Below is an example of what I am looking for:As the federal

Below is an example of what I am looking for:As the federal government of the United States slowly progresses out of the depths of historic debt, we find ourselves looking back at how this debt came to be. Social debate and political arguments have centered on the debt for years, if not decades, without any significant resolution outside of new economic rhetoric and political mudslinging. We, as citizens, see debt in many different contexts: deprivation, shame, even as a form of enslavement. Additionally, when we ponder on the notion of debt, we frame our thoughts within the context of creditors and debtors; creditors provide goods, services, or monies to the debtor requesting the items under the condition that repayment is to be expected. Typically, debt is considered on an individual basis, with one creditor and one debtor wherein the debtor accepts the debt itself. However, as we have seen in the past several decades, government is ready and willing to accept debt as a term of operating. Why are elected leaders so adept at accepting debt as a normal function of government? The proposed research intends to examine the influence of groupthink, as constructed by Janis (1982), within the legislative decision to accept the role of debtor on behalf of American citizens. In order to examine the influence of groupthink on the process of accepting debt by legislators, the proposed research will first elaborate on the concept of groupthink to base its applicability to notion of debt acceptance. Secondly, the paper will examine instances where the federal debt ceiling limit has been increased to allow for greater borrowing by the federal government for operational costs. Finally, the paper will examine the roles and actions perpetrated by legislators actively involved in the approval of raising the debt ceiling limit to identify any potential symptoms of groupthink which may have occurred during the decision to increase the debt ceiling limit. (References)