Vertical Federalism refers a ranking system applied to the different levels of government in the country. The Central or federal government can exercise authority over each state and is responsible for certain things like foreign policy, national defense and legal tender. States can exercise authority over city and town governments while the more local governments don’t make any laws at all, and are just responsible for making sure their citizens are obeying the law and having their needs met.

Horizontal Federalism is describing the relationships of the different departments at the same level of government. An example of the federal level is the idea of checks and balances among the three main branches. The executive, legislative and judicial branches all keep an eye on each other and make sure the other two are following policies agree upon by all.

Letter from Samuel Adams to Richard Henry Lee (1787)

"...shall extend to every subject of legislation, and its laws be supreme and control the whole, the idea of sovereignty in these states must be lost. Indeed I think, upon such a supposition, those sovereignties ought to be eradicated from the mind; for they would be Imperia to Imperio justly deemed a solecism in politicks, and they would be highly dangerous, and destructive of the peace union and safety of the nation. And can this Nation Legislature  be competent to make laws for the free internal government of one people, living in climates so remote and whose habits and particular interests are and probably always will be so different."

The first point he is making is that if there is a central government that can make laws and have power of all states, then the power held by those individual states will inevitably dissolve. He says it is much better to have a union of sates that agree on certain policies when it come to dealing with each other but in the end each state should be as self sufficient as possible in order to guarantee the freedoms they already had at this point. He also argues that this country is so big and diverse that every state has different need to be met because the climate and landscape and distance between cultures creates different factors in the day to day lives of different people living in those diverse regions. In other words, the life styles of those living in Georgia was very different than those living in Maine. The climate difference, difference in landscape or terrain and even just the isolative distance between the two areas is bound to create a difference in values, needs and goals.

I chose this passage because when forming a government, people must ask themselves how they can be most effective in achieving the goals of that government. In this case, the goal of the very new American government was to protect as many civil liberties as possible while improving if not maintaining the quality of life of its citizens. This is something I have always been torn about. On one hand I can see the advantage of a united country. Some laws are so crucial that there should be one central government ensuring that every state is on the same page when it comes to recognizing them. For example, I think we expect every state to uphold that murder and torture are illegal. We even enforce this policy in other countries when our government gets involved with human rights abuse. However, states can still have the power to enforce that law as they see fit giving them some autonomy. Some states have the death penalty and others don't. There is also the advantage of security that comes with a central government. It is much easier to conquer 13 separate colonies one at a time as opposed to one country made up of 13 states pooling all of its resources together, which is why this country united in the first place. However, I have always agreed that life in this country is so diverse that some areas might as well be their own country. Not to say they shouldn't have the support of the union, but should be a little more left alone to govern themselves when it comes to everyday life.

"Government implies the power of making laws. It is essential to the idea of a law, that it be attended with a sanction; or, in other words, a penalty or punishment for disobedience. If there be no penalty annexed to disobedience, the resolutions or commands which pretend to be laws will, in fact, amount to nothing more than advice or recommendations."

What Hamilton means by this quote is that calling yourself a nation with a government means being a group of citizens that come up with a list of rules to live by and enforcing those rules by acknowledging non compliance and then in turn giving incentive to comply by taking away rights from those who do not. In other words, law without law enforcement is just a suggestion and therefore ineffective as a means of protection of rights. If you tell me it is illegal to sell drugs but I sell drugs anyway with no consequences, then making something illegal is just saying "please don't do that."

I think this quote relates to the class because it addresses the most basic need for a government system. We talk about the process of forming a government and the different needs it should meet and the rolls it should play, but in my mind this quote addresses why we ever saw a need for government in the first place. I know that now, forming and enforcing laws is one of the governments many rolls, but to me it is the key roll. Other services provided by government are dictated by those laws and the only reason one could argue that we are different or separate from nature is because we have laws that we live by. Laws are put in place to keep our natural reactions to things in check. With out laws we are simply impulse driven, or least have no protection from those who are. And without enforcing those laws, they are not even really laws.

The fact that Madison felt you cannot deal with the causes of special interests because it would violate rights, could be considered precedence for outlawing restrictions on insurance due to pre-existing conditions. When he says, “The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man, and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. “ He is recognizing that the purpose of government is to improve life for people, and people are animals who come from nature and therefore make decisions that are not always logical and well thought out. If we are going to have services set in place to assist with those problems and hold our communities together, then we need to be sensitive and appreciative of that fact. Being a community or a nation means embracing the nature of those around you. If you don’t it could be argued that are basically saying, “I love America, but I only love certain Americans.” Everyone is flawed, has special circumstances that distinguish them from everyone else and sees the world in different ways. To have government dedicated to protecting the rights and improving the lives of those people, we need to celebrate our differences as well as our common goals. Part of doing that means accepting that once in a while someone will need help from his or her country and seeing that much of the time, we don’t need more than that to go on. Especially since every single president we have ever elected would not have been elected had they not made it clear that they are devout Christians. I understand there is a separation of church and state but the reality is that our leader being a Christian in very important to much of the country. The least we could is act like it.

Another quote of Madison’s I found interesting reads, “The smaller the society, the fewer probability will be the distinct parties and interests composing it, the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority and the smaller the compass within which they are placed the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression.” What he means by this is that a larger nation will be safer from oppression by a corrupt government because a smaller group is more easily distracted and fooled into thinking the same way and obeying. The diverse and complex a nation is, the less like people are to see everything the same way. Different factions means different ways of seeing the world which means different interpretations of right and wrong. He is also saying that when a small group comes to a majority decision, the lack of diversity means no other party has a significant say which means that new ideas are crushed before they even recognized as ideas which is historically and intellectually dangerous. I have mixed feeling about this idea because on one hand I have always felt that the root of many of our problems as a nation is that we are so big. This country is so diverse in its people as well as its way of life, landscape and climate. It is also just geographically very big so there is a lot of space to govern as well. Pleasing everyone is impossible. No matter what decision is reached by a majority, there are going to be a hundred small groups or subcultures (which arose from the different types of diversity of this land) whose toes are being stepped on by that decision. On the other hand, a smaller group will be more likely to fall into some type of mob mentality. A smaller population could mean that an oppressive government can more easily regulate what information is getting out, squash a revolution therefore having less fear of corruption being found out and more easily distract the people from real issues by appealing to simpler list of sensibilities.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/obama_invites_leaders_to_white_house_to_talk_shutdown_debt-228072-1.html

I honestly feel that Obama is not responsible for compromising on the Affordable Health Care Act. The act was voted on and went through all of the proper processes needed to put it through and make it official and now that certain people are not getting their way they are resorting to desperate measures. I actually feel a little embarrassed for our country at this point. Democracy does not mean that everyone gets their way all the time, it means the majority of the people choose in which direction this country goes and sometimes people have to sacrifice what they want for the greater good of the nation over all. The people who initiated this shut down, in my mind, are being immature and passive aggressive to the point that I am questioning their right and ability to hold office in a federal government.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/essential_it_depends_whom_you_work_for-228169-1.html?pos=hftxt

I have very mixed feelings about the laying off of government employees as a result of this shutdown. On one hand, I feel that state our economy is in, we really do need to reevaluate what is considered essential and what we can consolidate to make things more efficient. A lot of money is wasted on redundancy in this country. If there is a job being done by four ill trained paid interns that can be taken over and done better by the eight-teen permanent employees, then it makes sense to say that American tax dollars should no longer be paying those interns. However, there are a lot of issues in this country that we seem to not have enough resources to address. Our education system for example has a lot of problems that the government has been trying to work out and laying off people may mean taking away people who have been focusing on it. Even the fact that our economy is in such bad shape could mean we need more people and man hours focused on that issue as well.

I chose these two articles because they show how our political system has a long way to go instead of our government working as a united force with a common goal, it is divided into two sides who are perpetually arguing for the sake of being right in order to gain more leverage over the people of this country. Everyone wants the people of this country to be healthier. More available healthcare along with better education seems to be the most logical way to pull that off. However, instead of trying to work together to reach that goal, congress is caught up in what seems like a childish school yard argument which ended in what seems like the silent treatment. To be honest, I'm not even sure what a government shut down is. We still have laws, I am still paying taxes, there are still people in D.C. working everyday. Our country is still running and the people are still citizens of a country. To me a government shut down just means some people don't want to play anymore cause things are not going their way.

Article III.

Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State,--between Citizens of different States,--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

This section of the Constitution is saying that any case involving any party disobeying the law will fall under the authority of the courts. This includes any individual citizen no matter what state they live in or in which state the crime was committed , public representatives and the states themselves. Even the federal government is subject to a trial if it is involved in some type of wrong doing which would be determined by the laws written by congress. (to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;) It is also saying that any of this cases should be treated equally. The citizens, those holding public offices and the state and federal governments are all equally expected to follow the same laws and held equally responsible when they don't.

I chose this section because it reflects the idea of all men being created equal. In theory that is what is supposed make America a great nation and unique from other nations, however we see examples everyday of that not being the case. Many politicians and government employees use their positions of power to put themselves above the law. A big part of why this is allowed to happen is the lack of education and interest the people have for their own government and political system. As long as they can continue their comfortable day to day routines, people tend to not care what kind of corruption is going on behind closed doors. However, a government of the people, by the people and for the people should automatically treat everyone as equals and ours clearly does not.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness (p. 59)."

This quote from the Declaration of Independence is say that based on the laws of nature, there are certain right freedoms we ought to be guaranteed in order to function to out full potential as human beings. To me the most obvious is the right to life. Being alive must come before being free or being happy. This is not only just but also practical for allowing a society to progress and flourish. People will work together towards a common goal much better if they feel safe, secure, free and happy. It makes it so that people want to work together. This section also explains that it is the roll of government to protect the people and ensure that these rights remain in tact. The will of the government of the will of the people should be one in the same. The government protects these because the people say they exist. The third part of this quote talks about the peoples duty to protect themselves and each other from corruption of the government. When it has become clear that government is acting against the will of the people, it is the peoples' responsibility to overthrow it and put a new one in its place. Even if rights are god given or natural, however u want to put it, it is still possible for someone else to try and take it away. The only way we can call them rights is we are willing to fight for their preservation.

I picked this quote because it directly relates to what Paine said about god given rights and how they can be hindered by allowing ourselves to be governed by laws created before we were alive, in a time after they are no longer as relevant if relevant at all. If the needs of the people are always changing like Paine explains then the government must also be prepared to change with them. This is one reason we have the duty to participate in out own government. The Declaration acknowledges that god given rights exist and talks about our duty to overthrow a government that no longer has out best interests at heart. Paine talks about why those god given rights serve such a vital purpose to our quality of life and why it is sometimes necessary to force the government to change with the times.

"Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generation which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. The Parliament of the people of 1688, or of any period, had no more right to dispose of the people of the present day, or to bind or to control them in any shape whatever, than the Parliament or the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind, or control those who are to live a hundred or a thousand years hence. Every generation is and must be competent to all the purposes which it occasions require. It is the living, and not the dead that are to be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants cease with him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he has no longer any authority in directing who shall be its governors, or how its government shall be organized or how administered (p. 57)."

What this quote means is that the idea of policies written by people, lasting longer than the people who wrote them can be a very ineffective or dangerous way to govern a society. In order for each generation to be as free as the previous generation, the laws and ideals have to reflect the ever changing needs of the people alive at that time. Needs are always changing because the world round us is always changing. One concept that came from "The Enlightenment" is the idea the natural environment is one of the key factors that effects how an individual develops. It influences their needs, values and overall character. The individuals that collectively make up a society define the nature of that society. Therefore if the environment is always changing then the needs of a society are always changing. This means that it is the duty of the governing body to be ready to adapt to better meet those needs. If t is not prepared to do so the potential end result is the free will of a group of people being taken away for completely impractical reasons by people "from beyond the grave."

This quote relates to class because we are learning about the formation of the American political system and government and how its function is relevant to this nations history and our everyday lives today. A big part of our government is the recognition of god given or natural rights. These are rights that no one has the power to tamper with. Living by a set of out dated rules puts those rights at risk because someone who is no longer alive and has couldn't have had any idea what our lives would be like today, is affecting our ability to exercise those rights. Even today, certain issues and circumstances  that could not have been foreseen call into question laws that are still in affect. Ideas like the right to bear arms, what an individual is allowed to do with his or her body and what we are entitled to in terms of personal health, safety and security.