaking, the whole point of checks and balances is to limit power within the branches of government. However, with the executive order, we are basically giving the executive branch a loophole to all of that. Hopefully we don't ever have a president who would abuse this power in a way that would negatively affect our country, nevertheless should that happen, I think the executive order would become a problem for future presidents. It also depends on the views, as they stated in the MSNBC video, of the person and whether or not their views line up with those

capital institutions will be revoked or compromised which will supposedly lead to great economic growth that will

One of the most influential topics, to me, that was discussed within Chapter 23 of the textbook was the topic about whether or not the government should balance its budget. This is always a very heated topic that is discussed throughout any congressional debate/session… whether it is a Monday, or if it is the Presidential campaign. This section declares the pros and cons behind the government balancing its budget. Under the pros, the government can either go on and pay off the debts (often with interest) or they can place the debt off for the future economists to deal with gradually. Another pro for balancing the budget is that with the increase in the debt, those future economists and other generations will have lower incomes and higher taxes.

Deficit spending is when purchases exceed income. It is usually attributed to government spending within an economy. Although it can happen to both individual and business, when government spends more and not able to balance the budget, we say it is deficit spending. Deficit spending is created each fiscal year by congress and government because the spending by government causes the growth of the economy. For example, in the United State deficit spending is mainly caused by social, security, and medical cost. Government spends most of its revenue in each fiscal year into this payment. According to Kimberly Amadeo(2017) he said “ most people don’t realize that wars create more deficit spending than the create recession. The war in Afghanistan cost $28.7 billion in 2001.The war in Iraq for deployed military costs $72.5 billion by 2003. In 2008, the total cost grew to $186.6 billion.