Thesis

Thesis

In this paper, I will discuss the manner in which the structure of the U.S government exercises power in propelling its policies despite the opinion held by a majority of the public. Throughout this paper I will attempt to unravel the disappointing manner in which the Obama and his administration approved deployment of 30,000 more soldiers to Afghanistan in early 2010, despite massive calls from the public to recall the troops in the Afghan territory.

Analysis

President Barrack Obama took over the U.S top seat promising to institute several changes to the way the previous government run its operations thereby gaining much public favor. Among the issues Obama had promised to quell once he ascended power was to tone down the U.S involvement in unworthy wars, specifically referring to the war on Iraq and Afghanistan. He particularly promised to begin a program to call back the troops deployed in these countries. However, One year after assuming power he was ordering for deployment of more soldiers, going against his said beliefs and promises.

Public Preferences:

The famous phrase ‘war on terrorism’, coined by former President Bush brought forth a number of instituted changes to reassure the Americans security after the events of 9/11. However the public support for the same was short lived following the revealed manner in which the soldiers committed prosecutions and torture of the suspects. The American public was torn between supporting and opposing the war but as more information emerged, more and more Americans supported withdrawal from the war. After it became evident that the said gain on the U.S side from the war was not forthcoming, more people failed to see the reason for continuing with the war. More and more casualties were being reported on the side of the U.S soldiers fighting in a war that the public opposed, saying that apart from earning the country increasing international hatred, the budgetary allocations were ridiculously high.

The public’s quest saw a ray of hope when President Obama took power promising to slowly by slowly bring home the soldiers and eventually end the invasion of Afghanistan. Obama however shortly bowed to the quests of the U.S generals in Afghan requesting more soldiers and promised to send more troops. The American public was angered by this as they were for ending the invasion as opposed to fuelling it. The Obama administration’s public ratings consequently fell. The public quoted the fact that U.S was struggling with reducing the debt ceiling and a proposed solution had been to cut on the massive government expenditures, while deployment of more soldiers was directly against this as it meant that the budget allocated to the war rose to more than $300 million daily and a total of around $500 billion each year on the foreign wars. According to an article by Agiesta, the American public strongly supports cutting of these expenditures and channel the funds into curbing unemployment, healthcare, and infrastructure development. Consequently they failed to understand why the nation would need to expand the war (3).

Policy outcome:

President Obama took over office amidst escalating concerns over the war on terrorism where both the public and the legislature were at a divide over the issue of ending the war. This daunting task however proved not as obvious as a majority of the public as well as Obama himself thought. The rift between the Obama led Democrats and the Republicans was growing in a number of issues, among them being the healthcare issue, tax bill, and the handling of the war on terrorism. While some of these issues were settled by debate in the legislature house, some of the decisions as stipulated by the American constitution lay entirely on the President himself. This gave the Obama administration the ultimate power to instill these changes and devise policies that did not necessarily follow the preferences of the public. Obama presented his argument in quelling the Afghan war by devising a plan that would include deployment of more troops, then giving a timeline of when the whole group would begin to be withdrawn. This decision further divided the opinion of the public as well as those of his fellow Democrats since it seemed to go against his promise of ending the foreign invasion by instead approving the deployment of 30,000 soldiers in his plan. His justification for this move did not touch or tend towards solving the internal problems or honor the public’s quest. What followed were plans to begin the deployment which would be split for a period of six months. The public support ratings for the president fell sharply following this move (Knoxy 3).

Disconnect between preference and outcome:

Almost every nation today aims at having a democratic government which has the public preference as the basis of its policy development. Debate has therefore been ranging regarding whether the situation on the ground especially with regard to the U.S government reflects a situation where the public opinion is incorporated in devising policies. According to Achen, the solution that is deemed best in having the publics say represented in policy making is by democratically electing a person who best represents their ideologies. However, the reality on the ground paints a different picture from the expected. The structure – here represented by the president’s esteemed constitutional powers– always have a tendency of having its way and ignoring the majority of the public views (480).

The case of president Obama ordering more soldiers to Afghanistan is a typical representation of such a rift that is evident when it comes to the government honoring the preferences of the citizens it governs. Despite massive cries from the public and highlighting of numerous discussions in the media, President Obama still went ahead to order sending of 30,000 more soldiers. This is a person the majority of the public had elected to power owing to his promised message of change which would improve the ailing U.S economy. The public hoped that privileges would be accorded to the internal issues like unemployment, healthcare, and reducing the debt but instead Obama went against this but increasing government expenditure by increasing the troops. The public opinions on the issues they are dissatisfied with in the government are either aired on the media or during public demonstrations, both of which provides no structured channel for having their views directly impact on the decisions. President Obama in this case used the powers vested upon him by the American constitution, as the chief commander of the armed forces, to order the deployment of the soldiers. This issue did not even need to pass through parliament for debate, but just fell in the hands of the president. The public felt betrayed by the one person they chose to institute their will and a sharp divide in Obama’s own Democratic party arose.

In conclusion, one of the key constituent of a successful arrangement is where the preferences of the majority is supported by the outcomes as decided upon by the structures in place. In this case, the public trusts the elected president and the government as a whole to devise policies that are representative of their opinion. However, that is not always the case since the structure, as represented by those who have the final say, can always alter the preference and have things their way. Obama drifted away from the calls to have budgetary cuts and withdraw form the war and went ahead to use his powers in ordering addition of soldiers to Afghanistan.

Works Cited

Achen, Christopher. “Measuring Representation.” American Journal of Political Science 22.3(1978): 475–510. Print.

Agiesta, Jennifer and Cohen, Jon. “Poll Shows Most Americans Oppose War in Afghanistan.” Washington Post 20 August 2009: LZ02. Print

Knoxy, Britney. “Obama Sending 30,000 More Troops to Afghanistan.” New York Post 1 December 2009: AP. Print.