White Australian Policy

White Australian Policy Introduction Various countries of the world are endowed in terms of resources both natural and manmade. For this reason, there are countries that tend to be better off economically than others. This has seen many people migrate to other countries in search of greener pastures in terms of better employment opportunities and investment as opportunities. Due to the high number of foreign immigrants that countries receive, sometimes countries would come up with policies which would restrict the number of immigrants coming into the country.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on White Australian Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Australia at one time came up with such a policy which came to be referred to as the White Australian Policy. Under this policy those immigrants who applied to come into Australia from certain regions of the world were given preference more than other immigrants. This discussion seeks to establish the reason why the Australian governments adopted this policy in the 20th century. Background Information The White Australian Policy was put in place by the Australian government in the 20th century. Specifically, the year 1901 saw the legislature pass an Act that came to be known as the Immigrations Restrictions Act. The provisions of this legislation restricted the immigration of people from certain regions of the world. Further, this act provided that prohibited immigrants be deregistered from being members of the Common Wealth. Specifically, this Act restricted the immigration of all people who were considered to be of unbecoming or loathsome character, any person suffering from an infectious or contagious disease , insane persons as well as those who were likely to become a charge against any charitable or public organization. Other persons who had been restricted from migrating into Australia were those who had any criminal records, prostitutes and any person who had been con tracted to for purposes of manual labour in Australia. The main of this Act therefore was to prevent entry of people who were considered undesirable for the progress of the society in Australia. However even though the policy has since been abolished, many historians argue that Australians remain one of the largest racists groups in the world. There was yet another restriction which required that applicants who wanted to migrate to Australia needed to pass a certain dictation test and those who did not pass were barred entry into Australia. One unfair aspect of this test is that it would more often be conducted in a language in which the applicant did not understand. This made the likelihood of the applicant passing the test very minimal. This was a move that received great support from the bigger community in Australia. As a matter of fact, in the year 1919, the Prime Minister of Australia at the time is quoted as having said that the enactment and implementation of this legislatio n was one of the greatest achievements that Australia had.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Second World War During the Second World War, there was a lot of migration as people moved in search of safe places to hide from the war. However, Australia was all the more keen to ensure that people from other countries and especially those who were prohibited by the Immigrations Restrictions Act were not allowed entry into the soil of Australia. Despite the stringent measures that the Australian government had put in place, there are numerous refuges who were non white who gained entry into Australia. When the Second World War came to an end, some of the non-white immigrants who had entered Australia left on their own volition. However, some of the immigrants had since intermarried with Australians and therefore did not want to go back to their native countries. This brough t about a lot of friction between government officials and the non-white immigrants as the government considered these immigrants as having been illegal. The minister of immigration in Australians at the time, having read the mood of the non-white immigrants gave a notice of deportation to the immigrants. This sparked heavy protest from the immigrants which later turned out to be violent (Willard, 1967. p.234). Due to these protests, the government officials loosened their measures and the non-white immigrants were allowed to stay. This marked the beginning of abolition of the White Australian Policy which was not only unfair but discriminatory as well. Further Progress In the year 1957, the Australian government further loosened its measures by allowing any non-European immigrant who had been in Australia for a period of 15 years or more to be granted Australian citizenship (Windshucttle, 2004, p.23). This would later see the Australian government revise and amend the provisions of the Immigrations Restrictions Act which provided for a system that was simpler and made entry into Australia easy than it was previously. In addition, the dictation test which was one of the requirements for any applicant wishing to enter Australia was abolished. Under the provisions of the revised Act any applicant wishing to enter Australia needed not give details of their race as was the case previously. Instead, other factors such as the ability for an immigrant to settle and integrate with the indigenous community and provide value to Australia in terms of their services were considered. The period within which a non-European immigrant could be granted citizenship of Australia was further reduced from fifteen years to five years.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on White Australian Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Abolishment of the Policy In the year 1966, the government of Australia decided to do away wit h the White Australian policy having acknowledged that it was highly discriminative. This saw the number of non-European immigrants rise considerably. By the year 1973, the government of Australia had resolved on eliminating race as factor for migration. This was done by requiring that any immigrant to Australia, regardless of their origin be granted permanent citizenship of Austria after having stayed in Australia for a period of three years. Further, the government issued instructions to all posts overseas that race be totally and completely disregarded when considering applicants who would wish to immigrate to Australia. The Australian government also made a ratification of all the international treaties and agreements that were in regard to race and immigration. The Whitlam government was very instrumental in ensuring that non-European immigrants were no longer discriminated against in their quest to gain entry into Australia. However, the same government came up with yet anothe r policy which put a restriction on the general number of immigrants who would enter the country every year regardless of their race (Collins, 1962, p.34). This meant that their efforts to abolish the White Australian policy did not bear much fruit since the number of immigrants whether non-European or otherwise into Australia did not go up as expected. It was not until the year 197 when Fraser came into office that the stringent measures were now lifted and there was an increased number of immigrants from various parts of the world with race no longer being a consideration of admission. The Fraser government was committed into bringing immigration changes in Australia and in 1978, the government came up with anew framework which all the more ensured that no person would be denied entry into the soil of Australia based on their racial background. The government laid emphasis on attracting immigrants from other countries, not paying attention to their race but more importantly whethe r those people can bring any value to the Australia. Current Status Presently, Australia is one of the countries who immigrations laws are somewhat friendly (Collins, 1962, p.45). The issue of race has since been dropped and it is no longer a consideration that determined whether or not an applicant will be granted entry into Australia. Other factors that are not considered and are therefore not barriers to entry into Australia include religion, cultural background, religion, language and ethnicity. By the year 2010, Australia was estimated to have a total population of 22.7 million people with more than a quarter of this number being non-European immigrants. This goes to show that Australia has embraced other races into their country and this has paid off because the economy of this country has continued to take an upward trend despite the global recession that has been experienced over time. Australian now views the social and cultural diversity that it has as a source of wealth a nd economic progress.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Conclusion The issue if immigration is one that has remained contentious in many countries. This is because many countries would like as much as is possible to protect their culture, beliefs and practices and they argue allowing many people from outside may water down their culture. However Australia has proven over time that it is indeed possible to accommodate people from other cultures and races and still manage to maintain one’s culture. The White Australian Policy remains part of the Australian history mainly because it was highly discriminative. We however get to understand that such discriminatory and stereotype kind of classifications does not help in nay way and especially for country that is seeking to grow. Growth in a society and especially economical and sociological cannot be achieved in isolation. A society cannot hope to thrive, develop or progress in isolation at the exclusion of other societies. This is because there is no society that has got all the resour ces that it will require for development and there is always the need to engage other societies for combined efforts. Researches have shown that countries that allow immigration of people from other countries without having may restrictions have the advantage of fast economic growth due to the integration of various ideas and skills from different parts of the world. Australia is a good example and especially to those countries where discrimination based on race or any other kind of affiliation is still rife. Countries and especially those that are classified as peripheral countries or third countries must give immigration a serious consideration if they hope to catch up with the affluent countries. It is only by lifting such barriers that notable economic development will be noted and the standards of life of its citizenry will be promoted. References Collins, T. (1962). The white Australia policy. New York: Australian Catholic Truth Society Willard, M. (1967). History of the white Australia policy. London: Routledge. Windshucttle, K. (2004). The white Australia Policy. New York: Mcleay Press.

Opposition to the War of 1812 From Americans

Opposition to the War of 1812 From Americans When the United States declared war against Britain in June 1812, the vote on the declaration of war in the Congress was fairly close, reflecting how unpopular the war was to large segments of the American public. Though one of the main reasons for the war had to do with the rights of sailors on the high seas and the protection of American shipping, the senators and representatives from the maritine states of New England tended to vote against the war. Sentiment for war was perhaps strongest in the western states and territories, where a faction known as the War Hawks believed that the United States could invade present day Canada and seize territory from the British. The debate about the war had been going on for many months, with newspapers, which tended to be highly partisan in that era, proclaiming pro-war or anti-war positions. The declaration of war was signed by President James Madison on June 18, 1812, but for many that did not settle the matter. Opposition to the war continued. Newspapers blasted the Madison administration, and some state governments went so far as to essentially obstruct the war effort. In some cases opponents to the war engaged in protests, and in one noteworthy incident, a mob in Baltimore attacked a group which opposed the war. One of the victims of the mob violence in Baltimore, who suffered serious injuries from which he never fully recovered, was the father of Robert E. Lee. Newspapers Attacked the Madison Administration Move Toward War The War of 1812 began against a backdrop of intense political battling within the United States. The Federalists of New England were opposed to the idea of war, and the Jeffersonian Republicans, including President James Madison, were very suspicious of them. A huge controversy broke out when it was revealed that the Madison administration had paid a former British agent for information on Federalists and their suspected connections to the British government. The information provided by the spy, a shady character named John Henry, never amounted to anything that could be proven. But the bad feelings engendered by Madison and members of his administration influenced partisan newspapers early in 1812. Northeastern newspapers regularly denounced Madison as corrupt and venal. There was a strong suspicion among the Federalists that Madison and his political allies wanted to go to war with Britain to bring the United States closer to the France of Napoleon Bonaparte. Newspapers on the other side of the argument argued that the Federalists were an English party in the United States that wanted to splinter the nation and somehow return it to British rule. Debate over the war - even after it had been declared - dominated the summer of 1812. At a public gathering for the Fourth of July in New Hampshire, a young New England attorney, Daniel Webster, gave an oration which was quickly printed and circulated. Webster, who had not yet run for public office, denounced the war, but made a legal point: It is now the law of the land, and as such we are bound to regard it. State Governments Opposed the War Effort One of the arguments against the war was that the United States was simply not prepared, as it had a very small army. There was an assumption that state militias would bolster the regular forces, but as the war began the governors of Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts refused to comply with the federal request for militia troops. The position of the New England state governors was that the president of the United States could only requisition the state militia to defend the nation in the event of an invasion, and no invasion of the country was imminent. The state legislature in New Jersey passed a resolution condemning the declaration of war, terming it inexpedient, ill-timed, and most dangerously impolitic, sacrificing at once countless blessings. The legislature in Pennsylvania took the opposite approach, and passed a resolution condemning the New England governors who were opposing the war effort. Other state governments issued resolutions taking sides. And it is clear that in the summer of 1812 the United States was going to war despite a large split in the country. A Mob in Baltimore Attacked Opponents of the War In Baltimore, a thriving seaport at the beginning of the war, public opinion generally tended to favor the declaration of war. In fact, privateers from Baltimore were already setting sail to raid British shipping in the summer of 1812, and the city would eventually become, two years later, the focus of a British attack. On June 20, 1812, two days after war was declared, a Baltimore newspaper, the Federal Republican, published a blistering editorial denouncing the war and the Madison administration. The article angered many citizens of the city, and two days later, on June 22, a mob descended on the newspapers office and destroyed its printing press. The publisher of the Federal Republican, Alexander C. Hanson, fled the city for Rockville, Maryland. But Hanson was determined to return and continue publishing his attacks on the federal government. With a group of supporters, including two notable veterans of the Revolutionary War, James Lingan and General Henry Lee (the father of Robert E. Lee), Hanson arrived back in Baltimore a month later, on July 26, 1812. Hanson and his associates moved into a brick house in the city. The men were armed, and they essentially fortified the house, fully expecting another visit from an angry mob. A group of boys gathered outside the house, shouting taunts and throwing stones. Guns, presumably loaded with blank cartridges, were fired from an upper floor of the house to disperse the growing crowd outside. The stone throwing became more intense, and windows of the house were shattered. The men in the house began shooting live ammunition, and a number of people in the street were wounded. A local doctor was killed by a musket ball. The mob was driven to a frenzy. Responding to the scene, the authorities negotiated the surrender of the men in the house. About 20 men were escorted to the local jail, where they were housed for their own protection. A mob assembled outside the jail on the night of July 28, 1812, forced its way inside, and attacked the prisoners. Most of the men were severely beaten, and James Lingan, an elderly veteran of the American Revolution, was killed, reportedly by being struck in the head with a hammer. General Henry Lee was beaten senseless, and his injuries probably contributed to his death several years later. Hanson, the publisher of the Federal Republican, survived, but was also severely beaten. One of Hansons associates, John Thompson, was beaten by the mob, dragged through the streets, and tarred and feathered. Lurid accounts of the Baltimore riot were printed in American newspapers. People were particularly shocked by the killing of James Lingam, who had been wounded while serving as an officer in the Revolutionary War and had been a friend of George Washington. Following the riot, tempers cooled in Baltimore. Alexander Hanson moved to Georgetown, on the outskirts of Washington, D.C., where he continued to publish a newspaper denouncing the war and mocking the government. Opposition to the war continued in some parts of the country. But over time the debate cooled off and more patriotic concerns, and a desire to defeat the British, took precedence. At the end of the war, Albert Gallatin, the nations treasury secretary, expressed a belief that the war had unified the nation in many ways, and had lessened a focus on purely local or regional interests. Of the American people at the end of the war, Gallatin wrote: They are more Americans; they feel and act more as a nation; and I hope that the permanency of the Union is thereby better secured. Regional differences, of course, would remain a permanent part of American life. Before the war had officially ended, legislators from the New England states gathered at the Hartford Convention and argued for changes in the U.S. Constitution. The members of the Hartford Convention were essentially federalists who had opposed the war. Some of them argued that states which had not wanted the war should split from the federal government. The talk of secession, more than four decades before the Civil War, did not lead to any substantial action. The official end of the War of 1812 with the Treaty of Ghent occurred and the ideas of the Hartford Convention faded away. Later events, events such as the Nullification Crisis, the prolonged debates about slavery in America, the secession crisis, and the Civil War  still pointed to regional splits in the nation. But Gallatins larger point, that the debate over the war ultimately bound the country together, had some validity.

Summary Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 200

Summary - Essay Example Grouping together of the nodes forms an ad hoc network that exposes the system to errors. The allowance of each node to interfere with each others transmission causes hidden and revealed problems within a wireless network station. The solution for this problem is available using the IEE standard and Point Coordination. The wireless networks have more chances of undetected frame collisions at the MAC sub layer. Detecting the collision and retransmitting the lost frame is imperative practice in preventing the loss of data integrity. However, the wired (Ethernet) local data networks rarely experience data integrity issues. Therefore, collision control is unnecessary for the Ethernet and wired LANs. The wireless network faces transmission issues when signal problems occur due to signal-bounce. Consequently, this necessitates the need for the MAC layer to solve these challenges. The MAC sub-layer for wired segments does not need collision avoidance protocol despite not having much transmission capabilities as those in wireless LANs. The wireless LANs is prevalent than the wired ones as they have various benefits found at the MAC sub layer of the network

Alcoholism in families Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Alcoholism in families - Research Paper Example People from all walks of life are subject to its dangers and most importantly, those living close to the victims also suffer the consequences of uncontrolled alcoholism, which promotes antisocial behavior. This paper is a critical evaluation of alcoholism in the families. Alcoholism as discussed herein, is a condition which has the potential of creating havoc in relationships as well as families. For one, alcohol itself is a substance, which reduces understanding and judgment skills in a person, in some cases leading to poor emotional intelligence. Under such circumstances, it may be found out that people who abuse alcohol are more capable of engaging in unwarranted fights with their spouses out of simple arguments (Ketcham, 2001). However, the victims of such violence especially women tend to develop an understanding at the onset of such behavior, finding excuses to justify their husbands’ actions. In this context, they may be heard making excuses such as; it is only because he was under the influence of alcohol among others, but in the long run, the behavior develops into a habit, which may be difficult to tolerate. Research indicates that alcoholic couples are 3 times more capable of perpetrating spousal abuse as compared to non-drinking or occasional drinkers (Frederickson, 2009). Relationships are supposed to be based on love and if so, it is against the expected norms to hurt your spouse either while sober or under the influence of alcohol. Definitely, if such behavior persists, these relationships continue to deteriorate and eventually, divorce or separation becomes the only viable option. In addition, it has been noted that alcoholics are more prone to committing incest with their own children. According to research, it is observable that 30% of incestuous activities involving father and daughter are as a result of alcoholism. This is one of the worst experiences that a female parent can undergo and

Contingency Theory of Leadership Essay Example for Free

Contingency Theory of Leadership Essay At my workplace we have sales goals that we have to meet and part of my job is to ensure that the staff is achieving their goals and if they are falling behind, I help them find ways to better their selling skills and recognize opportunities. In the table below, categorize different leadership approaches that could be used in the work environment you have described. Provide different suggestions for each of the four approaches to leadership. Directive approachSupportive approach The company has weekly product knowledge training so that the employees know about the products that they are selling. The employees are also rewarded incentives that relate directly to their goals and are aware of their job duties (Jones, 2007) and new procedures shared in our weekly meetings. The individual goals also relate to work schedules the full time employees goals are higher than the part-time employees. The supportive approach to leadership of this group the management is open and very approachable (Jones, 2007). The management also has goals to meet and are always willing to offer advice and additional training to employees. They also meet with employees individually and find out what motivates that specific employee because everyone is different. Participative approachAchievement-oriented approach The employees participate in creating individual goals for themselves (Jones, 2007) and for the branch. They create in-branch promotions and try to make sales fun. Employee suggestions for improvement are put into action and employees are commended for their work ethics and participation with branch promotions. The goals that are set for the employees are realistic, not outrageous (Jones, 2007). By observing the amount of branch traffic, and amount of customers that do not currently have a specific product we can set goals that are achievable.

My Philosophy of Teaching Essay -- Philosophy of Education Teachers Es

My Philosophy of Teaching I didn’t grow up wanting to be a teacher. I went to college after high school and studied Journalism, International Studies, and Psychology. Teaching was not a career I ever thought about pursuing. Then, I had the opportunity to spend time in the classroom and the teacher pointed out to me that I was a natural. I have had extensive experience volunteering with young people through school and church activities. I coach a high school track team. It is through this involvement and interaction with these young people that it has become clear to me that I need to be a teacher. I have a great rapport with kids and teens. I like them, they like me, and there is a mutual respect. Finally, I know I want to teach! I want to incorporate teaching something positive, something meaningful and helpful into the required curriculum. I want to teach the classics in a non-classic way. I will teach my students to learn about themselves. I want to enable them to realize what they can achieve. I will strive to build character in my classroom. I want my students to learn, interpret, and express! I don’t want to dictate. I don’t want to stand over them and lecture. I want the learning/teaching method to be one of interaction and feedback. I want to constructively correct mistakes without being critical or judgmental. I want to teach my students to teach themselves so they will be able to think for themselves and... My Philosophy of Teaching Essay -- Philosophy of Education Teachers Es My Philosophy of Teaching I didn’t grow up wanting to be a teacher. I went to college after high school and studied Journalism, International Studies, and Psychology. Teaching was not a career I ever thought about pursuing. Then, I had the opportunity to spend time in the classroom and the teacher pointed out to me that I was a natural. I have had extensive experience volunteering with young people through school and church activities. I coach a high school track team. It is through this involvement and interaction with these young people that it has become clear to me that I need to be a teacher. I have a great rapport with kids and teens. I like them, they like me, and there is a mutual respect. Finally, I know I want to teach! I want to incorporate teaching something positive, something meaningful and helpful into the required curriculum. I want to teach the classics in a non-classic way. I will teach my students to learn about themselves. I want to enable them to realize what they can achieve. I will strive to build character in my classroom. I want my students to learn, interpret, and express! I don’t want to dictate. I don’t want to stand over them and lecture. I want the learning/teaching method to be one of interaction and feedback. I want to constructively correct mistakes without being critical or judgmental. I want to teach my students to teach themselves so they will be able to think for themselves and...

Abuse of the Executive Powers of the President Essay

In the United States our President has many powers that are granted to him when they are elected into office. They have the ability to change the budget, to either cut back on spending, or implement new programs to help their citizens. They can veto a bill that they think is not ready to be made law yet and send it back to congress for further evaluation. They can appoint Supreme Court Justices. They also are the Commander in Chief of all U.S. armies, and they even have the power to send troops over to foreign nations in times of hostility in some circumstances. There are many who believe that the powers of the president are sometimes abused, especially as the Commander in Chief. There have been several instances in our Nation’s history in which the President has been able to wiggle their way around the constitutional limitations that are given of the Commander in Chief. Even though the president is unable to actually declare war he can use his powers to advance a conflict. The article Congressional War Powers, The Commander in Chief and Senator John Mccain describes how this is achieved by stating â€Å"Technically only congress has the power to declare war but the President can act unilaterally to repel sudden attacks made on U.S. Soil† (Bowling, 2008, p. 1). Presidents use these executive powers to engage in a conflict that they believe needs to be settled in times of crisis. The Constitution has a system within-it that tries to grant separate but equal powers to all branches of government called checks and balances. Although this system of checks and balances is supposed to be followed, there are ways which certain branches of government can gain more power than others. Often the President is the one who abuses the system, and uses their executive powers for their own advantages. These powers granted to the President have been abused more and more throughout our Nation’s recent history and it needs to be limited to make sure that the leader of the United States is making decisions which are best for his citizens. Literature Review In the book Executive privilege, Presidential Power, secrecy and accountability Mark Rozel defines executive privilege and how it has been implemented over time. He focuses on several cases where executive privilege has been abused including the Nixon, George W. Bush, and Clinton administrations. He brings insight on how they took the power too far and  how the country felt about their actions. The article Conflicts between the commander in chief and Congress (2008) written by Jules Lobel focuses on the Bush administration, and how the president took his powers of commander in chief too far. According to the article the administration â€Å"ignores or greatly minimizes Congress’s Constitutional Powers to declare War† (2008, p. 391). This is a prime indicator that the president is gaining too much power. Another article, CONGRESSIONAL WAR POWERS, THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF AND SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN, (2008) written by Jeremy L. Bowling, Richard D. Caldwell, Ryan C. Hendrickson, and John S. Morris, focuses on how the system of separation of powers was supposed to divide the powers of the government equally, but describes how the president has used his unilateral powers too much. The article also focuses on John McCain’s views about using and restricting the powers of commander in chief. Another article that focuses on the executive powers of the president is Controlling Executive Power in the War on Terrorism written by Mark Tushnet (2005). This article analyzes what the government’s response is to outbreaks of war. It describes how Congress and the president interact with one another during times of crisis to decide what should be done. It elaborates on the difficult struggle that the government faces during these times. Usually the president has final say of what to do during these times. Another article that focuses on a different way the president can gain too much power is The Most Dangerous Branch: Executive Power to Say What the Law Is written by Michael Stokes Paulsen (1994). This article goes into depth about just how much power the president has compared to the other branches of government. One of the main points it asserts is that the president has the power to interpret the law before executing it which can play a big role in how the country is ran. Discussion ` Our country’s Constitution was arranged in a way, and developed over the years to make sure that no branch of government would become more powerful than the others. It has been amended and changed throughout history so that it can adapt to the way that citizens’ views change. Although the Constitution is written in ink it does not mean that there is one way of interpreting the meanings of laws and amendments. The constitution grants Executive Power to the President but there are also  powers called the inherent powers which are other powers guaranteed to the President, including conducting foreign policy, making treaties, using executive privilege which is used to keep diplomatic and military secrets private. These powers can be very dangerous because they can be taken advantage of, and interpreted in a way that can give the president the upper hand over the two other branches of government. Michael Paulsen describes why the Executive Branch of government is the most dangerous by stating â€Å"The executive possesses Force, Will, and Judgment the power to interpret the law. He has the sole duty and prerogative to direct and control the manner in which the laws are executed† (1994, p. 219). If a person gets elected to president who is selfish or does not have good morals then these powers could prove to be very harmful to the nation’s well-being. There have been several instances in our nation’s history where the President has acted not in the best interest of the nation, but in the best interest of themselves and his supporters. This builds mistrust in citizens about the government, and makes them question whether they actually have as much influence in the government that is promised to them by the Constitution. A power that has been abused recently, and interpreted in a certain way that makes it easy to be in favor of the president is the power of commander in chief. The president is not able to declare war officially but he can sure be one of the causes for it. Even if the majority of the country feels that war should be avoided the president still has the power to send troops over to foreign nations if there is a threat to the national security of the country. The president then has to prove why their decision to send troops to foreign nations is justified. Even if citizens do not agree with him, as long as he proves that he is trying to protect the nation, he is able to engage in the conflict. One of the most recent displays of taking advantage of executive power is when the Bush administration sent troops to Afghanistan to fight the War on Terror. President Bush had told the citizens of the United states that there was suspicion that Afghanistan had weapons of mass destruction which justified him to send troops to check out the situation. According to Jules Lobel in the article Conflicts between the Commander in Chief and Congress â€Å"President Bush had the right to not only regulate and direct troops but also hold enemy combatants against their will  for interrogation† (2008, p.392). This was a nice way of letting citizens know that the Bush administration was willing to do anything, even torture to retrieve information from individuals who they suspected knew something. The administration also felt that it was necessary to begin wiretapping peoples’ phones in order to protect citizens. This outraged a lot of citizens that felt like their privacy was being violated, and the government was over stepping its boundaries. It is true that during times of war or conflict the president has the power as commander in chief to take necessary actions in order to keep the country safe, but in some circumstances that power is over used and can almost become an excuse to carry out laws and regulations without the approval of congress. This power has proven that there needs to be some limitations on what the president can or can not do during times of conflict. Another power which has shown throughout history to be abused by the president is executive privilege. This is the ability for the president to withhold information that they feel is necessary to keep secret for the good of the public. This is a useful tool to the president and it can be used to keep the public from panicking in times of crises, and also to protect citizens from criminals who are try to receive information. It can also be used to prevent legislative oversight on foreign policy, so that the president can cooperate with other nations as he pleases. It is necessary to justify the use of executive privilege, and there have been several circumstances where there was no proof to explain the action. The most controversial issue in our Nation’s history is when President Nixon attempted to use executive privilege to cover up the Watergate scandal. He tried to withhold information from congress to protect him, as well as his constituents from getting in trouble. He could not explain the need for secrecy of the situation. Mark Rozell explains in his book executive privilege that â€Å"confidentiality was the vehicle for the cover-up of the criminal acts and conspiracies by his aides† (2002, p.53). It also explains in the book how Nixon attempted to expand executive privilege to all executive branch officials (2002, p.65). If this were to happen then the executive branch would without a doubt become the most powerful branch of government because they could use executive privilege to trump almost  anything. The Watergate scandal had truly made citizens question the reliability and honesty of the federal government. This was the first time in American History where the president attempted to cheat the system solely for his own benefit. The disapproval rating of the national government at the time directly after the scandal had dropped dramatically, and legislators began to think how to limit executive powers of the president, but would not be able to affectively come up with a solution. The Clinton administration also refused to release to congressional investigators that the White House deemed subject to executive privilege†(Rozel 2002,p. 124). He was trying to cover up his personal affairs so that he would not look bad in the nation’s eyes, and although the court claimed that this use of executive privilege was improper, and he was impeached, he still remained to be in office. The power to interpret the power of executive privilege has simply gotten out of hand and there are some individuals who believe â€Å"the power to interpret the law, including the Constitution, is like any other power too important to vest in a single set of hands† (Paulsen 1994, p. 222). This is a power of the government that continues to be abused by the president and congress has tried to figure out a way to control this power, but has remained unsuccessful. Citizens may wonder why the other two branches are hesitant about limiting the president’s power to use executive privilege. One of the reasons is because as Lobel states â€Å"The constitutional concern with congressional interference with the President’s Command er in Chief power over warfare typically focuses on detailed congressional micromanagement of the conduct of war (2008, p. 401). It is an issue to take away the executive power of the president especially as commander in chief, because although congress might make a more affective decision to a situation in times of crises, the time it would take for senators and house representatives to agree on what to do would be too costly and timely that it would hardly be effective. Congress is just too big to come to a fast conclusion that the majority agrees upon. There have been several presidents, including Franklin Delanore Roosevelt, who used executive power to change policy that actually made a positive difference in society. Roosevelt portrayed his use of executive power when he made the New Deal. The executive power is an important factor in the political process but Its primary concern is what â€Å"Professors Bradley and Goldsmith call Executive  Branch unilateralism, a fear that Presidents acting on their own might make unsound decisions, engaging in too much (or too little) military action, intruding on liberties too much (or too little)†(Tushnet, 2005, p. 2674). Presidents have a lot of power, and they can choose to make decisions that are for the well-being of our country, but the decisions that they make on their own needs to be limited so that they do not make a decision that is unconstitutional or morally wrong. There have been many instances in our nation’s history where presidents have abused their power to implement their views on policer war, or to protect themselves. Some presidents have used their executive power to change America for the better, but recently this power is interpreted in such ways that can make the president more powerful than the other branches of government, especially during times of war or when there is a conflict on policy. Citizens should be able to decide whether the country should go to war or not, instead of outing that extremely dangerous power into the hands of one man. Yes it is true citizens elect the president but they can not tell how they are going to act once in office. Presidents use strategies to get elected so that once they are in office they can do what they actually believe should be done. There have been several attempted scandals and cover-ups from former presidents to keep them from getting in trouble and the executive power still remains to be misused. The president is the leader of the nation, and should act on behalf of all people, not just on behalf of himself and his constituents. The powers of the president need to be limited even more especially during times of crisis, so that there is not too much power placed in one pair of hands, and so that the views of all citizens can be heard.