Lochner v. New York: Economic Regulation on Trial is Paul Kens’ 1998 concise investigation of the Supreme Court’s controversial ruling in Lochner vs. New York case, which gives a complete understanding of the history that lead up to the case and the impact of the ruling. Kens gives a comprehensive account of the many issues that were involved in the Supreme Court’s ruling, including the history that lead up to the case, its effects on later cases, and the overall belief of critics that the justices promoted laissez-faire capitalism and social Darwinism. This book is readable for a wide range of readers from high school level readers to those well versed in legal codes and proceedings. Most learners would find good use of this easy to understand summary of the Lochner v. New York case.
IV. Addressing the opposition A. Argument 1 The Plaintiff has argued that this regulation is in best interest for the public and provides security for the society as a whole. They want the regulation to be considered Constitutional because it was voted on by the majority and therefore, it is in the best interest of the community and should therefore be enacted. This argument does not speak to the constitutional issue of the case. The Supreme Court’s main objective is to protect individuals and minorities from oppressive government.
Although they agreed on the need for an efficient and modernized statute, they opposed the aspect of regulation during the development of the UCC. This group envisioned autonomy amid the efficient and modern system, agitating against the regulation of business freedom by judges, statutes, or trade group oversight. By 1949, the date that early drafters had hoped to approve the code, elements of regulation persisted, as exemplified by consumer and small merchant protection. Compromise on the part of the two groups that retained certain elements and dropped
In Network Neutrality Nuances, David Farber makes a contrasting counterpoint to Barbara van Schewick’s piece of net neutrality protecting us from abuse from our ISPs. Farber states that because the internet has always regulated itself over the course of its nature and is continuing to grow increasingly with no issues, we should continue to let the internet self-regulate. Thus David Farber is suggesting that the government and legislators take a reactive stance on the internet because over the course of the internet’s history it has shown to be growing exponentially. Farber continues to analyze the history of net neutrality and comes to the conclusion that any legislation that attempts to manage the internet will fail due to the incompetence of legislations regarding the internet as demonstrated by history. Farber attempts to inductively explain the pretense behind the legislations against net neutrality; however some of his examples ultimately fail to support his conclusion due to his very apparent position against legislators
The most important thing that the bureaucracy does is implement policy. Congress and the President make the policies and laws, but they have someone else (the bureaucracy) to implement them. However, they also make policy by rule-making (process of defining rules or standards that apply uniformly to classes of individuals, events, and activities). Also, according to Jillson (2016), "Congress passes laws that authorize government programs, the bureaucracy then writes specific rules that define how the program will be administered." So, when the bureaucracy makes rules you have to obey them because they have the force of law.
In her well written and highly organized piece “The Nuances of Net Neutrality”, author Barbara van Schewick aims to convince readers of the need to increase net neutrality regulations in order to preserve the value of the internet. While the author presents some valid points she does not apply a thorough analysis on net neutrality, leading to the articles arguments falling apart once put under scrutiny. This is due to the use speculative language, lack of concrete examples, and failure to mention reasons why regulation is the best approach. In the article, Schewick writes in a clear and concise manner that allows the reader to easily follow the argument.
David Farber’s Counterpoint in “Net Neutrality Nuances” by Barbara Schewick and David Farber brings up a different perspective and analysis on the issue of Net Neutrality. Instead of agreeing with the opinion of the majority and supporting the idea of the government regulating the behavior of ISPs when it comes to the internet, he argues that the government should simply leave it undisturbed and refrain from passing any laws regarding net neutrality. He believes the government progress will only slow down and hinder the actual solution, which he believes is to let the internet work itself out and resolve its own problems as it has done so in the past. While he brings up valid counterpoints to Barbara Schewick’s points that support regulation, David
With the issue of network neutrality arising, David Farber expresses his side of the argument. His opinion is that network neutrality may seem fair for the users and that network services seems to be secretive to its customers, however that is not the case. He portrays the downsides of the attempts of the government leaning over network neutrality and the most reasonable way for services and users to cooperate. This way, he has a strong stance for his side of the issue of network neutrality. (Farber, 2009) David Farber’s initial point about the Internet is that it is constantly evolving thus it requires monitoring on a scale that will help both service providers and consumers.
Mission Statement: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) serves as a means to help protect the health of all Americans and their environment. In their efforts to do so the EPA 's purpose is to protect U.S. citizens from being exposed to possible health issues in all aspects of their lives, whether it be at home, school, or even work. These efforts are being made all over the U.S. to try and reduce external costs on U.S. citizens, by using the best info available to the EPA about health risks. Not only is the EPA advocating for the protection of the environment, but U.S. policies are having a larger presence of reforms that concern every aspect of the environment, ranging from natural resources to energy and transportation.
The agency also works with industries in voluntary pollution prevention and conservation programs. The idea for the environmental protection started in the 1950 's, when the government responded to the increasing public concerns for the growing pollution levels and the impact that human activity
The principal objective of the drug regulatory bodies is to make sure that medicines are marketed only after appropriately scrutinized for their efficacy, safety and quality. Once the approval is granted, however, FDA (Food and Drug Administration) has a minimal role in determining whether drugs are prescribed for their approved uses as indicated on the product labels. Off-label drug use refers to the prescription of licensed drugs for clinical indications or in a manner different from that approved by the drug regulatory body. Off-label drug use takes many forms like use of drugs for an unapproved indication, in a patient population, through a route of administration, or with a dose not specified in the approved labelling (22). Off-label
After reading about bureaucracies I believe that this sector actually makes the government functional. I compare federal bureaucracy to the honey be worker, is the bee that does all the work in the hive and gets pollen, nectar and water to produce honey. Our founding fathers created the government where there is three branches with in the government but it could be argued that overtime, advances in technology and changes in society we have blindly incorporated a fourth branch as what would be known as the Federal Bureaucracy Branch. The federal bureaucracy is divided up into three different segments known as Government corporations Independent agencies and Regulatory commissions. Each segment playing vital roles within our government making the life of the American citizens much easier.
The protection of environment is crucial to the wellbeing of this planet. The job of government is to protect and preserve the land on which its people live. However, there is a bill being considered that completely goes against this, one that calls for the eradication of the Environmental Protection Agency, a government program created to protect human and environmental wellbeing through their regulation of laws. I urge you to oppose bill H.R. 861 - the termination of the Environmental Protection Agency - because of the ways that the EPA protects air, water, and land.
Regulations that the government implement, licensing for example, increases the barrier of entry into the market and decreases ways for the traders to gratify consumer demand. This case is prevalent in the monopoly market. The market is sometimes best to decide how much and what to produce since it has better information and knowledge of the consumers compared to the government. Economic decisions may also not be competent when the government is motivated by political power rather than economic imperatives. Sometimes, economic policies are designed to retain power rather than to ensure maximum efficiency in the economy.
This landmark symposium made the introduction of the federal government involvement in environmental regulation. In 1955 congress passed its first environmental legislation which was upheld and supported strongly by the public and improved science. After this huge merge the United States environmental protection Agency and the effective public policy toward the environmental were instituted. (Usepa,