The Outside Game Argumentative Analysis

Part III The Outside Game: Open Secrets and Vote Smart identify numerous groups that lobbied this bill in the hopes of it becoming a law. A number of these groups include the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the American Bar Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. These groups openly supported this bill, and wanted to be associated with it, so they lobbied. Types of lobbying in which the group Families Against Mandatory Minimums utilize are donating money to government officials through Political Action Committees in hopes of persuading them, holding local or federal protests with signs such as “Let The Punishment

Some of these groups include the National Sheriffs’ Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition, and the National Association of Police Organizations. These groups on the opposition side tried to utilize facts in hopes of decreasing support for this bill. For example, the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition published an article on their website providing the recidivism rates of an eight year study in which it was discovered that 50% of those arrested for drug trafficking would be arrested for this crime a second time. This group believed that a law such as the Fair Sentencing Act would encourage drug abuse and not reduce recidivism in the long run. These groups opposed this law because of strong beliefs in justice and fear of drug crimes worsening. Many of them were concerned this would take us backwards in terms of how far our society has come with cocaine use, they believed this law would escalate cocaine use because individuals wouldn’t be fearing harsh sentencing charges. The individuals among these organizations have a predisposition to their ideologies which definitely affected their position on this bill, they’ve spent their entire lives trying to improve law enforcement and on the surface it seemed this bill

In other words, there is one Congress to represent the people, and one Congress to carry out laws. In our bicameral system, the Senate is closely corresponded with carrying out laws, while the House of Representatives is corresponded with representing the constituents. The bipartisan bill of the Fair Sentencing Act is closely correlated with both aspects of the Two Congresses. It did receive cross party support, so senators and representatives that may have been against this bill may have supported it for the sake of keeping their constituents happy, this may have been the case with Ron Paul because he was hesitant to support it. Ron Paul may have been thinking of the next election, so he did what his constituents wanted despite his personal reluctance. Conversely, Lamar S. Smith claimed to personally oppose this bill, but we really do not know for sure if he only claimed to. It could be the case that he might have been extremely dedicated to his constituency and may have known that his voters would be outraged if this law were to pass, so he opposed it despite his own beliefs. He was either acting as a representative, a lawmaker, or both, depending on his actual views, and his constituents’ actual views. Richard Durbin, the sponsor of this bill claimed this law would be smart and fair and