America's Government Dependency

For many years, drugs have been the center of crime and the criminal justice system in the United States. Due to this widespread epidemic, President Richard Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” in 1971 with a campaign that promoted the prohibition of illicit substances and implemented policies to discourage the overall production, distribution, and consumption. The War on Drugs and the U.S. drug policy has experienced the most significant and complex challenges between criminal law and the values of today’s society. With implemented drug polices becoming much harsher over the years in order to reduce the overall misuse and abuse of drugs and a expanded federal budget, it has sparked a nation wide debate whether or not they have created more harm than good. When looking at the negative consequences of these policies not only has billions of dollars gone to waste, but the United States has also seen public health issues, mass incarceration, and violent drug related crime within the black market in which feeds our global demands and economy. With this failed approach for drug prohibition, there continues to be an increase in the overall production of illicit substances, high rate of violence, and an unfavorable impact to our nation.

The U.S. government’s expansive role in public policy is caught in a swirl of conflicting cross-currents. On the one hand, popular expectations about government’s

Being two of the most respected and qualified academicians on public policy, Charles Murray, and Robert B. Reich have never been short of making controversial and contradicting statements which arguably serves only their interest of getting an audience. Public policy as it is has been subjected to lots of changes throughout the history leading to different reactions and opinions from different individuals. “What it means to be a Libertarian-A Personal Interpretation” written by Charles Murray, explicitly describes how the society should view the government by claiming it can help in achieving overall happiness and allowing members of the society to have a right to individual freedom when coping with the changes brought by public policy. On the other hand, Robert B. Reich’s “Aftershock the next Economy and America’s Future” talks about overcoming our problems by keeping a tier of classes. This paper discusses the contradicting views of these two writers.

There is a disease running rampant on the streets of Washington DC. It is a disease that cripples the economy, destroys jobs and leaves Americans living on the streets. Inordinate spending perpetuates the sickness and corrupt politicians keep the cure at bay. Federal expansion is ruining the lives of American citizens and creating a society of impecunious and pusillanimous citizens, unable and unwilling to speak out against the higher power which controls every aspect of their lives. “Where are our (sic) Men of abilities? Why do they not come forth to save their Country?” George Washington once inquired to his fellow man, now, many Americans may find themselves asking this same question as the country continues its spiral downwards

In America, the debate over the warranted degree of government involvement in one’s daily life is ever-present. As citizens, Americans demand protection and security from our leaders. In return, they provide capital, ingenuity, and a responsibility to society. As can especially be seen in the current time of recession and bailouts, citizens rely on the government to regulate and stabilize of our economy - to act on behalf of their wellbeing. However, this has not always been the case. Subsequent to western expansion, the government was hesitant to impose regulations upon its citizens, especially in relation to their economic pursuits. Political leaders relied on powerful businessmen’s’ support for occupational security - so formed the

Through my research I have found our involvement in the drug world follows the same theme that seems to recur with our government and their policies. We talk a good game that formulates a structure and a well-worded policy that appears to be in the best interest of American citizens and foreigners alike. However we also aid these countries. The problem doesn’t lie within our policies or the simple compassion from our government that drugs hurt our society. The problems occur with those that implement and enforce these policies. Cocaine and its market cannot be eradicated. The efforts of many of our political leaders have been futile because of the supply and demand of the product. In 1989, President Bush had a plan that he called, “The cheapest and safest way to eradicate narcotics” (Menzel pg.43). The result was the following,

In the book The Net Government of the United States by Donald F. Kettl is an inspiring and at times radical look at our government and its day to day attributes to our society. The ways in which the government operates and the agencies it employs are examined through and through. The author makes many arguments for their failures and against the system itself. This all leads to an opinion and analysis of a way to fix the system. The power of the government to make decisions should be purely of their own right and if the American people vote for these people then they are the leaders. There is no way to accurately fix our system and the theories and conclusions drawn up by Kettl are intriguing, but there is room for more calculation.

Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves” (Tanner 1). Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize winner, Chief Economist at Roosevelt Institute, best-selling author, and a professor at Columbia University explains the problems with the current economy in the United States in his book Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy. He explains that even though the one percent of the United States population is living a prosperous life, the remaining ninety-nine percent are being hurt by this reality (Stiglitz 8). From this it can be concluded that the regulations currently being pressed upon the majority of the population are hurting more than benefitting.

The government of United States spends nearly 15 billion annually on the “War on Drugs”. This translates to spending about five hundred dollars per second to combat the menace of drugs. According to group Law Enforcement against Prohibition, about 82% of the drug arrests are only for possession of banned substances. The War on Drugs has forced our law enforcement agencies to focus on nonviolent drug offenders instead of expending their energies and resources in capturing violent criminals. Our correctional facilities are overflowing with “small time drug offenders” which has created a number of social and economic problems for the country.

It all begin in June, 1971 Nixon officially declares a "war on drugs," identifying drug abuse as "public enemy No. 1." He assembles a task force and the “war on drugs” takes off. At first, it seemed like the government was trying to stop the flow of drugs coming into America. Then in September of 1984, Nancy Reagans “Just say No’ campaign began. From there America began locking up drug offenders at an alarming rate. As a result, today many of those enslaved in the prison system are those who have problems with using illegal narcotics. This has done nothing to stop the flow of drugs on the streets of America, or to rehabilitate those with addiction problems. Instead, according to National Review on “The War on Drugs is Lost” it is seen as, “We are speaking of a plague that consumes an estimated $75 billion per year of public money, exacts an estimated $70 billion a year from consumers, is responsible for nearly 50 per cent of the million Americans who are today in jail, occupies an estimated 50 per cent of the trial time of our judiciary, and takes the time of 400,000 policemen--yet a plague for which no cure is at hand, nor in prospect.” (Buckley). So, obviously locking up those with addiction problems is not the answer to helping them, but then again the ruling majority likes it this way. It keeps prisons full, and keeps the bottom social class in

The war on drugs has cost our government a vast amount of money that could be better spent elsewhere. In fiscal year 2013 alone, the United States government spent $25.6 billion in an effort to prevent drug use and its consequences. This was $415.3 million (1.6%) increase from the previous year. [1] This indicates that our government has no intentions of backing off of their drug stance any time soon. Overall, the national drug control budget costs the government more than the state, commerce, and interior departments combined. In addition, large number of drug-related trials clog our nation’s criminal justice courts, and often times the result of these cases is imprisonment for the accused. Since the start of the war on drugs, the country’s incarcerated population has increased sevenfold, and over one percent of the population now resides in a prison. [3] There are currently more people behind bars for drug charges today than there were people behind bars for any reason in 1980. [2] Keeping all of these prisoners incarcerated costs

With availability, still rampant in neighborhoods, drugs are still ruining lives. "Further, prohibition has been ineffective and has failed to demonstrate any significant reduction in drug usage, drug supply, or drug harm" (Buchanan, 2015, p. 1). The only thing that the "War on Drugs" is documented as doing is increasing mass incarceration numbers but did little to combat the issue. Making a substance illegal, can create an appeal to that drug, making it more desirable. The illicit drug market is extremely violent, to begin with, but with enforcement comes more violence. For example, "Disrupting the once steady market by removing a key business leader makes this underground market more volatile, and turf wars become more likely. When a business is forced to operate underground, there are no legitimate means of resolving disputes between producers, suppliers or users" (Buchanan, 2015, p.

Drug Policy in the United States began under the Presidency of Richard M. Nixon, who launched the “War on Drugs” and oversaw the creation of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). The sole purpose of both initiatives was to combat the copious amounts of drugs flowing out of our borders. Then First Lady Nancy Reagan, who will go down in history as the greatest First Lady of All Time, launched “Just Say No”. A campaign aimed towards the youth to refuse the vices of drug and alcohol abuse. These policies were perpetuated in the 1990s under the Clinton Administration who passed their own tough on crime initiatives as well. The upside, the implementation of these policies has caused the drug use rates to equal where they were 25 years ago. On the downside, the United States imprisons more people than any other industrialized nation in the world because of the drug offenses.

Everyday we become influenced by things that surround us in our society. Without these influence's we wouldn’t be the people we are today. One of the many influences that I have encountered in life would have to be the recent presidential election of Mr. Donald Trump. The fact that the government allowed a person that knows almost nothing about how to run a country become our president is absurd. People overlooked who they chose as a president because they were so focused on the phrase “make America great again”, that he was proposing but never really focused on the negative effects he would bring to this world. I am a women and I am also Latina, two kinds of people that Mr. Trumps belittles. I am apart of this society and I have the right

According to Michelle Alexander, why and how has the “war on drugs” developed over the last 40 years? What are the main political and economic factors that led to the war on drugs, and what are the main political and economic factors that shaped it as it developed over the last four decades? Draw on material from the Foner textbook chapters 25 through 28 to supplement Alexander’s discussion of the political and economic context.