Brief History of the State of the Union Address

The State of the Union address is a speech delivered annually by the President the United States to a joint session of the United States Congress. The State of the Union Address is not, however, delivered during the first year of a new president’s first term in office. In the address, the president typically reports on the general condition of the nation in the areas of domestic and foreign policy issues and outlines his or her legislative platform and national priorities. Delivery of the State of the Union address fulfills Article II, Sec. 3, of the U.S. Constitution requiring that â€Å"The President shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.†Ã‚   As a policy of the doctrine of separation of powers, the Speaker of the House must invite the president to present the State of the Union Address in person. In lieu of an invitation, the address can be delivered to Congress in written form. Since January 8, 1790, when George Washington personally delivered the first annual message to Congress, presidents have from time to time, been doing just that in what has become known as the State of the Union Address. The speech was shared with the public only through newspapers until 1923 when President Calvin Coolidges annual message was broadcast on radio. Franklin D. Roosevelt first used the phrase State of the Union in 1935, and in 1947, Roosevelts successor Harry S. Truman became the first president to deliver a televised address. Extreme Security Required As the largest annual political event in Washington, D.C., the State of the Union Address requires extraordinary security measures, as the president, vice president, Cabinet members, Congress, Supreme Court, military leaders and diplomatic corps are all together at the same time. Declared a â€Å"National Special Security Event,† thousands of federal security personnel—including a number of military troops—are brought in to guard the area. The Great State of the Union Controversy of 2019 The question of when, where, and how the 2019 State of the Union Address would be delivered became a hot political mess on January 16, when during the longest federal government shutdown in history, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California) asked President Trump to either delay his 2019 address or deliver it to Congress in writing. In doing so, Speaker Pelosi cited security concerns caused by the shutdown. â€Å"Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29,† wrote Pelosi in a letter to the White House. However, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen stated that the Secret Service—then working without pay due to the shutdown—was fully prepared and willing to provide security during the address. â€Å"The Department of Homeland Security and the US Secret Service are fully prepared to support and secure the State of the Union,† she wrote in a tweet. The White House suggested that Pelosi’s action was actually a form of political retaliation for President Trump’s reluctance to negotiate with the House on the its refusal to authorize $5.7 billion in funding requested by Trump  for construction of the controversial Mexican border wall—the dispute that had triggered the government shutdown.   On January 17, President Trump responded telling Pelosi via a letter that her congressional delegation’s planned secret seven-day, secret â€Å"excursion† to Brussels, Egypt and Afghanistan â€Å"has been postponed† until the shutdown ended, unless she chose to travel using commercial aviation. Since the non-publicized trip included Afghanistan—an active war zone—travel had been arranged aboard a U.S. Air Force plane. Trump had earlier canceled his own upcoming trip to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, due to the shutdown. On January 23, President Trump turned down Speaker Pelosi’s request to delay his State of the Union Address. In a letter to Pelosi, Trump asserted his intention to deliver the address on Tuesday, January 29 in the House chamber as originally scheduled. â€Å"I will be honoring your invitation, and fulfilling my Constitutional duty, to deliver important information to the people and Congress of the United States of America regarding the State of our Union,† Trump wrote. â€Å"I look forward to seeing you on the evening on January 29th in the Chamber of the House of Representatives,† he continued, adding, â€Å"It would be so very sad for our Country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!† Speaker Pelosi has the option of blocking Trump by refusing to call a vote on the resolution required to formally invite the president to before a joint session of Congress in the House chamber. Lawmakers have not yet considered such a resolution, an action typically taken for granted.   Speaker Pelosi quickly returned this historic struggle of separation of powers back to where it started on January 16 by informing President Trump that she would not allow him to deliver his speech in the House chamber as long as the government shutdown continued. President Trump responded by indicating that he would announce plans for an alternative State of the Union address at a later date. A White House spokesperson suggested options including a speech from the Oval Office of the White House or at a Trump rally away from Washington. In a late night tweet on January 23, President Trump conceded to Speaker Pelosi, stating that he would delay his State of the Union Address until after the government shutdown had ended. â€Å"As the Shutdown was going on, Nancy Pelosi asked me to give the State of the Union Address. I agreed. She then changed her mind because of the Shutdown, suggesting a later date. This is her prerogative—I will do the Address when the Shutdown is over,† Trump tweeted, adding, â€Å"I look forward to giving a great State of the Union Address in the near future!† The President continued that he would not seek an alternative location for the annual speech â€Å"because there is no venue that can compete with the history, tradition and importance of the House Chamber.† In a tweet of her own, Speaker Pelosi said she was hopeful that President Trump’s concession meant that he would back a bill already before the House that would temporarily fund the federal agencies affected by the shutdown. On Friday January 25, President Trump reached an agreement with Democrats on a short-term spending bill that did not include any funding for the border wall but allowed the government to temporarily reopen until February 15. During the delay, negotiations over border wall funding were to continue, with President Trump stressing that unless funding for the wall was included in the final budget bill, he would either allow the government shutdown to resume or declare a national emergency allowing him to reallocate existing fund for the purpose. On Monday, January 28, with the shutdown at least temporarily ended, Speaker Pelosi invited President Trump to give his State of the Union address on February 5 in the House Chamber. â€Å"When I wrote to you on January 23rd, I stated that we should work together to find a mutually agreeable date when government has reopened to schedule this years State of the Union address,† Pelosi stated in a letter provided by her office. â€Å"Therefore, I invite you to deliver your State of the Union address before a Joint Session of Congress on February 5, 2019 in the House Chamber.† President Trump accepted Pelosi’s invitation a few hours later. The Address At Last President Trump finally delivered his second State of the Union address on February 5th in the House Chamber. In his 90-minute speech, the president sounded a tone of bipartisan unity, calling on Congress to â€Å"reject the politics of revenge, resistance and retribution — and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise and the common good.† Without mentioning the record 35-day government shutdown that had delayed the address, he told lawmakers he was â€Å"ready to work with you to achieve historic breakthroughs for all Americans† and by working to â€Å"govern not as two parties but as one nation.† In addressing funding for his controversial border security wall that had caused the shutdown, the president came short of declaring a national emergency, but did insist he would â€Å"get it built.† Trump also stressed his administration’s economic success, noting that â€Å"no one has benefited more from our thriving economy than women, who have filled 58 percent of the new jobs created in the last year.† The president added, All Americans can be proud that we have more women in the workforce than ever before — and exactly one century after Congress passed the constitutional amendment giving women the right to vote, we also have more women serving in Congress than ever before.† The statement brought a standing ovation and chants of â€Å"USA!† from female lawmakers, many of whom had been elected based on their platforms opposing the Trump administration. On foreign policy, Trump touted his efforts to denuclearize North Korea, claiming that â€Å"if I had not been elected president of the United States we would right now, in my opinion, be in a major war with North Korea.† He also revealed that he would meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un for a second summit on February 27 and 28 in Vietnam.   Washington Hit the Essentials Rather than outlining his administrations agenda for the nation, as has become the modern practice, Washington used that first State of the Union Address to focus on the very concept of the union of states that had so recently been created. Indeed, establishing and maintaining the union was the primary goal of Washingtons first administration. While the Constitution specifies no time, date, place, or frequency of the address, presidents have typically delivered the State of the Union Address in late January, soon after Congress has re-convened. Since Washingtons first address to Congress, the date, frequency, method of delivery and content have varied greatly from president to president. Jefferson Puts it in Writing Finding the whole process of a speech to a joint session of Congress a little too kingly, Thomas Jefferson chose to carry out his constitutional duty in 1801 by sending details of his national priorities in separate, written notes to the House and Senate. Finding the written report a great idea, Jeffersons successors in the White House followed suit and it would be 112 years before a president again spoke the State of the Union Address. Wilson Set the Modern Tradition In a controversial move at the time, President Woodrow Wilson revived the practice of spoken delivery of the State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress in 1913. Content of the State of the Union Address In modern times, the State of the Union Address serves as both a conversation between the president and Congress and, thanks to television, an opportunity for the president to promote his partys political agenda for the future. From time to time, the address has actually contained historically important information. In 1823, James Monroe explained what became known as the Monroe Doctrine, calling on powerful European nations to end their practice of western colonization.Abraham Lincoln told the nation he wanted to end slavery in 1862.In 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke of the four freedoms.Just four months after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush shared his plans for a war on terror in 2002. Whatever its content, presidents traditionally hope their State of the Union Addresses will heal past political wounds, promote bipartisan unity in Congress and win support for his legislative agenda from both parties and the American people. From time to time... that actually happens.

Defining The American Poet Through Leaves Of Grass Walt...

nathan Reed Andrew Walker AML3041-0001 02 August 2015 Defining the American Poet through Leaves of Grass: Walt Whitman Walt Whitman s Leaves of Grass define the aspects of democratic poetry. Early reviews of Leaves of Grass claim that Whitman is the original American poet. This is due to how Whitman practices the democratic view of human equality. For example, if we take a look at a review published in the New York Daily Times that was written in 1856, less than a year after leaves of grass was published, the author claims about Whitman â€Å"We are much mistaken if, after all, he does not yet contribute something to American literature which shall awaken wonder.† The reviewer recognized early on of Whitman’s genius and was able to predict Whitman’s influence on American poetry. Charles Dana of the New York Daily Times writes a review of Leaves of Grass in July of 1855, just months after its first publication. In the review Dana states â€Å"He vouchsafes, before introducing us to his poetry, to enlighten our benighted minds as to the true function of the American poet.†(D ana, Charles A. Review of Leaves of Grass (1855)This observation, suggests that in American politics, culture, and prior literary sources we were missing this American vision. By analyzing the democracy in Walt Whitman’s poetry it is important to first analyze the origins of democracy. Language in the reviews of Leaves of Grass in the mid-nineteenth-century reflect a sense of nostalgia. Society was nostalgicShow MoreRelatedAn Inexplicable Nature of the American Identity Essay1242 Words   |  5 Pagesidentification enamored the American people. Progress was inevitable as was cultural definition. But as time progressed, the feeling of unlimited strength, time and space transformed into something that, for better or worse, was no longer shared by later poets. Those of the â€Å"New World† came to realize that their world never really managed to leave behind the faults of the â€Å"Old.† Societal tension rose as different poets and authors struggled to pin down the direction of American culture and its idealsRead MoreWalt Whitman And Allen Ginsbergs Poetry1332 Words   |  6 PagesYou say what you want to say when you don t care who s listening.† Walt Whitman was a brilliant writer of his time, a writer that created a voice for the masses to no longer be a mass, but an individual. He was truly a pioneer of his generation, a revolutionary in thought, and this is not his quote. Due to his paralleled lifestyle to Walt Whitman, Allen Ginsberg learned and drew inspiration from such works as â€Å"Leaves of Grass† to apply towards his own book, â€Å"Howl and Other Poems† in the 1960s.Read MoreThe Starbucks Diaries : Discovering And Interpreting The Cold War Between Walt Whitman And Sherman Alexie3507 Words   |  15 Pages Shayeree Chakraborty Ms. Wafa Hamid American Literature 8 October 2014  ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬___________________________________________________________________________ The Starbucks Diaries: Discovering and Interpreting The Cold War between Walt Whitman and Sherman Alexie One of the most interesting dynamics of any cold war is perhaps its very existence, as difficult to point out as its predicament. The very idea of war associates itself with a certain traditional idea of glory butRead More Comparing and Contrasting Self-Awareness in the Works of Emerson, Whitman and Poe2170 Words   |  9 PagesDefining Self-Awareness in the works of Emerson, Whitman and Poe Literature in the American Renaissance influenced the Romantic sentiment that prevailed during this period: the emergence of the individual. This materialization evolved out of the Age of Reason, when the question of using reason (a conscious state) or faith (an unconscious state) as a basis for establishing a set of beliefs divided people into secular and non-secular groups. Reacting to the generally submissive attitudes predominantRead MoreWalt Whitman: An Omnisexual Poet2586 Words   |  11 Pages The homosexual themes displayed in Walt Whitman’s works, especially in his most famous collection of poems Leaves of Grass, raise the question of his own sexuality. Many of his poems depicted affection and sexuality in a simple, personal manner, causing nineteenth century Americans to view them as pornographic and obscene. Based on this poetry, Whitman is usually assumed to be homosexual, or at least bisexual. However, this assumption does not account for major influences of his writing suchRead MoreEssay on Whitmans Music as a Means of Expression2414 Words   |  10 Pages In his verses, Walt Whitman eradicates divisions of individual entities while simultaneously celebrating their unique characteristics. All components of the universe are united in a metaphysical intercourse, and yet, are assigned very distinct qualities so as to keep their identities intact. Often times, Whitman demonstrates these conceptions through elements of song. â€Å"Walt Whitman caroled throughout his verse. For the Bard of Democracy, as America came to call our great poet, music was a centralRead MoreHow Fa Has the Use of English Language Enriched or Disrupted Life and Culture in Mauritius15928 Words   |  64 Pagesads not by this site [pic] [pic] ENGL 103A: American Literature 1789-1900 (Archived) Dept of English, UC Santa Barbara (Summer 2011) †¢ ABOUT †¢ ASSIGNMENTS †¢ SYLLABUS †¢ DISCUSSION †¢ CLOSE READINGS CLOSE READINGS Post your close reading posts here. Share this: †¢ Twitter †¢ Facebook †¢ Like this: Like Loading... [pic] 26 Comments on â€Å"CLOSE READINGS† 1. [pic]John Cooper says: July 13, 2011 at 3:36 pm Emily Dickenson’s poem â€Å"Because

Buddhism and Christianity Free Essays

Buddhist and Christians are among the world’s larges religions. They are characterized by different teachings and practices that they observe. They both have different origins and beliefs that form part of their structures. We will write a custom essay sample on Buddhism and Christianity or any similar topic only for you Order Now The two characteristics that I am going to look at are: the ethical teachings of both Christians and Buddhists and their religious scriptures. Ethical teachings: Ethics is one of the issues which stand out among the teachings of both religions. The two religions emphasize on the need for proper ethics through believes, practices and worship. Despite the emphasis that they both put on ethics, differences emerge between the two in their theoretical and practical aspects. There are several areas in which the differences can be evident such as: their ideas concerning sin, the notion and model of ethics together with the codes of ethics. Sin: in both religions, human beings are regarded as sinful beings. Sin is the basis of religious doctrines and without it: it is possible that ethical religious believes could not be there. According to both religions, human beings are characterized by sin, imperfection and guilty. It is only through moral religious principles that one can be made pure and perfect. The births of both Buddha and Christ were good news to both the Buddhist and Christians respectively. Jesus was born to bring salvation and love from God while Buddha was born to bring the message of wisdom and compassionate to mankind as well as show them the path to enlightenment (King, P. 3). Christians believe that all human beings are connected to the first sin in the Garden of Eden by the first parents: Adam and Eve. This sin has over the years been passed down from one generation to the other. This story explains the origin of sin which according to the story was human disobedience to God. Therefore, Adam and Eve went against God’s wishes when they decided to ignore the orders He had given them of not eating the fruit they ate. Because God is perceived as a model for perfect ethics, then going against his wishes will be the same as sinning. Therefore, according to Christians, sin is not only the original sin that has been passed down though generations but also the heart’s disobedience in following or practicing the divine morals, ethical codes and spirit. Hence the base of Christian ethics is not only believing in Christ but also living according to his teachings (Locke, P. 237). In Buddhism, there is no that kind of â€Å"original sin† as in Christianity. They instead believe that every individual is born of craving and ignorance which results to human beings being born in a cycle referred to as samsara: a birth and death cycle. It is only through enlightenment that an individual can overcome craving and ignorance. According to Buddha’s personal experiences, sin is originally caused by impunity, bad karmas and imperfection: there is no any other source. In the Buddhist structure, it is believed that sin originates from oneself and can therefore be overcome by oneself. Therefore, the basis of Buddhist’s ethical teachings is the mind: that sin originates from the mind and can only be overcome by the mind (Smart, p. 77). Model and ethical notion: both Christianity and Buddhism take the perfect model of ethics to be an important aspect of religious morality. Ethical teachings of both religion focus on Christ and Buddha because both of their lives were full of noble virtues and love that cannot be compared with any other. These models are the foundations of both religions although there are different ideas concerning ethics between them (Locke, P. 237). For Christians, love (agape) is the basis of moral life which is shown clearly in the life and teachings of Christ as well as in the bible. They believe that God is love and it is what constitutes his heart. Therefore, it is through his grace and forgiveness of human sins that ethical values can be cultivated in individuals and salvation can be attained. Christian moral standards are basically established on sin, forgiveness, belief and the love of God. They also believe that belief must go with actions: a Christian can best be recognized by his/her deeds as compared to what he/she says. Contrary to the Christians, Buddhist morality is not based upon the power or the life of Buddha but instead it is based upon his teachings about â€Å"cause and effects†. They believe that an individual’s positive or negative attitude is determined by his/her actions and thoughts. Buddha taught people to: â€Å"make an island of yourself, make yourself your refuge; there is no other refuge. Make truth your island, make truth your refuge; there is no other refuge,† (King, P. 3) Therefore, in both religions: human beings are perceived to be sinful. The mind’s purity is perceived to be the basic step in ethics through which suffering and impunity which has been created in individuals can be overcome. If the overall aim is transformation from the evil nature to divine: then Christians could achieve it through uniting with Christ while Buddhist could achieve the same by observing Buddhahood. Religious scriptures: According to the interviews I conducted with a Christian and a Buddhist leader, I found out the following about their religious scriptures: Teachings concerning God: conservative Buddhists’ scriptures teach nothing about existence of God. It does not affirm or deny existence of God and does not state who is divine not even Gautama himself. Liberal ones do not put emphasis on this concept but they pay homage to Buddha, Buddhist teachers, deities and ancestors. They worship using images, bow before them, give offerings to them, chant and pray to them. Although earlier Buddhism did not recognize Buddha to be omniscient, they now consider him and other teachers to be omniscience. Contrary to Buddhist scripture teachings, Christians refer to the bible that teaches them that God exists. It states that the fact that there is a universe is an indication that there is a God somewhere. Psalm 19:1 – â€Å"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork. † Romans 1:20 – Though God is invisible, His power and divinity can be seen through the things that are made. The only way the universe could exist is because there is a supernatural being powerful and wiser than anybody else (Scott, p. 87). Purpose of religion: The purpose of religion was to better man’s relationship with God. Buddhism scriptures do not teach anything about God while the bible teaches that the whole purpose of humanity is to serve and have a better relationship with Christ. Ecclesiastes 12:13 – The whole duty of man is to fear God and keep his commands. Ephesians 1:7-9 – The will and purpose of God was to redeem man by the forgiveness of sins through the blood of Jesus. Teaching about a true and supreme God: Buddhism teachings allow for worship of many gods while the biblical teachings forbid the worship of more than one God. Matthew 4:10 – â€Å"Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him ONLY shalt thou serve. † We are not to worship many gods, nor any god other than Jehovah [2 Corinthians 6:18; Colossians 1:19-22]. Destiny of man: Buddhist scriptures teach about reincarnation (rebirth), Karma which teaches that the future lives are influenced by current actions and that what happens currently is the result of previous actions and nirvana which teaches that the ultimate purpose of man is to get out of the birth and rebirth cycle characterized by suffering. While the bible teaches that: an individual only lives once and physically dies once after which there will be resurrection, judgment and eternal rewards. 1 Corinthians 15:22, 23 – All die as a result of Adam’s sin; as a result of Jesus, all live again. Resurrection is the opposite of death; hence the spirit is reunited with the body. Matthew 25:31-46 – The wicked go to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life. Buddhist scriptures do not teach about death and resurrection (Scott, p. 87). Suffering: Buddhist scriptures teach that suffering is essential in life, it’s brought about by human desires and they can be eliminated by getting rid of earthly desires by not wanting to exist as an individual. The bible teachings teach that suffering is part of life; it is a consequence of sin physical desires are neither good nor bad, it depends on how you seek to satisfy them, an individual’s desire to exist is not bad and it’s through trust in God that you can be able to overcome suffering and not through defeating yourself. The Buddhist teaching of not to desire to be an individual can be considered to blasphemy God’s work by Christians. Works cited King, L. Winston. Buddhism and Christianity: Some Bridges of Understanding. Taylor and Francis. 2008, p. 3. Locke, A. Kenneth, â€Å"The Foundation for Ethical Behavior: A Christian perspective for a dialogue with Buddhism,† Hsi Lai Journal of Humanistic Buddhism 3 (2002): 327. Scott, Archibald. Buddhism and Christianity; A Parallel and a Contrast, Being the Croall Lectures for 1889-90. General Books LLC. (2009): p. 87. Smart, Ninian. Buddhism and Christianity: rivals and allies. University of Hawaii Press. (1993): p. 77. How to cite Buddhism and Christianity, Papers

Mobile Phones Boon or Bane free essay sample

Since the dawn of human civlisation man has been creating things to meet his needs. Mobile phone is one such , portable electronic device. They are now inexpensive, easy to use, comfortable and equipped with almost every latest feature we desire such as calculater internet games camer and many more. They are also known as lifesavers as they can help people in emergencies. For instance disaster response crews can locate trapped or injured people using the signals from their mobile phones or the small detonator of flare in the battery of every cell phone; and for students also they are equally applicable .A coin has 2 faces. Likewise,mobile phones has its own demerits. i t has severe health implications. Symptoms caused such as headache, earaches, blurring of vision by the radiation of mobile phones are one of the most argued problems. These invisible radiations destroy the cells located in ear and head region resulting in tumors. We will write a custom essay sample on Mobile Phones Boon or Bane or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma Moreover Psychiatrists believe that mobile phone addiction is becoming one of the biggest non-drug addictions . Teenagers are engaged on their mobile phones all the time, no matter on phone calls, using SMS text messages, personalizing the mobile phones with ringtones and pictures etc. . Its use in impropriate places causes disturbance, such as in classrooms.. Mobile phones with camera are causing privacy problems such as using it as a hidden camera to take pictures and making videos. last but not the least The already so-little piece of time we leave to our soul in the busy modern life is now occupied by this superficial guy These myriad wonders are created for gud not to be used in the wrong way. understanding its real worth may reduce its misuse.