Respond to EACH post (6 total) 150 words each and using TWO reference sources EACH. Write whether or not you agree and why. How informative the post was . etc, THANK YOU POST ONE One of the issues that concerns me most is the balancing of the budget. On both the federal and state level, this issue is significant to me -- as a young citizen, I have many more years in the work force ahead of me. The economic impact of debt resulting from unbalanced budgets will impact not only my life, but the lives of upcoming generations for years to come. Furthermore, our nation cannot continue to be a world leader  if we constantly run up deficits. As an old proverb says, "the borrower is servant to the lender." I believe that efforts to counteract the nation's debt must start with the states. If the states cannot balance their budgets when they are constitutionally obliged to do so, there is little chance that the federal government will balance their budget when they are not required to do so. Fortunately, the actions of my own state legislature look promising. According to the current Massachusetts legislature's official website (found through the link in the lessons tab) , the budget was recently handled in the following manner: After the proposed budget for the fiscal year 2016 was finalized  by the governor on March 4th of this year, it was sent to the state house of representatives. The House Ways and Means Committee reviewed this proposal, amended it, and finalized their version of the budget on April 15th. The full House of Representatives then reviewed this version of the budget, and finalized it by May 4th. This final House version was sent to the Senate Ways and Means Committee (along with the governor's original proposal) to be considered and finalized. This being done by May 19th, the whole Senate then considered and finalized their version of the budget by May 22nd. The House and Senate versions were then submitted to a Conference Committee to iron out the differences between the two. The resulting version was finalized by July 7th, and sent back to both the House and Senate for approval. This final version was placed on the governor's desk for approval. On July 17th, Governor Charlie Baker extended his approval and signed the budget into effect. The 2016 budget was ultimately finalized July 30th, 2015. As required by the State's Constitution, the approved budget was balanced and managed to resolve a $1.2 billion deficit. The progress made by the Massachusetts legislature in this area of policy can serve as an example for the federal government, especially given the similarities of state legislatures to Congress (Fischer 2015). Works Cited/References The 189th General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. "Massachusetts Budget Process." State Budget. Accessed September 29, 2015. https://malegislature.gov/Budget/Process The 189th General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. "FY 2016 Final Budget." State Budget. Accessed Sept ...

1. Respond to EACH post (6 total) 150 words each and using TWO
reference sources EACH. Write whether or not you agree and
why. How informative the post was . etc, THANK YOU
POST ONE
One of the issues that concerns me most is the balancing of the
budget. On both the federal and state level, this issue is
significant to me -- as a young citizen, I have many more years
in the work force ahead of me. The economic impact of debt
resulting from unbalanced budgets will impact not only my life,
but the lives of upcoming generations for years to come.
Furthermore, our nation cannot continue to be a world leader if
we constantly run up deficits. As an old proverb says, "the
borrower is servant to the lender."
I believe that efforts to counteract the nation's debt must start
with the states. If the states cannot balance their budgets when
they are constitutionally obliged to do so, there is little chance
that the federal government will balance their budget when they
are not required to do so.
Fortunately, the actions of my own state legislature look
promising. According to the current Massachusetts legislature's
official website (found through the link in the lessons tab) , the
budget was recently handled in the following manner:
After the proposed budget for the fiscal year 2016 was
finalized by the governor on March 4th of this year, it was sent
to the state house of representatives. The House Ways and
Means Committee reviewed this proposal, amended it, and
finalized their version of the budget on April 15th. The full
House of Representatives then reviewed this version of the
budget, and finalized it by May 4th. This final House version
was sent to the Senate Ways and Means Committee (along with
the governor's original proposal) to be considered and finalized.
This being done by May 19th, the whole Senate then considered

2. and finalized their version of the budget by May 22nd. The
House and Senate versions were then submitted to a Conference
Committee to iron out the differences between the two. The
resulting version was finalized by July 7th, and sent back to
both the House and Senate for approval. This final version was
placed on the governor's desk for approval. On July 17th,
Governor Charlie Baker extended his approval and signed the
budget into effect. The 2016 budget was ultimately finalized
July 30th, 2015.
As required by the State's Constitution, the approved budget
was balanced and managed to resolve a $1.2 billion deficit. The
progress made by the Massachusetts legislature in this area of
policy can serve as an example for the federal government,
especially given the similarities of state legislatures to Congress
(Fischer 2015).
Works Cited/References
The 189th General Court of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. "Massachusetts Budget Process." State Budget.
Accessed September 29, 2015.
https://malegislature.gov/Budget/Process
The 189th General Court of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. "FY 2016 Final Budget." State Budget. Accessed
September 29, 2015.
https://malegislature.gov/Budget/CurrentBudget
mass.gov. 2015. "Governor Signs Fiscal Year 2016 Budget;
Enacts MBTA Reforms." Press Releases. Accessed September
23, 2015. http://www.mass.gov/governor/press-office/press-
releases/fy2016/governor-signs-fy2016-budget-enacts-mbta-
reforms.html
Fischer, Mark. 2015. "State Legislators." Week 4 Lesson.
Accessed September 28, 2015.
https://edge.apus.edu/portal/site/303280/page/c6e7c48f-d339-
4f6b-a390-caa8160b0059
POST TWO

3. One major issue that will be facing the voters of Ohio on Nov.
3rd will be the legalization of medicinal and recreational
marijuana. Ohio issue 3 "would legalize the limited sale and
use of recreational and medicinal marijuana and create 10
facilities with exclusive rights to commercially grow the drug
(Ballotpedia, 2015)." The issue would allow for persons over
the age of 21 to consume, grow, cultivate, and share up to eight
ounces of homegrown marijuana with up to four flowering
marijuana plants (Ballotpedia, 2015).
Issue 3 is different from other marijuana legalization bills
that have been passed in other states, and has caused a very
large amount of controversy. This bill actually writes a
monopoly into the state constitution; providing for 10
businesses to be the sole commercial producers of marijuana in
state of Ohio (Ballotpedia, 2015). Writing this provision into
the legislation has caused several interesting things to happen.
Issue 3 has pushed many people (such as myself) who may
have supported marijuana legalization firmly into the
opposition's camp. Myself, and many others, have the belief that
so long as you are not hurting anyone else with your actions,
then your actions should not be illegal. Alcohol is far more
dangerous than marijuana, but is currently completely legal.
However, many people in the same category as me will now be
voting "no" on this issue due to the simple fact of us not
wanting monopolies written into our state's constitution.
The monopoly provision in Issue 3 has also caused the
creation of Issue 2. Issue 2 (create by house and senate
Republicans) strictly prohibits the addition of monopolies into
the state constitution (Ballotpedia, 2015). If passed, Issue 2
would, in effect, cancel out issue 3. Governor Kasich stands
against Issue 3 and strongly supported the creation of Issue
2 (Ballotpedia, 2015).
November 3rd should be a rather interesting day in Ohio as
the voters determine the fate of these completely opposing
issues. If both measures are passed Issue 2 will be the one to
prevail. This is do to a current provision in Ohio's Constitution

4. which makes legislature sponsored amendments (ie. Issue 2)
take effect immediately, while citizen initiated amendments (ie.
Issue 3) have a waiting period of one month before
implementation ( Borchardt, 2015). If this this situation does
arise, then supporters of Issue 3 are expected to take their case
before the Ohio Supreme Court (Borchardt, 2015).
Ballotpedia. (2015). Ohio 2015 ballot measures - Ballotpedia.
Retrieved October 1, 2015, from
http://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_2015_ballot_measures
Borchardt, J. (2015, August 17). What happens if both
marijuana legalization and anti-monopoly amendments pass?
Retrieved October 1, 2015, from
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/08/what_happen
s_if_both_marijuana.html
POST THREE
Education is currently a hot topic in Oklahoma because it lags
behind its neighboring states when it comes to teacher pay. This
issue concerns me because I have three young kids who will be
starting school soon. Oklahoma is failing to pay its teachers in a
way that shows we respect the work they do. The average
teacher salary is $44,128, which makes it the second lowest in
the nation. For the past seven years, the starting teacher salary
has been frozen at $31,606. When inflation is taken into
account, that’s worth some $4,000 less than in 2007. (Blatt)
It hasn’t really been addressed, although some legislators have
tried. In 2014 and 2015 the Democratic Leaders in the senate
(first Sen. Sean Burrage then his successor, Sen. Randy Bass)
filed legislation that reworked the Oklahoma teacher pay scale
to give more pay increases and bonuses earlier in a teacher’s
career, since research shows that most teachers leave the
profession or move before they have taught for 5 years. SB 1944
(2014) and SB 681 (2015). The bill did not receive a hearing in
committee either year. In 2014, they proposed a $2000/year
raise for teachers, but the bill died in conference committee

5. after passing the House and Senate almost unanimously.
Speculation was that, in an election year, legislators wanted to
be able to say they voted for a teacher pay raise but knew they
didn’t have the money to fund it, so it died in committee. (HB
2642)
Senator Bryce Marlatt intends to file legislation in 2016 to give
Oklahoma teachers a pay increase in the coming legislative
session. Marlatt said the state’s teacher shortage has reached a
point of crisis, with school administrators across the state
struggling to fill teaching vacancies. The State Department of
Education has received an unusually high number of requests
for emergency teaching certifications, which allow candidates
who have not completed standard education and training
requirements to teach in state classrooms. (Griffin) Despite the
obvious need, the Chair of the House Appropriations and budget
committee has said that, in light of OK’s budget issues, teacher
pay raises are likely off the table in the 2016 legislative session.
(Robson)
University of Oklahoma President David Boren has suggested
increasing the state sales tax by one cent to boost school
funding and help solve what he is calling an education crisis.
Boren, formerly a governor and U.S. senator, is forming a
group, "Oklahoma's Children _ Our Future," with the goal of
collecting enough voter signatures to qualify a measure for the
November 2016 ballot to increase the tax. (Green)
Blatt, David (2014), Prosperity Policy: Respect, Journal Record,
http://journalrecord.com/2014/05/07/prosperity-policy-respect-
opinion/
Green, Rick (2015), OU president suggests penny sales tax to
boost education funding, http://newsok.com/article/5449071
Griffin, Joe (2015), Marlatt Pushes Across-the-board Teacher
Pay Hike, The McCarville
Report,http://mccarvillereport.com/archives/32525
House Bill 2642, Oklahoma State Legislature,
http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=hb2642&Sessi

6. on=1400
Robson, Nate (2015), House Budget Chair: Teacher Pay Raises
Are Probably Off the Table, Oklahoma Watch,
http://oklahomawatch.org/2015/09/21/house-budget-chair-
teacher-pay-raises-are-probably-off-the-table/
POST FOUR
This year an Indiana 19 year old was sentenced for sex crimes
and placed on a sex offender registry for having sexual relations
with a 14 year old across state lines, even though the girl lied
and told him she was 17. The teens met on the internet and had
consensual sex, the girl and her mother have stood in court and
stated they do not think Zach, the 19 year old, should be on the
sex offender registry, basically destroying his future. Further,
the judge stated, "That seems to be part of our culture now," he
said, according to a transcript. "Meet, have sex, hook up,
sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for
this whatsoever" (Phillips & Fitzpatrick, 2015), which in my
opinion goes against Amendment Six of the Bill of Rights
because he is not being impartial.
However, the bigger picture, as a whole here is amendment
eight, which does not allow unusual punishments. This does not
just apply to the above stated case, but as a whole. Do we really
need to be destroying kids lives because they made a mistake
and had consensual sex with someone that did not make the age
of consent yet? Seems silly to me! A lot of people probably
could have been arrested and convicted of a similar crime.
However, there are teens that do, in my opinion, qualify to be
on a sex offender registry, but those are ones that truly
committed a sex crime, not someone that had consensual sex.
Admittedly, he shouldn’t have done it and should have
considered the consequences, but this is a clear example of over
criminalization that is taking our nation by storm. As discussed
in several of the required readings this week we are at point in

7. society where we are making laws that are hurting people and
society more than actually helping society as a whole (Larkin,
2013). Is it really worth the tax dollars of two states to monitor
a teen that had consensual sex with someone? In my opinion it
is not.
To fix this problem we need to change sex offender laws, I am
not saying we do not need sex offender laws, because by far we
do and overall I support them, for true offenders. There should
not be a one size fits all response to the sex offender laws and
who gets put on the registry. Fixing this will solve lots of over
criminalization towards teens of similar circumstances.
References:
Larkin JR, P.J. (2013). Public Choice Theory and
Overcriminalization. Harvard Journal Of Law & Public Policy.
36(2). 715-793
Phillips, K., & Fitzpatrick, D. (2015, August 4). Teen's plight:
From dating app to sex offender registry - CNN.com. Retrieved
September 30, 2015, from
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/03/us/dating-app-sex-offender-
registry/
POST FIVE
Criminal justice policies are always a delicate balance between
personal liberty and the desire to reduce crime.
· Select and discuss an example of a criminal justice policy that
comes in conflict with constitutional protections.
A criminal justice policy that I will be discussing is the DUI
Sobriety Checkpoints. A DUI Sobriety Checkpoint is when the
local police force sets up a random checkpoint to search for
drunk drivers. The thought process behind the checkpoint is to
prevent or catch drunk drivers. The first sobriety checkpoint
was in 1986 in Michigan when the Michigan State Police

8. decided to install sobriety checkpoints along certain roads
where there was a high number of drunk drivers.
While some people may see a sobriety checkpoint and think it is
a good deterrent and identification of drunk drivers to prevent
them from harming other people others may look at a sobriety
checkpoint and see a violation of the fourth amendment (Adams,
2012). The fourth amendment states “The right of the people to
be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by
oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” This would
mean that American Citizens are protected against unreasonable
search and seizure. It is the fourth amendment that prevents
police officers from randomly pulling over vehicles or randomly
entering into private residences without probable cause (Fourth
Amendment). So what is the difference from a police officer
entering your house or stopping you while driving to ensure you
are following all required laws?
Most people may not argue against sobriety checkpoints as it is
seen as a drunk driving deterrence but when the public willingly
gives up this constitutional right for the good of the public then
what other rights are they willing to give up? Will you allow the
NSA to monitor your email and phone calls in order to
potentially stop another terrorist attack? What about allowing
the government to monitor your bank records to prevent drug
and/or sex trafficking?
Once we start giving up our rights for the good of the public (to
prevent others from committing crimes) it is only a matter of
time before more rights are stripped away for the good of the
public.
References:
Adams, Patrick. (2012). A Brief History of Checkpoints (And
What to do About Them). Retrieved from
http://www.independent.org/pdf/working_papers/80_checkpoint
s.pdf

9. Fourth Amendment. Legal Information Institute. Cornell
University Law School. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment
POST SIX
The Conflict
One of the most controversial policies today is the
mandatory sentencing of young offenders to Life Without Parole
(LWOP) for serious crimes, such as murder (Handelman, 2012).
Essentially, children under the age of 18 can be tried “as adults”
if they commit major crimes. This is ironic because a U.S.
Department of Justice report reveals that only 23% of adult
criminals convicted of murder receive Life Without Parole
(Durose & Langen, 2003). About 2% of adults are sentenced to
death, while the majority receive sentences averaged at 20 years
and 8 months (Durose & Langen, 2003). Even more disturbing
is the fact that the same report reveals adult inmates only serve
about 55% of their sentences, due to incentives, such as time
credits earned for good behavior and early parole board
hearings (Durose & Langen, 2003). If children are tried as
adults, why are their sentences so much longer?
In 2012 the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that
mandatory sentencing of children to LWOP violated the 8th
Amendemment, stating that to do so would be considered “cruel
and unusual punishment” (Handelman, 2012). The decision
affected 39 states, which are expected to amend their statues in
response to the ground-breaking ruling (Handelman, 2012). The
monumental decision may have been inspired by a 2010
government program called “Close to Home”, which supported
the move of young offenders to facilities in their own
communities rather than detention centers out of state
(Handelman, 2012). Another push might have been the national
advocacy group, “Campaign for Youth Justice”, which put forth
a series of reforms designed to keep youths awaiting trial away
from adult jails (Handelman, 2012). In an interview for the New

10. York Times, Marsha Levick, the deputy director and chief
counsel of the Juvenile Law Center, pointed out that her client,
a 10–year old boy accused of murder, was given coloring books
while he awaited his trial in an adult prison, highlighting how
different his needs are from those around him (Koslowska,
2014). She explained why the policy needed reform, saying,
“Children require special care to stay on course
developmentally, to enable successful return to their family and
community, and to reduce further offending in the future”
(Koslowska, 2014).
Juvenile Judge Elizabeth Crnkovich sees the other side of
the coin, arguing, "Uniformly in our communities, more and
more young people are engaging in more and more dangerous
and serious behavior. And I see as a result of that, more
prosecutors and the citizens generally seem to be exerting more
pressure to charge these youths as adults” (Khan, 2010). Even
though public concern about crime rates declined during the
1990’s, concern about murder did not, especially when crime
rates began to climb again after 2001 (Peters, 2007). Statistics
back this up – between 1985 and 2007 juvenile jurisdiction
cases jumped higher by 44% (Durose & Langen, 2003).
According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, 10% of all homicides are now committed by
offenders under the age of 18 (Khan, 2010). Approximately
33,000 juveniles are arrested by the FBI on suspicion of violent
crimes every year (Khan, 2010). Politicians are slow to
advocate for change in the judicial system because they do not
want to appear “soft” on crime or policies that protect criminals
(Peters, 2007). For people like Debbie Houk, whose pregnant
daughter was viciously murdered by her 11-year old stepson,
LWOP is more than fair. In testimony at his trial she stated,
“The day Kenzie was murdered, the whole family was served
with a life sentence… There are a 4-year-old and 7-year-old
who are serving life right now. They are never going to see their
mom" (Chen, 2010).

11. How Should it Be Resolved?
I find it a bit telling that the United States is the only
country in the world where a person under the age of 18 can be
sentenced to Life Without Parole (Knafo, 2013). There are
currently 2,500 young offenders in jail that have been sentenced
to stay there for the rest of their lives, while adult murderers are
released from prison after serving less than 20 years (Knafo,
2013). In my opinion, if a child commits a heinous crime, they
should indeed be treated like adults. They did the crime, and
they should serve the time, whether that’s 8 years, 10 or 20, but
not 40, 50, or 80 years more than an adult would. That indeed
would be “cruel and unusual punishment” as the 8th Amendment
suggests. Not only is it illogical to punish a child more than an
adult, but scientific tests have proven over and over that a
child’s impulses, emotions, and behavior are not fully
developed until the age of 25 (Kozlowska, 2014). If
rehabilitation is ever going to work, it makes sense to offer it to
those who have the best chance at mental and emotional growth.
Resources:
Chen, F. (2010). Boy, 12, faces grown up murder charges. CNN.
Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/10/pennsylvania.young.m
urder.defendant/
Durose, M., & Langen, P. (2003). Felony Sentences in State
Courts, 2000. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice
Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc00.pdf
Handelman, S. (2012). The Ten Most Significant Criminal
Justice Stories of 2012. The Crime Report. Retrieved from
http://www.thecrimereport.org/news/inside-criminal-
justice/2012-12-the-ten-most-significant-criminal-justice-
stories-of
Khan, H. (2010). Juvenile Justice: Too Young for Life in
Prison? ABC News. Retrieved from
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/life-prison-juvenile-offenders-

12. adult-courts/story?id=11129594
Knafo, S. (2013). Here Are All The Countries Where Children
Are Sentenced To Die In Prison. Huffington Post. Retrieved
from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/20/juvenile-life-
without-parole_n_3962983.html
Koslowska, H. (2014). Should a Child Offender Be Treated as
an Adult? New York Times. Retrieved from http://op-
talk.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/should-a-child-offender-be-
treated-as-an-adult/
Peters, G. (2007). American public policy: promise and
performance, 7th edition. Books 24/7. Retrieved from
http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/toc.aspx?