Arguments Against Federalism

Federalism is defined as Congress must be kept within the limits of the enumerated powers of the Constitution. As long as people have the right to leave political jurisdictions they find undesirable, states or smaller government units have to bear the costs of their mistakes. Individuals who prefer freedom to government order should be encouraged because although federalism does not ensure freedom, freedom fares better under federalism than under a completely centralized politics. An example of

Fiscal Federalism is federal funding that is allocated to states which specific conditions attached to it. By giving states the money the federal government is able to control the states government. In short, the federal government is the one who decides how much money is given to the state, the conditions the money will be given and what the state is allowed to do with the money. This means that the federal and state government responsibilities are at times entwined, rather than distinct. The states

on these substances are what cause the crime not the drug themselves. By having drugs do illegal it results in people have to resort to using underground and dangerous methods to obtain them which they clearly are willing to do. Next an argument is presented against the way the government goes about fighting this war. Stating that the government focus its efforts on catching “Mr. Big” a theoretical mastermind drug dealer responsible for the vast majority if drug sales. However such a person does not

sale and importation of illicit narcotics the war on drugs began in earnest. The war on drugs has also played a major role in politics as well as having a significant impact on the economy. While there are many arguments in favor for the war on drugs and an equal number of arguments against it I will attempt to show an unbiased look at the war on drugs and drug prohibition and how it has affected society as a whole. Since 1971 the United States government has spent $1,000,000,000,000 on the war on

It is also possible that drug users are irrational decision makers and might not understand the adverse long-term effects and addictive properties. Prohibition should reduce demand through legal penalties; however, since not all drug users are rational choice makers, demand can increase by creating a “forbidden fruit” effect. The consequences of increased use add to the complexity and costs of enforcement on both drug users and the general population. Drug users, trying to avoid the legal consequences

containment; it is an act of limiting and holds a spirit of negation. It limits our independent and individualist choices. It is not a democratic value unless devised by the citizens. Prohibiting something on the basis of unsure logistics and deviant arguments is not the way a democracy thrives. There is a fine line between democracy and authoritarianism. Maybe the governments today need to realize this fine conception! Abstract It has been in our history and we all have suffered through this centered

Legalizing Marijuana Drugs are a major influential force in our country today. The problem has gotten so out of hand that many options are being considered to control it or even solve it. Ending the drug war seems to be a bit impossible. The war on drugs seems to be accomplishing a lot but this is not true. Different options need to be considered. Legalization is an option that hasn't gotten a chance but should be given one. Although many people feel that legalizing marijuana would increase

Countries have been making drugs illegal over the years for varieties of reasons - be it to combat a perceived moral or health epidemic, to single out certain groups of people, or to reflect religious influences. Even when some drugs do not present notable health dangers, governments ban them. While there are many drugs that are unhealthy when abused, the drug policies around the world, particularly the United States, are inconsistent and oppressive. Drug laws were supposedly created for the good

War on Drugs Christina Echeverry October 2017 ALC Class 18-002 War on Drugs Introduction In 1971, President Nixon created the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 commonly known as the War on Drugs. The war on drugs was implemented to combat production, distribution, and consumption of illegal drugs (Olaya & Angel, 2017). In 2007, law enforcement officers made approximately two million drug arrests in the United States (Potter, 2014). Supporters state that the war on

Pros and Cons of Drug Legalization Many feel today we are losing the war on drugs. When a battle goes to the point where there is no winner, there needs to be a re-evaluation of how to solve the problem. In the case of the war against drugs, years of fighting have caused increased crime, overcrowding of prisons, and the wasted use of money and resources with no results. It is now time to look at alternative methods to solve the nation's drug problem. Although, legalization will increase use of the