GRE Issue Topic 88

Sample 1:

When history judges the effectiveness of a country's leader, it considers the decisions he or she made that led to a good life for the citizens of the country. High employment rates, accessibility to affordable health care, a good school system, a reasonable inflation rate, and security from invasion by enemies are some of those important measures. When those conditions exist for an extended period of time, the leader can be called effective, perhaps even great.

America has elected presidents who displayed great leadership in areas other than government, believing that their skills would create a sense of wellbeing for its citizens. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the allied troops in Europe during WWII, created the strategy for the D–Day invasion of Normandy that eventually decided the war in favor of the Allies. "I Like Ike" became the campaign slogan that helped to elect him president in 1952 and again in 1956. Eisenhower's demonstrated ability to secure victory over communism and fascism in Europe made him the popular choice to lead post–war America. The prosperity of Americans during the ‘50s would make it reasonable to conclude that Eisenhower was an effective leader.

Perhaps no other president in the twentieth century faced more challenges during his term of leadership than Franklin Delano Roosevelt. First elected in 1932, he faced the Herculean task of lifting the country out of the Great Depression. Large numbers of Americans were unemployed, hungry, and homeless. With the blessings of Congress, FDR established the New Deal which contained programs like the CCC (Civil Conservation Corps) that provided both paying jobs for Americans and a necessary service in America's woodlands. During the first year of FDR's third term, on December 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked American ships at Pearl Harbor. As a result, American would become engaged in WWII, fighting both in Europe and the Pacific. FDR’s ability to lead during wartime was exemplified by his ability to forge an alliance with the USSR, a former adversary. Americans were so convinced of this president's ability to improve the wellbeing of all citizens that they reelected FDR for an unprecedented fourth term.

Some might argue that leaders in the twenty first century have made some decisions that were designed to secure the wellbeing of Americans but have infringed on citizens' rights or have not had the intended consequences. After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, the leaders of America declared war on Al Qaeda and vowed to hunt down those responsible for the attacks and to prevent further threats to America’s safety. Patriotic fever swept the nation, and most citizens heartily approved of President Bush's decision. Twelve years later, American troops are still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the American people are weary of the protracted war. The Patriot Act was created to enable the tracking of suspected terrorists in the United States, but many citizens protested the invasion of privacy inherent in that act. Travel by air throughout the country became a more laborious undertaking with security measures implemented at every airport. Even though Americans feel safer when they travel, they feel that some freedoms have been lost. The well–being of the majority may occur at the price of individual freedom.

Just recently, the government of Syria used chemical weapons in the form of poisonous gas on its own citizens. President Obama immediately declared that the US should take military action against Syria to eliminate these chemical weapons. Should Syria continue to use chemical weapons, American troops and civilians in the Middle East may be in danger. A military strike might ensure their wellbeing. On the other hand, Syria and its allies could retaliate, putting even more Americans in danger. Decisions about protecting the wellbeing of Americans are often fraught with conflicting consequences; the right choice is not always obvious or easy, and leaders are subject to harsh criticism if their choices are unpopular.

Leaders of the free world do attempt to secure the wellbeing of their citizens by maintaining a vibrant economy, protecting individual rights, and insuring their safety by eliminating threats both foreign and domestic. Many of those leaders also try to improve the lives of people who are oppressed or murdered by their own leaders in other countries. The effectiveness of any leader to secure the well–being of the citizens may not become apparent until his or her actions are viewed from a historical perspective.