Are Dogs Getting the Attention They Deserve? Essay -- Symbols Wealth A

Are Dogs Getting the Attention They Deserve? It used to be that you could tell just about how poor a family was by how many dogs they had. If they had one, they were probably doing all right, two dogs meant that the couple were dog lovers, but if a citizen kept three, you could begin to suspect he didn’t own much else. What type of dogs these were also lead people to believe their social status in society. (Hoagland, 1995) Would this lead people to believe that this is true? In my opinion, No it does not. In Edward Hoagland’s â€Å"Dogs, and the Tug of Life†, he describes the significance of dogs in our lives, both as social symbols and as reminders of why dogs are taken for granted. He explains why having a dog is giving people the wrong impression and how people need to know the true significance. Are dogs a symbol of social status? Hoagland wholeheartedly agrees with this argument, as stated in the first paragraph, as well some people do too. I, personally, would have to agree with this term of being a social status. Dogs have always been part of many homes. But nobody stops to think that the kind of dog one owns, signifies what type of lifestyle that person lives. This bit of information is incorrect. Just because a family is wealthy, does not mean they are spending lots of money on high class dogs. Who’s to say they aren’t taking in every stray dog that mosies up to their house? Maybe richer people do more with their dog, such as spend lots of money on grooming, feeding, and showing off, but it doesn’t mean the dog is always a pure bred, one of a kind. People are beginning to take dogs for granted. They feel that it is just an animal with no feelings and don’t consider what kind of role a dog really ... ...er of dogs owned and the income of the family have nothing to do with each other. For the most part, Hoagland’s argument was very informative and significant. It is agreed that people are trying to use dogs as a sign of social status, but people who know the real meaning of having a dog, know this is incorrect and falsely justified. Dogs are being taken for granted, and people need to realize the importance of why they have dogs as pets. Dogs are more than lazy animals, dumb creatures, or ways of showing off to others. Dogs don’t help with social status, rather they help with companionship, loyalty, trust, and a bodyguard. In my opinion, dogs don’t help determine how poor or wealthy a family is. Maybe people spend lots or little money on a dog, but that just depends on what type of people they are, not what type the dog is. Nothing more, nothing less.

The Spanish Armada :: Papers

The Spanish Armada The Spanish Armada was a fleet assembled and dispatched by King Phillip II of Spain in attempt to invade England in 1588. His attempt was unsuccessful. Queen Elizabeth I of England held the defeat of the armada as one of her greatest achievements, assisting the decline of the Spanish Empire. The armada had a mission of both political and religious aims. King Phillip, the leader of the Roman Catholic Spain, was not able to stop a revolt in of his Protestant subjects in the Netherlands, a revolt that began in 1566, aided by Protestant England. By 1586, Phillip had decided that he could not defeat the Dutch until he had defeated England first. Long time religious rivalry between Spain and England was hoped to be resolved by King Phillip in the dethroning of Queen Elizabeth, reconverting England to Catholicism. The plan for conquering had begun. This plan consisted of the coordination of a fleet to sail from Spain and an army from the Netherlands to create a simultaneous invasion of Engl and. His force of 130 ships and more than 30,000 men was to be led by Alonso Perà ©z Guzmà ¡n, duke of Medina- Sidonia. England was aware of the Spanish plans, attacking it at Cà ¡diz, Spain in 1587, succeeding in delaying it for a year. By July of 1588, the armada was spotted off the coast of England on July 29. Lord Charles Howard intercepted it with a larger English fleet near Plymouth, and for the next week made small attacks on the Spanish in battles off of Plymouth, Portland Bill, and the Isle of Wight. Unable to break the Spanish Armada, they waited for their chance at a big blow. The opportunity finally arrived when the armada anchored near Calais, France, hoping to join troops scheduled to sail from the Netherlands. Ingeniously, Howard ordered ships set on fire to be sent against the armada, producing a panic that broke the Spanish formation. In the ensuing battle of Gravelines, on August 8, the Spanish were defeated by England and the armada sailed home with remaining s hips that were heavily damaged to Spain; 67 of the original 130 ships reached Spain, most in poor condition.

Fdi in Aviation

New Delhi, Sep 21 (IANS)  Civil Aviation Minister  Ajit Singh Friday said the government's open-sky policy for foreign investment in domestic airlines  has positively affected sentiments in the  aviation industry, but it is too early to say how much investment the sector would attract. â€Å"The sector is going through difficult times and is facing financial stress due to the overall economic slowdown. But the mood is upbeat now after we (government) allowed 49 percent FDI in airlines,† Singh told reporters on the sidelines of an Assocham event here. Time will tell how many  foreign airlines  are interested,† Singh added a day after the government notified that the foreign airlines can now pick up 49 per cent stake in domestic passenger carriers. Foreign carriers have so far not been allowed to directly invest in Indian carriers for security reasons, although 49 percent FDI by non-airline players was allowed. The  Indian airlines  sector has been going th rough a tough operating environment as high fuel and interest cost have hurt it. The government expects that the decision will help bring in more funds to the airlines who have been cold shouldered by banks.The decision is particularly expected to help airlines like Kingfisher to gain capital and resume full services. Other Indian carrier's require funds for expansion and to gain market share. International airlines  have welcomed the  government move. Ccarriers like Singapore Airlines, Emirates and the  International Airlines Group  (IAG), which owns British Airways and Iberia, have said they do not have any immediate plans to invest in India. Virgin Atlantic and Lufthansa also said they were not keen on investing in India at the moment.Middle East airline Etihad Airways has said it will wait for all the modalities of the new reforms are clear. Several such overseas carriers contacted by IANS and aviation watchers said high jet fuel cost, an extremely price-sensitive market , huge debt of the carriers and contracting domestic passenger traffic are the reasons deterring them to invest. Fdi in aviation [pic] After allowing foreign airlines to buy stake in domestic carriers, the civil aviation ministry is considering issuing around 30-40 licences for non-scheduled operations. A top ministry official said that many aviation ompanies have shown interest in starting non-scheduled operations, which do not have a fixed schedule. According to sources, some of these companies have come up with renewed proposals to the ministry. This has renewed the interest of the ministry, which is now working on issuing some licences. Officials said that regional connectivity will get a boost following the decision on allowing 49 per cent foreign direct investment in the sector. â€Å"Till recently, we were not convinced with the feedback we got from DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation).Now, we can think of issuing licences to non-scheduled Indian aviation companies w ho have come to us with foreign tie-ups as well. We are sure the new tie-ups in non-scheduled operations will definitely bring in good technology and  result  in better maintenance of aircraft,† said a senior official. Non-scheduled operators are carried on mostly by VIPs or flying schools, and corporate as well as government organizations. They largely have major safety issues, which has deterred the ministry from issuing such licences.Their operations remain largely free from surprise safety audits. According to Planning Commission estimates, non-scheduled operations could involve 300 business jets, 300 small planes and 250 helicopters during the 12th Plan (2012-17) owing to increasing demand. Many regional airlines that have either started or will begin their operations soon include G. R. Gopinath's Deccan Shuttle, which would offer connectivity within Gujarat. The state has good regional airport network and has non-scheduled operations being carried by like Air Mantra, owned by corporate groups.Until now, foreign airlines were allowed to participate in the equity of companies operating cargo airlines, helicopter and seaplane services but not in the equity of an air transport undertaking operating scheduled and non-scheduled transport services. Banks which were unwilling to provide funds to the airline industry due to the prevailing financial distress are slowly opening up to non-scheduled operations paving way for more investment. The government is seriously looking at expanding nonscheduled operations as scheduled airlines are unwilling to fly to tier-II and tier III towns and cities as it is not economically viable. At least, we can kick-start operations with NSOPs (nonscheduled operations) initially. There is a great potential for airlines to exploit the non-metros cities and smaller towns. We are hopeful that expanding NSOPs to these places would work and scheduled operations will also gradually pick up,† said an official. Recently, civ il aviation minister Ajit Singh had said that the government would come up with a new aircraft-acquisition policy to deal with airlines acquiring a single type of aircraft, which is causing problem in providing connectivity to smaller towns and cities.Read more at:http://indiatoday. intoday. in/story/aviation-ministry-eyes-non-scheduled-operations/1/222442. html Issues It is good news that half a dozen regional airlines want to start operations even in these difficult times. The government would do well to help with an appropriate policy and better infrastructure to go with the many concessions already made available to smaller aircraft. Regional airlines have had reasonable success in peninsular India, but not so much in the hinterland or in the poorly connected east.The biggest policy constraint affecting regional airlines is the route dispersal norms. Scheduled carriers have to deploy a certain percentage of their capacity on category II and III routes such as the northeast and J ammu ; Kashmir. The obvious intent is to ensure availability of certain minimum level of air connectivity to these destinations. But being mostly short-haul routes with less traffic, these are generally loss-making for big airlines that would typically operate large aircraft such as A-320. These regions are better suited for regional carriers with small jets and turbo-props.The forced presence of the big airlines, however, makes it difficult for such carriers to operate in these regions. A phased withdrawal of the route dispersal policy would create a more conducive regime for regional airlines. In the US, too, regional airlines — which have a far more robust business than regular big carriers — took off only when the big carrier shrank operations, post 9/11. The other issue is the lack of or costly aviation infrastructure in the metros. It increases costs and reduces operating efficiency, as turnaround time at these airports is long.Regional airlines typically have fe w aircraft, but keep them in air longer, allowing them to have high frequency or serve more destinations. The poor infrastructure makes such operating efficiency difficult to obtain. The government must think of providing smaller secondary airports in big cities from where such airlines can operate. Besides, India has nearly 450 unused/under-utilised airstrips, which could be pressed into service to open more destinations to air travel, thereby helping improve the case for regional carriers.The government must increase the FDI limit in the sector from the current 49%, and also open it to foreign airlines. G. R. Gopinath The Indian aviation sector may be in turbulence mode, but that hasn’t shaken the spirits of G. R. Gopinath, the father of low-cost air travel in India. Gopinath, who sold India’s first low-cost airline Air Deccan to Vijay Mallya, the owner of Kingfisher Airlines, is gearing up for action once again. â€Å"I have been preparing for a national launch for the past year, and I hope to be ready next year,† an upbeat Gopinath told India [email  protected]The provocation for Gopinath to take to the skies again is simple:  Kingfisher is in a financial mess. The airline is running a sharply reduced service, and if it does not manage to raise funds, it could shut down anytime. Gopinath, who sold Air Deccan to Mallya in 2006, sees this as an opportunity for his re-entry into the sector. He points out that when Kingfisher bought out Air Deccan, the two brands together had 36% market share. â€Å"I believe that the market is still largely untapped. This is an unfinished story, and I see a huge opportunity still there. In the meantime, he has reentered the skies with a different  avataar. Gopinath recently launched Deccan Shuttle, a regional airline in the state of Gujarat in Western India. Gopinath points out that apart from the big cities and towns that are connected by the Airbuses and the ATRs, India has around 500 small airst rips which are not well connected. â€Å"Gujarat, for instance, has nine airports. While all of them are linked to Mumbai (India’s financial capital in the neighboring state of Maharastra), they are not linked to state capital Ahmedabad, or to each other.My idea is to open up a new market. I am passionate about providing easy access and connectivity. † Gopinath has launched Deccan Shuttle under the banner of Deccan Charters, an aviation services firm that he set up in 1995. This was his first venture in the aviation sector. It currently has 20 aircraft (helicopters, turboprops and business jets) and operates out of 16 locations. Under Deccan Shuttle, Gopinath will begin by deploying around six 10-to-18-seater aircraft in Gujarat. Over the next three years, he plans to have 25 such small aircraft across five states.Gopinath’s  plan  is primarily to offer intra-state connectivity. But in routes where there is significant demand due to cultural or trade reasons , he will also look at inter-state connectivity. Other recent entrants in this space include Air Mantra, a unit of the Religare Group. Air Mantra launched in July, connecting Amritsar and Chandigarh in North India. Spirit Air, which operates in Eastern states like Jharkhand, Bihar and Orissa, is planning to start operations in the Southern states soon. Air Pegasus, from Decor Aviation, an airport ground handling agency, is expected to start operations later this year.Analysts are watching the space keenly. â€Å"There is a lot of potential in the regional airlines business provided the states offer the required infrastructure and policies, and the companies have the appropriate business model by way of routes, pricing strategy, etc. ,† says Vishwas Udgrikar, senior director and partner, infrastructure and transport at consulting firm Deloitte. He warns, however, that â€Å"given the current environment in the country’s overall aviation sector, players need to be cauti ous and enter the regional airlines sector with the right preparation. Jasdeep Walia, an analyst at Kotak Institutional Equities, suggests that running a regional airline could be tough. â€Å"For distances of around 250-300 kilometers, the demand will be limited, especially if the roads are good and people can cover it by car. And for distances of 500 kilometers to 600 kilometers, there is always the risk that as the demand picks up, bigger airlines will [step in]. † Gopinath’s comeback is also evoking interest. Udgirkar points out that any new entrant at the national level, despite prior experience, will find it very challenging. There are inherent challenges in this sector and formidable competition, too. † Walia adds: â€Å"This space is very competitive, and the government policies are not at all conducive. And Gopinath could not sustain his earlier venture. † Gopinath’s Air Deccan changed the face of aviation in India, but as a business per se it got grounded. His foray into logistics with Deccan 360 also ran into trouble. Whether or not he can take off this time round remains to be seen. [pic] [pic]

Multicultural Literature Essay

During this semester in Prose class, I have learned many kind of short stories by writers of various background. I also learn how to analyze the text critically, especially about structuralism and culture studies. There are 8 short stories that I have discussed with the class and written in one-page journal response. First, A Short Happy Life of Conat by Mochtar Lubis , Rising Flood by Riem Eng, First Confession by Frank O’Connor, Wings by Catriona McKenzie, Ta-Na-E-Ka by Mary Whitebird, Indian Camp by Ernest Hemingway, Bali by Putu Setia, and Because My Father Always Said He Was the Only Indian Who Saw Jimi Hendrix Play â€Å"The Star-Spangled Banner at Woodstock by Sherman Alexie. Moreover I learned about what Prose is and Intrinsic element of literature, such plot, character, theme, point of view,setting, etc. Then I learn about structuralism in literature, such as binary opposition, the sequence of the event, unequal treatment of time, etc. On the other opportunities I also learn about symbolism, narration, multicultural literature and Indonesian multiculturalism. Because My Father Always Said He Was the Only Indian Who Saw Jimi Hendrix Play â€Å"The Star-Spangled† at Woodstock is a story that does not only focus on Indian people who are marginalized but it contains how the modern Indians life is. In this story, we could find some of multiculturalism. First, from the narrator,Victor’s point of view, he shows the mix culture between traditional Native−American values from his mother and the dependence to American influences from his father. There also some multiculturalisms about the difference treatment towards Indian fathers who leave their children compare to white fathers and how Indians family live such as the difference of Victor’s friend experience about how their parents making love and Victor’s parents who are Indians . In the beginning of the story, the mixture of the culture is shown by Victor’s father. â€Å"During the sixties, my father was the perfect hippie, since all the hippies were trying to be Indians.† There is an irony here that Victor’s father does not like the perfect hippie. He wear bell-bottom, flowered shirt and holds a riffle above his head that represented American, not the hippies. He use red peace symbols splashed across his face and there is a sign â€Å"MAKE LOVE NOT WAR† in his demonstration but he seems does not stand for peace. â€Å"The caption under the photograph read DEMONSTRATION GOES TO WAR FOR PEACE. The editor capitalized on my father’s Native America identity with other headline like ONE WARRIOR AGAINST WAR and PEACEFUL GATHERING TURN INTO NATIVE UPRISING†. Then his obsession with pop music America icon, Jimi hendrix, damage his family relationship and affects the values of his Indian culture. â€Å"Only the good die young,† to his mother replied, â€Å"No, only the crazy people choke to death on their own vomit.† So Victor’s father asked â€Å"Why you talking about my hero that way?† In this case, Victor saw their parents argue just because of different perception of the death of Jimi Hendrix. So indirectly Victor’s father obsession on Jimi Hendrix make him having arguments with his wife. In addition, on page 32 â€Å"A hundred years ago, an Indian marriage was broken easily. The woman or man just packed up all their possessions and left the tipi. There were no arguments, no discussion. Now, Indians fight their way to the end, holding onto the last good thing, because our whole lives have to do with survival.† It also indicates that by â€Å"fighting† stage, an Indian family problem now becomes clear since both wife and husband spill out their feeling and thought that might become the solution of the problem. On the other hand, Victor’s mother still involved with Native−American traditions, such as her dancing. As soon as her husband does not need her when he was sick in a hospital, â€Å"she went back to the life she had created. She traveled to powwows, started to dance again.†. In this case I could see that Victor’s mother as a woman have to make hard decision. Even though she still loves him, she can not follow the lifestyle of the man. Culture will always influence the characteristic of the society. Victor’s father’s dependence on music, alcohol, and other American influence separates him from his wife and son. In addition, when his marriage get worse, Victor’s father does not follow tradition that inspires the Indians about survival or the importance of family . It bring the multicultural further that is about the difference treatment towards Indian fathers who leave their children compare to white fathers. â€Å"On a reservation, Indian men who abandon their children are treated worse than white fathers who do the same thing. It’s because white men have been doing that forever and Indian men just leraned how.† In this matter, we could see that white people who indicate as more individual people, give influence Native-American to leave the children. There is also multiculturalism about how Indians family live such as the difference of Victor’s white friend experience about how their parents making love and Victor’s parents who are Indians. â€Å"Some night I lay awake and listened to my parents’ lovemaking. I know white people keep it quite, pretend they don’t ever make love. My white friends tll me thay can’t even imagine their own parents getting it on.† I think in this occasion, it would be positif knowledge for Indian’s children that their parents still love each other although sometimes they have fight. For the conclusion, we could see that multiculturalism can be the mixture culture between one culture to another. It could give positif affect or even negatif affect. Especially when we look at Victor’s father, the influence of acceptance of white American pop culture with Jimi Hendrix ironically contributes to his family breakup. However, for Victor, an Indian boy these sound of American pop culture (not always Jimi Hendrix but also Roberst Johnson) offer the hope that maybe someday his father will return home. These sounds are an inspiration for this Indian boy to go on. â€Å"Until the sun rose so bright that I knew it was time to go back inside to my mother †. So he knew when the sun comes up and shines brightly.

John Locke V Thomas Hobbes Essay

Locke and Hobbes both had detailed accounts as to what the state of nature is. I will start with Hobbes and what he felt the state of nature is made up of. Hobbes believed in defining the state of nature as what it is instead of what it ought to be. So he focused in on the nature of people and came to a very descriptive conclusion as to how survive in this particular state of nature. He stated that man was equal in ambition, cruelty, and treachery, which in turn makes humans equal in the ability to kill each other. This is important because he believes that people can not live in peace in the state of nature because of those reasons. Also because of this he states that there are three principals of quarrels; competition, diffidence, and glory. Hobbes feels that because of human nature these three reasons to fight would take over and make the state of nature a state of war. Locke also has an opinion to the state of nature. He feels that men would respond to things and people around them with reason and rationality. Therefore he feels that a state of nature for the most part peaceful and pleasant. He also states that the natural law would guide humans in a state of nature. He thinks that people know right from wrong and are capable of doing both but it is upon the individual to carry out these values. In order to deal with the state of nature each of the two suggests a social contract. Whatever the contract is should be the obligations placed upon the people. They both believe in this particular agreement they just differ as to who it should be between. Hobbes speaks of the Leviathan and believes that the contract should be between the ruled and the ruler. He states that a strong ruler is the only way to enforce the social contract. He says that all me are born with three rights: the right to property, liberty, and life. He believes that the only important right is the right to life because without that right you cannot have a chance to enjoy the other two. So his contract consists of the subjects giving up the other two to the leviathan so that he can ensure the right to life. Locke’s social contract differs in many ways. One of them is Locke does not believe that individuals should not give up liberty, but instead give up the right to punish people who commit wrongdoings and leave that up to a overwhelming force, in this case the popular sovereignty. His belief of the state of nature which is that man would use their reasoning and be rational when dealing with other people. So his contract is between the elected and the people. Locke and Hobbes social contract may be different but in ways they are similar. They both believe in revolt if the contract is broken, but they state it differently. Hobbes believes in the monarch so the revolt against him would be different then Locke’s society of popular sovereignty, but in short it both of them called for persecution in such case. Still the case that called for persecution would naturally be different because of the different types of governments these men called for. For example Locke says it is time to revolt when a ruler tries to get absolute power of the people; but Hobbes states that the leviathan needs to have absolute power and the only time to revolt is if the monarch is not able to protect the people he rules over. Hobbes explains the relationship between the subjects and ruler as do what you told and you will not be killed. This means that these people could not say anything about the way the sovereign is running the kingdom or you are subject to death. This is so in the way Hobbes looked at it because the only way to control the people is a state strong enough to persecute someone for this particular reason. The monarch that Hobbes feels is the only way to govern should not be questioned by anyone as so long he is able to protect the people of the land. Locke’s view of the relationship is really different. Based on the concept of popular sovereignty the sovereign are the people; so the relationship is more give and take or democratic. This is a very important concept to Locke’s ideas because this is what differs him the most from Hobbes. His democracy is broken down into three branches; executive, legislative, and federal. The elected officials in these positions are an extension of the people so the people who make up the state serves the people until the people are tired of them. What Hobbes and Locke say about people moving into a political society from a state of nature is pretty similar and all most the same. Both say that contracts between people were necessary, but the dilemma in that is that in a state of nature there is no one to enforce the contracts between people. Both of them thought about this concept and figured that in order to move in to a political society someone was needed to enforce these contracts. Hobbes believes that the only one strong enough to force contracts is the monarch. Locke believes the same thing about someone being strong enough to force the contracts but he thinks it should be the elected doing so. Locke’s two treatises limited sovereignty more so than it has before. Locke called for a separation of powers. He broke it down into three sections and combined it with the popular sovereignty; therefore the many limitations were in place. I believe Locke included this idea into is first and second treatise because he wanted to not allow the abuse of power that is so evident in a monarchy. This is important because this is what our American system of democracy is based upon. Hobbes system of government there is very little limitation. The only limitation I can see is when the monarch does not provide for the security of the people and they revolt. Though that limitation is called upon by Hobbes the rest of the terms of the monarch have no limitations. The monarch is the ruler and no one can go against him because he is the divine and going against him is going against god. So the limitations of a monarch are pretty much is inexistent in Hobbes’s the Leviathan. The rights of the subjects according to Hobbes are the right to live and that is it. The other rights now belong to the Leviathan; this is needed according to Hobbes to ensure security. A monarch that gives too many rights to the people is too weak to defend them. This is so because if the monarch is questioned a lot it takes away the fear of the ruler. Hobbes says that fear is needed to keep the people in check. Therefore a sovereign must practice a policy known as shock and awe. Without this strategy someone would feel that they might be able to challenge the monarch. So rights that the subjects hold on the sovereign are limited to the right to revolt if the monarch fails to protect them. Locke thinks that people should hold more rights to the elected. The subjects have the right to put people in the state and take them out. Locke gives people the right to liberty and property. This is different from Hobbes because Hobbes said to give those rights up. Locke says that you can have rights that Hobbes said would not work in transforming into a political society. Hobbes says that subjects cannot ensure that the sovereign roles for the greater good. Because if they are alive it is the greater good according to Hobbes; so what can they do to ensure that the ruler is operating for the greater good? According to Hobbes nothing because you can not go against the Leviathan on how he is ruling, and to do so can result in you getting killed. So once again the subject has very little to say in the Hobbes ideology. Locke also has a conflicting view with Hobbes on this ability to check the sovereign to make sure he is operating for the good of the people. The main thing that allows them to ensure what the government doing is right is the ability bring charges against any wrongdoings. This is powerful because it does not only kick those people out of office but also brings persecution to them. Another powerful way to make sure government is doing the right thing is the ability to vote or not to vote for people who make up the state. Both Locke and Hobbes are modern political philosophers with different ways of reaching the same objective. Their objective is to transform a state of nature into a political society. Though they disagree on what a state of nature is and they disagree on which is the better political society, but both were apparently right. This is so because both of the philosophies can be applied to life today, which is in a whole different context of their time.

Historical Background of the 1987 Constitution Essay

The history of the 1987 Constitution began on 11 April 1899, the date when the Treaty of Paris between the United and Spain of 10 December 1898 became effective upon the exchange of instruments of ratification of both countries. But the sources of the 1987 Constitution are (i) McKinley’s Instructions to the Second Philippine Commission; (ii) Spooner Amendment; (iii) Philippine Bill of 1902; (iv) Jones Law of 1916, otherwise known as the Philippine Autonomy Act; (v) 1935 Constitution; (vi) 1973 Constitution and (vi) Freedom Constitution of 1986 and its implementing orders. Treaty of Paris Under the Treaty of Paris, the Philippines was ceded by Spain to the United States. Spain relinquished its sovereignty over the Philippine Islands, and with this, all laws of a political nature were automatically abrogated. The Treaty provided that the civil and political status of all inhabitants of the islands was to be determined by the US Congress. The Philippines in turn, was not given the status of an â€Å"incorporated territory† (as to make it a candidate for statehood) and so ex proprio vigore, the US Constitution did not apply to the Philippines unless the US Congress expressly enacted its provisions. McKinley’s Instructions President McKinley, legislating as Commander-in-Chief, issued on 7 April 1900 his â€Å"Letter of Instruction to the Second Philippine Commission † under Taft. It set up a â€Å"divided civil and military government† with the existing Military governor as the Executive, and a Philippine Commission, created on 1 September 1900, as the Legislative, both representing the US President as Commander-in-Chief. It also extended to the Philippines all the rights in the Bill of Rights of the US Federal Constitution, except the right to bear arms (because the country was in rebellion) and the right to a trial by jury (because the Americans distrusted the Filipinos capacity to be a just judge of his peers). The right to jury trial of an American charged with a crime in the Philippines was denied by the courts in US v Dorr, 2 Phil 332 (1903) by virtue of the Letter of Instruction. This was the first Organic Act (a law which establishes the structure and limitations of the government) of the Philippines. What it lacked, as a constitution, were the ratification by the people, and the right of amendment (which was reserved solely to the US President). The judiciary was subsequently established on 11 June 1901, with a Supreme Court, Courts of First Instance, and Justice of Peace Courts. Spooner Amendment On 4 July 1901, the Spooner Amendment, which was actually a rider to the â€Å"Army and Navy Appropriations Act,† changed the then â€Å"divided, military and civil government† into a fully civil government, under the US Congress. All acts of the Philippine Commission would now begin: â€Å"Be it enacted by the authority of the US government,† and no longer by authority of the US President. Philippine Bill of 1902 The US Congress now in control of the Philippines, ratified all the organic acts of the President, in order to prevent disruption of government, and on 1 July 1900, passed the Philippine Bill of 1902, which was to be organic act of the Philippines from 1902 to 1906. The organic act introduced significant provisions to constitutional history. The Philippine Commission was the upper house. It was under the Governor-General who retained all the executive power, including the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus upon recommendation of the Philippine Commission. It established an elective lower house called the Philippine Assembly, composed entirely of Filipinos. It called for the first election in the Philippines to fill up, the membership in the lower house, as soon as the Philippine insurrection stopped and there was a condition of general peace, except in the Moro and Non-Christian provinces. A census was taken and completed on 28 March 1903 and with a certification of peace and of Filipino acceptance of the US government made by the Philippine Commission on 29 March 1907, the election for the Philippine Assembly was conducted on 10 July 1907, with Osmena as speaker. The Bill also defined for the first time who the citizens of the Philippines were. They were all the inhabitants of the Philippine islands who were subjects of Spain as of 11 April 1899, who continued to reside therein, and all the children born subsequent thereto. This definition is still good law today. Jones Law On 29 August 1916, the US Congress passed the Jones Law, otherwise known as the Philippine Autonomy Act. It established a tripartite government with real separation of powers; this was the prototype of our present set-up. The executive power was in the hands of an American Governor-General, who was independent of the Legislature, and who was given the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus and impose martial law without the recommendation of the Legislature. The Legislature was composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives, all composed of Filipinos. The judiciary continued to be made up of the Supreme Court, the CFIs and Justice of Peace Courts. Under this set-up, while the Filipinos has all the legislative power, the Americans had all the executive power and thus, also the control of the government. Thus, in the Board of Control (National Coal Corporation) cases, the US Supreme Court ruled, despite the dissent of Holmes and Brandeis, that the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House could not vote the stocks of the NCC and elect its directors because this was a political function. Only the Governor-General could vote the government shares, said the court. The definition of who were citizens of the Philippines first enunciated in the Philippine Bill of 1902, was carried over by the Jones Law. Tydings-McDuffie Law Although this was not an organic act, it is important in the constitutional history of the Philippines because it was to be the enabling statute, providing the mechanism whereby the constitution of an independent Philippines could be adopted. The law, upon its acceptance by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines, provided for (i) the calling of a Constitutional Convention to draft a Constitution for the Philippines, (ii) the adoption of a Constitution that established a republican government, with a Bill of Rights, and a separation of church and state, (iii) the submission of the draft to the US President for certification that the Constitution was in conformity with the conditions set by the Tydings-McDuffie Law, and (iv) its ratification by the people in a plebiscite. Complete independence was to take place ten (10) years after its effectivity. 1935 Constitution Accordingly, on 30 July 1934, an election was held to choose the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Claro M. Recto was elected President of the Convention. On 8 February 1935, the Concon approved the draft. On 23 March 1935, the draft was certified by the President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt as conforming to the Tydings-McDuffie Law. On 14 May 1935, it was ratified by the people in a plebiscite, with the provisions on the qualifications of the President, Vice-President and members of Congress taking effect upon ratification. In September 1935, the first election under the 1935 Constitution was conducted with Manuel Luis Quezon as President and Sergio Osmena as Vice- President. On 15 November 1935, upon the inauguration of the Commonwealth, the 1935 Constitution took effect. This Constitution was to serve as the charter of the Commonwealth, and upon withdrawal of US sovereignty, of the Republic. The Constitution provides for a tripartite government, with the executive lodged in the President who had a six-year term, the legislative in a unicameral National Assembly, and the judiciary in a Supreme Court, CFIs and Justice of Peace Courts as before. In 1940, it was amended to provide for (a) a bicameral Congress with a Senate and a House of Representatives; (b) a term of four years for the President, but with re-election and (c) the establishment of an independent constitutional body known as the Commission on Elections. War ensued, and the Philippines was so devastated that the declaration of its independence, due 15 November 1945 had to be postponed. At any rate, on 23 April 1946, the election of the first officials of the Philippine Republic was held, and on 4 July 1946, the Republic was inaugurated and the Philippines became â€Å"politically† independent of the US. Theoretically, to an extent that sovereignty is never granted to a people but is earned by them as they assert their political will, then it is a misnomer to say that 4 July 1946 was the day US granted independence to the Philippines. More appropriately, it was the day when the US withdrew its sovereignty over the Philippines, thus giving the Filipino people an occasion to assert their own independence. But not â€Å"economically†. On 30 April 1946, one week after the election, the US Congress passed the Bell Trade Act which would grant Philippine prime exports entry to the US free of customs duties from 1946 to 1954, and a gradual increase in duties from 1954 to 1974 (Laurel-Langley agreement), provided that the Philippines would grant US citizens and corporations the same privileges, and in addition, the right to explore natural resources of the Philippines in parity with the Filipinos, and to operate public utilities. This must be accepted by Congress, embodied in an Executive Agreement, and reflected as an amendment in the Constitution. The Senate approval of this bill gave rise to the case of Vera v Avelino, 77 Phil 192 (1946). The Senate then had 11 Nacionalistas and 13 Liberals. Three Nacionalista Senators-elect (Vera, Diokno and Romero), known to be against the Bell Trade Act, were prevented by the rest of the Senate, in what is known as â€Å"exclusion proceedings,† on grounds that their elections were marred with fraud. The political motivation was clear but the SC was conned into lifting the injunction it issued for the withholding of the suspension, because of the unfulfilled promise that the Senate would not carry out the suspension. With the balance of power offset, the Bell Trade Act was passed. Subsequently, the SC had to dismiss the petition on the ground that the principle of separation of powers, it could not order a co-equal branch to reinstate a member. The Senate authorized President Roxas to enter into an Executive Agreement, which he did on 3 July 1946, the eve of the declaration of Philippine Independence. Then came the amendment of the Constitution in order to include the Parity Rights Agreement, which gave rise to the case of Mabanag v Lopez Vito, 78 Phil 1 (1947). Under the Amendatory Provisions of the 1935 Constitution, Congress, acting as constituent body, needed 3/4 vote to propose an amendment to the Constitution. But with the three Senators still suspended, only the 21 remaining were used as the basis for computing the 3/4 requirement. When this was raised in court, it begged off from ruling on the ground that it was a political question. It also used the Enrolled Bill Theory. So with the amendment proposed, it was subsequently ratified on 5 March 1947. The third time the Constitution was amended (1940, 1947) was in 1967. A Resolution of both houses provided for (a) the amendment of the Constitution by a Convention, (b) the increase of seats in the House of Representatives to make the Concon sufficiently representative, and (c) allowing members of the House as delegates without forfeiting their seats. The first was approved, the second and third were rejected. This became the subject matter of Gonzales v COMELEC. Election of delegates to the Concon took place on 10 November 1970. Then the ConCon met on 1 June 1971. Before it finished its work, it came up with a resolution calling for an amendment to the 1935 Constitution reducing the voting age from 21 to 18, so that a wider base could vote in the ratification of the Constitution then being drafted. A plebiscite was set by the COMELEC for 8 November 1971 but this was enjoined by the SC in the case of Tolentino v COMELEC, the court ruling that a piece-meal amendment was not allowed by the 1935 Constitution since it provided that the amendments were to be ratified at â€Å"an election† which meant only one election. The Court upheld its jurisdiction over the ConCon by arguing that since the Concon derived its power from the Constitution, it was thus limited by the Constitution. But it was subsequently overtaken by Martial Law. On 30 November 1972, the Convention submitted its â€Å"draft† to the President, who called on a plebiscite to ratify the Constitution. This was questioned in the case of Planas v COMELEC, 49 SCRA 105 (1973) on the ground that there can be no freedom of expression under Martial Law. But the case was rendered moot and academic when the President cancelled the plebiscite and instead held a citizens’ assembly on 10 to 15 January, 1973. On 17 January 1973, the President came up with a proclamation that the Constitution had come to full force and effect after its overwhelming ratification by the people in a viva voce vote. 1973 Constitution The validity of the ratification process was questioned in the case of Javellana v Executive Secretary, 50 SCRA 30 (1973) but the failure of the SC to come up with the necessary votes to declare the act as unconstitutional forced it into the conclusion that â€Å"there are no further obstacles to considering the constitution in force and effect.† The 1973 Constitution was amended four times. The first, in 1976, gave the President, legislative powers even if the Interim Batasang Pambansa was already operating. The second, in 1980 was not significant. It merely raised the retirement of justices of the SC from 65 to 70 as to keep Fernando for five more years. The third, in 1980 changed the form of government from Parliamentary to Presidential. The fourth, in 1984, responded to the succession problem by providing for a Vice-President. The start of the end of the Marcos years, of course, could be treated as early as 21 August 1983. But its immediate precursor was the Snap Election which the President was forced to call and set on 7 February 1986 to respond to the clamor for popular mandate. The validity of the â€Å"Snap Election Law† called by the Batasang Pambansa was raised in the case of Philippine Bar Association v COMELEC, 140 SCRA 455 (1985). The issue was raised because of the conditional letter of resignation sent by Mr. Marcos to the Batasan, making his resignation effective only upon (i) the holding of a Presidential election, (ii) the proclamation of a winner, (iii) the assumption into office by the winning candidate. It was contended that a conditional resignation was not allowed under the 1973 Constitution, for it did not create a vacancy, and without a vacancy, there was no reason to call for an election. But the SC failed to issue a preliminary injunction to enjoin the COMELEC from preparing for the election, thus making â€Å"the initially legal question into a political one.† In the meantime, the political parties have started campaigning and the people were so involved in the election that to stop it on legal grounds would frustrate their very will. And so, failing to come up with the majority to hold the Snap Election Law unconstitutional, the SC could not issue the injunction prayed for. The election went ahead. The rest is history. The results of the election were proclaimed by the Batasan, naming Marcos and Tolentino as the winners. But the February 2 to 25, 1986, EDSA revolution took place. On 25 February, Marcos was proclaimed in Malacanang by Makasiar, while Aquino was proclaimed in Club Filipino by Teehankee. Later that evening, Marcos fled to Hawaii. A. The February 1986 Revolution and the Proclamation of Provisional Constitution. Freedom Constitution What was the basis of the Aquino government? Did it assume power pursuant to the 1973 Constitution, or was it a revolutionary government? Proclamation No. 1, 25 February 1986 (Provisional government).– But Proclamation No. 3 which announced the Provisional Constitution, seemed to suggest that it was a revolutionary government, since in one of its whereases it announced that the â€Å"new government was installed, through a direct exercise of the power of the Filipino people assisted by units of the New Armed Forces,† referring to the EDSA revolution. The better view is the latter view. The Aquino government was not an offshoot of the 1973 Constitution for under that Constitution, a procedure was given for the election of the President — proclamation by the Batasan — and the candidate Batasan proclaimed was Marcos. Lawyers League v Aquino (GR Nos. 73748, 73972 & 73990, May 22, 1986).– This view was affirmed in Lawyers League v Aquino where the legitimacy of the Aquino government is questioned on the ground that it was not established pursuant to the 1973 Constitution. The SC ruled that petitioners had no personality to sue and their petition states no cause of action. â€Å"For the legitimacy of the Aquino government is not a justiciable matter. It belongs to the realm of politics where only the people of the Philippines are the judge. And the people have made the judgment; they have accepted the government of President Aquino which is in effective control of the entire country so that it is not merely a de facto government but in fact and law a de jure government. Moreover, the community of nations has recognized the legitimacy of the present government. All the eleven members of this Court as reorganized, have sworn to uphold the fundamental law of the Republic under her government.† The Aquino government was a result of a â€Å"direct state action.† It was not as if a small group revolted and succeeded in wresting power in the end. Rather, the entire state revolted and overthrew the government, so that right from the beginning, the installation was already lawful and the government was at all times de jure. In this regard, it must be noted that there is no such thing as a constitutional right of revolution. A revolution, from the point of view of a State, is always lawful since a State can never go wrong; it can change its government in whatever way the sovereign sees fit. But this right of revolution, inherent in sovereignty, cannot be recognized in a Constitution, for this would be self-destructive. The nature of a Constitution is to set-up a government and provide for an orderly way to change this government. A revolution contradicts this nature. Proclamation No. 3, March 25, 1986 (Provisional Constitution).– At any rate, the Provisional Constitution or Freedom Constitution was adopted on 25 March 1986 through Proclamation No. 3. It abrogated the legislative provisions of the 1973 Constitution, modified the provisions regarding the executive department, and totally reorganized the government. (Its use of the 1973 Constitution, however, is not be to construed that it was a continuation thereof.) Then it provided for the calling of a Constitutional Commission, composed of 30 to 50 members appointed by the President within 60 days. (In our history, all major constitutions — Malolos, 1935, 1971 — were drafted by elected delegates.) The President appointed 48 Commissioners, who worked on the Constitution from 1 June to 15 October 1986. The draft was submitted to the people in a referendum on 2 February 1987. On 11 February 1987, the President, through Proclamation No. 58, announced its overwhelming ratification by the people and that, therefore, it had come into force and effect. In Re: Saturnino Bermudez (145 SCRA 160)(1960).– In the case of In Re: Saturnino Bermudez , the SC held, quoting the previous case of Lawyers League v Aquino, that: [T]he legitimacy of the Aquino government is not a justiciable matter. It belongs to the realm of politics where only the people of the Philippines are the judge. And the people have made the judgment; they have accepted the government of President Aquino which is in effective control of the entire country so that it is not merely a de facto government but in fact and law a de jure government. Moreover, the community of nations has recognized the legitimacy of the present government. All the eleven members of this Court as reorganized, have sworn to uphold the fundamental law of the Republic under her government.

Women on the Texas Frontier Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Women on the Texas Frontier - Assignment Example Jacqueline Reiner points out various barriers that hindered Southern Women from moving out of the woman’s sphere; creating a scenario where only a few were able to move out of the woman’s sphere. The first barrier is associated with the fact that majority of the public offices were not open to the nineteenth century women (Jacqueline, pg. 53). The other issue that might have contributed to the essence of few women moving out of the woman’s sphere is the fact that women were only allowed to participate actively in churches, schools as well as in voluntary religious activities. The institutions of slavery during the early nineteenth century, especially among the Southern Women might have also contributed to the wide acceptance of the woman’s sphere among the white and the black women (Jacqueline, pg. 57). However, after the American Civil war, some of the Southern Women were compelled by social necessities to extend the essence of woman’s sphere to other social setting, thus they worked in public places like bars as bar tenders while a few were provided with opportunities for formal education (Jacqueline, pg. 58). On the other hand, some few women managed to join women’s organizations as well as clubs creating a scenario where only a few managed to move out of the woman’s