Without having any background knowledge on the situation of Governor Bob Riley and his efforts to implement a sweeping tax reform on the State of Alabama, there are some significant things that caught my attention within the video. The State of Alabama was already experiencing major deficit and a lower class population which was severely affected by the suffering education system in turn contributing to a population which would have difficulty moving up in class. It seems that there were not many options available to the State of Alabama; either a sweeping reform which would significantly increase taxes (though Riley assigned these hikes to the wealthy) or significant budget cuts which would affect some already suffering divisions funded by the budget. In an effort to persuade the voters to support and vote yes for his reform, Bob Riley fell back on political jockeying. He used religion to encourage people to follow the plan he was pushing for. Within his political messages he stated the Christian way to handle the deficit was to tax the wealthy because his Testament reveals that the rich should take care of the less fortunate. Is political jockeying an appropriate method in government? Should it be present in the development of state budgets, executive activity, or legislative activity? I think to an extent it may sometimes be acceptable. But the means that should be used to persuade voters on policies should be facts and statistical information which supports what will occur with a policy. And perhaps more of an explanation of a personal opinion. I think the efforts used in Riley’s scenario almost placed a guilt on others. The interesting thing about his political jockeying efforts is that the population that was being targeted to benefit the most were the ones who seem to have opposed his reform during the voting process. .

1. Without having any background knowledge on the situation of
Governor Bob Riley and his efforts to implement a sweeping tax
reform on the State of Alabama, there are some significant
things that caught my attention within the video. The State of
Alabama was already experiencing major deficit and a lower
class population which was severely affected by the suffering
education system in turn contributing to a population which
would have difficulty moving up in class. It seems that there
were not many options available to the State of Alabama; either
a sweeping reform which would significantly increase taxes
(though Riley assigned these hikes to the wealthy) or significant
budget cuts which would affect some already suffering divisions
funded by the budget.
In an effort to persuade the voters to support and vote yes for
his reform, Bob Riley fell back on political jockeying. He used
religion to encourage people to follow the plan he was pushing
for. Within his political messages he stated the Christian way to
handle the deficit was to tax the wealthy because his Testament
reveals that the rich should take care of the less fortunate.
Is political jockeying an appropriate method in government?
Should it be present in the development of state budgets,
executive activity, or legislative activity? I think to an extent it
may sometimes be acceptable. But the means that should be
used to persuade voters on policies should be facts and
statistical information which supports what will occur with a
policy. And perhaps more of an explanation of a personal
opinion. I think the efforts used in Riley’s scenario almost
placed a guilt on others. The interesting thing about his political
jockeying efforts is that the population that was being targeted
to benefit the most were the ones who seem to have opposed his
reform during the voting process.