Respond to 2 students 1st students discussion There are different advantages and disadvantages to different levels of subnational governments. The first advantage is the area of focus, each level of...

There are different advantages and disadvantages to different levels of subnational governments. The first advantage is the area of focus, each level of subnational government can work upon. Once the federal government has come up with its own federal policy, then the state government ensures that the whole state is covered with the policy with its own state-level constitutional prospect. Afterward, it is the local government, that looks after the implementation of policy in the area that is under the control of that local government. So, the area of focus is clearly defined. The second advantage is the customization of the programs and clarity of what to be done, with each government level. It ensured that each geographical area got what is required by them.

Though, there are some disadvantages also. The first disadvantage is the ambiguity among people regarding the responsibilities of the government at different levels. Further, it will cause one government to hold other governments to be responsible for any problem or issue. The second disadvantage is the increased length of time that will take place to make a decision due to a multi-level government structure. It will cause a delay in the implementation of important projects. Further, it will create more chaos among the different governments as one will pull another.

Term limits have advantageous as it makes different following advantages:

(1) It makes it necessary pressure to perform and deliver some visible results.

(2) It creates other parties or groups to come up with new ideas and get elected into the governance.

(3) It always makes the government be on their toes so that always works for the best of the people and democracy works well.

(4) People get a chance to elect other parties or people to elect if one government is not working.

Reference:https://thediplomat.com/2020/03/competition-with-china-goes-subnational/

2nd students discussion

There are both benefits and drawbacks to having multilevel governments in the United States. One disadvantage of each state having different laws is that someone from out of state may not be aware of a law and accidentally violate it. As an Oregon resident the most common and humorous that I have seen is pumping your own gas at the station. In Oregon, it is illegal to pump your own gas. Many visitors from out of state have learned this from flustered gas station attendants. Fortunately, I have never heard of someone receiving a ticket or facing any sort of charges. My sister and I like to joke that if a gas station attendant is taking a long time to provide service, just get out and act like you’re going to pump it yourself, that’ll get them over there in a hurry! Another downside to this law is those of us who grew up in Oregon often do not know how to pump our own gas. I bet out of state people get a hoot out of watching us try to figure it out for the first time! This is a light-hearted example, but it could apply to much more serious things such as gun control laws or the recent shelter-in-place orders. These laws are not only different among the states, sometimes they are different between cities or counties within a given state. For example, there is a city ordinance which prohibits residents within city limits from keeping chickens. However, Keizer which is another town which is right next to Salem allows residents to keep chickens. The two cities are so close, that as a kid I did not know where Salem stopped and Keizer started.

Another disadvantage between multilevel government is a confusion of jurisdictions. I was the victim of a hit and run car collision (no one in my vehicle was hurt, I don’t know about the other vehicle since they never stopped). When I called 911, they needed to know the exact intersection that the collision took place because different sections of the of road I was on are the jurisdiction of the county sheriff, while others are the jurisdiction of the city of Salem Police Department.

There are some benefits to multilevel government. First, I think it allows law makers to put in place laws which are tailored to the residents of a certain area that meets their needs. If there was only one set of laws that applied to the entire country, it would end up in many people being dis-serviced by these laws because they would be ill-fitting. Some areas would be overburdened by the laws, other areas would not have sufficient laws, while other areas would have many laws that just make no sense to them. Could you imagine living in Kansas as a farmer and having laws that are designed to govern ocean fishing as part of the laws of your land? How about imagining the laws that are designed for highly populated and developed cities governing rural areas such as much of Alaska? Having one set of rules to govern a country as large and diverse as the United States simply does not make sense.

Another benefit of multilevel government is that people can choose to live in an area that is more aligned with their needs and beliefs about what laws are necessary. When I was 19, I worked at a summer camp in Kansas. Many of the people I met told me how they couldn’t imagine living in Oregon because of how liberal the state is. I did not understand what they meant. I was conservative and believed the same things they did, and I was from Oregon. The judgement seemed harsh, but when I went home at the end of summer, I began to see what they meant. I love Oregon, but I think it is because weather in the Willamette Valley is nearly perfect and my connections to friends and family. I am not a fan of my state’s politics or liberal bent. It is comforting to know that I could move and live in another state if Oregon’s politics get bent too far left. Overall, I think that multiple levels of government are necessary to rule such a large nation as the U.S. and that the benefits outweigh the negatives.

When it comes to setting term limits, I lean toward not having limits in place. However, I think that it depends upon which office which is being held and the procedures available to recall from that office if the representative does not fulfill his/her duty responsibly. According to chapter 14.4 of our class textAmerican Government 2eby OpenStax, term limits are often the result of voter initiatives. Some of the motivations behind this include reducing the amount of career politicians and bringing diversity into political office by forcing turnover among representatives. Many hoped that by setting term limits it would take elected officials’ attention from planning how to win the next election, and instead direct their attention to addressing policy issues. According to the assigned YouTube video “Term Limits an Overview” published by Americans for Congressional Term Limits, often the lack of term limits causes career politicians to bend to the will of large campaign donors and special interest groups. The idea is that by forcing term limits, it will cause ordinary people to serve for a time, focus on policy, and then return home at the end. The goal of this change is that the people would be better represented, and the policies would focus on the best interest of the constituents instead of catering to special interest groups. These are all good motivations that I can get behind.

However, I think that there are many unintended consequences which outweigh the intended benefits. According to chapter 14.4 of our class textAmerican Government 2e, our text says that term limits are not effective in reducing the influence of special interest groups when forming policy. Instead, when term limits are in place, elected officials have less expertise needed for writing policy which causes them to depend more heavily on advice received from lobbyists. As we learned in chapter 10 interest groups have are often strongly involved in the lobbying process, which means that limiting terms has the opposite effect than that which was desired. Legislators end up bending further to lobbyists and special interest groups due to inexperience in office. Another area which term limits often backfires is trying to increase the diversity of elected officials. Chapter 14.4 of our class text tells us that since there are generally less women and minority candidates to start with, once those candidates have served their term, they are unable to run for office again. In some areas this means that term limits actually reduce the diversity of candidates available for election. Another argument that our class text makes against term limits is that is reduces the power of state legislators and may cause an imbalance of power in favor of the governor and executive branches. I am not a fan of our governor and feel she has stepped out of line on many issues. I would want as many checks on her power to be as strong as possible. Overall, I think term limits are well intentioned, but they seem inadequate in bringing about the change supporters hope for. I think that instead of term limits, perhaps attention needs to be directed toward increasing candidate diversity and voter interest. I also think that if there are no term limits this should be checked by a feasible method for voters to recall a candidate that is not serving in the best interest of the people.