Driven to Distraction

This article discusses the risks of using cell phones while driving, but currently not even one state legislature has banned it completely. Distracted driving has become a threat on roadways with drivers who use phones being four times more likely to crash. For this theory of a cell phone ban to become a law it must move up to the systemic agenda. Once it is a law, the way to implement it would be by the tool of social regulation. It would be very equitable since there would be less car accidents related to cell phones. However, it may be hard to regulate so the manageability and effectiveness wouldn’t be great.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/technology/series/driven_to_distraction/index.html?scp=1&sq=cell%20phone%20ban&st=cse

-Kelly Neary

Heated Debate at Hearing on Smoking Ban in Parks

This article is talking about putting a smoking ban in public parks, playgrounds, beaches and pedestrian plazas. There were some arguments about the ban being too restrictive, and concerns that the ban would lead to an overbearing government. This smoking ban would be exercising the social protective regulation of the tools of public action. It’s restricting a private action, but it wouldn’t be very effective because it would be hard to regulate in big places such as the city parks. Also, the issue of equity arises in that it’s not really fair to people who do smoke. That is why one council member petitioned for designated smoking areas outside, but was ultimately turned down since the second hand smoke would still be an issue.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/air-cleared-at-parks-smoking-ban-hearing/?scp=2&sq=smoking&st=cse

-Kelly Neary

Labor groups, Hyatt workers protest hotel's policies

Downtown Indianapolis Hyatt Regency Hotel employees are boycotting the hotel's policies. They held a rally on Monument Circle in downtown Indianapolis to express their unhappiness with their employers decisions. They insist on better pay and hours, also benefits. This is an example of a bottom-up approach because the "street-level bureaucrat's" perspective is what initially began this debate. The top policy implementers take the lower level's opinions into consideration before modifying policies to make them more feasible.
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20109210371

Obama: Tax Policies Should Aid Investment, Not Overseas Jobs

Barack Obama on Saturday said he wants to strengthen the labor market by closing tax loopholes that would encourage companies to send jobs overseas; he's aiming to replace the tax loopholes with new policies that would allow companies to write off the cost of new equipment, provide tax breaks for clean-energy manufacturing and make the research and experimentation tax credit permanent. Mr. Obama on Saturday argued that congressional Republicans would reward companies that create jobs and profits overseas instead of fighting to close tax loopholes. Speaking just weeks before the midterm elections, Mr. Pence argued that Republicans would better address the country's weak labor market and economic woes.

Post by: Ziying Yuan

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704706904575555643437459432.html

Tea Party projected to gain influence in Washington

Tea Party candidates are running for republican-leaning Congressional races. They are projected to do well running for Republican and Democratic positions. Nominees such as Rand Paul for senator in Kentucky and Dan Benishek for a retiring democrat house member. Though this party is small, the Tea Party could "exert outside influence" on Republicans to follow through on their promises to cut spending and taxes. This is an example of an elitist approach to agenda setting, where a small elite party obtains large influence. The Tea Party isn't nearly as big as the Republican Party, but they can still manipulate Republicans into focussing on issues like phasing out Medicare in favor of personal savings accounts.

Aria Greenberg

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/us/politics/15teaparty.html?ref=us

U.S. to Let Insurers Raise Fees for Sick Children

Pears article discusses the controversy with the Obama administration encouraging health insurance companies to offer children only policy that could charge higher premiums for the coverage of children if the state allowed it. Insurers are trying to bring in healthy children so that their premium doesn’t go up. Insurers also agree that if they provide insurance for a child, they cannot refuse to help pay for the treatment of pre-existing conditions.

This is a moral issue and the government has taken on this issue showing that this is a public problem. The government believes it is morally right to care for the children diagnosed with cancer or heart conditions, yet insurers refuse to take on such a financial risk.


Elizabeth Sziler

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/health/policy/14health.html?ref=us

Corporate America’s Complaint about the President

During a recession citizens look to the government for help to create a more prosperous economy. However, recently many large businesses feel the president is becoming too anti-business. This week, the CEO of Verizon said during a speech in Washington that Obama’s regulatory expansion is “making it harder to raise capital and create new businesses.” After the housing market crashed many Americans cried for more regulations on big business; but has Obama’s Administration gone to far?

According to this author, Obama’s administration has made it clear they favor a mixed economy; an economy focused on both free market capitalism and greater governmental regulations. However, the author has also made it clear that Obama’s policies have led to some economic growth already. Whether or not economic growth will continue into the near future is still up for debate.

http://www.economist.com/node/17095509?story_id=17095509