Current Situation s1

CURRENT SITUATION

This section’s primary focus is data analysis. Your law/policy was enacted in order to fill a perceived need; do the existing data and statistics prove that your law is working (or not)? Be sure to include any major events related to your law/policy from the last 5 years, but remember that the primary focus of this section should be statistics, statistics, statistics. Don’t forget about the economic effects of your law—how much money is spent on enforcement of your law annually, how much money in fines/penalties is generated through enforcement of your law, how much money is spent fixing problems created by violators of your law, etc.

1.  What is the current law/policy’s definition? What are the current penalties? This information is only necessary if you’re doing an old version of a law, and the definition and penalties have been amended/updated.

2.  What major events related to your law have occurred in the last 5 years, 2010-present?

3.  Based on what the law/policy’s intent was, have the statistics/numbers increased or decreased (i.e., if seat belt laws are supposed to prevent/decrease serious injuries and fatalities in car wrecks, do the statistics show serious injuries/fatalities decrease when people wear seat belts)?

4.  To what can this change be attributed (is the policy working as intended, or are there other factors in play)?

5.  Currently, what effects has the policy had on the economy (i.e., financial impact)?

Current Situation

There is a lot of bald and golden eagle nest in the united states spread around, so the U.S. Fish and Wildlife services are trying to find ways to keep people from messing with the nests because if the nest is disturbed or any alterations made to the nest and it bothers the eagle to a sertain point the eagles may abanden the nest and its chicks. Bald Eagles were taken off of the endangered species list in June of 2007, this happened because the numbers of eagles grew a lot. Even though this has happened the eagles are still protected by the protection act. Since the eagle was taken off of the endangered species list, the service proposed a regulated permit of the authorized taking of a limited amount of bald and golden eagles which is only lawful under this permit. To make sure that the eagles continue to do well, U.S. Fish and Wildlife service worked with the states wildlife agencies to continue to watch the eagles. If the eagles start to seem to go down in numbers again the will be reinstated into the Endangered Species act.

Current Situation

The insanity defense today states: “defense to any prosecution under Federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to understand the nature and quality of his/her acts” (Izenberg, 2008). When a defendant is found not guilty by reason of insanity their trial is acquitted and the defendant is cleared of all charges. However some states, including Montana, Idaho, and Utah, allow some to be found Guilty but Mentally Ill (A brief history of the insanity defense, 1995). This is when a defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt but is mentally ill. These people are treated at a mental facility, and when they are found mentally competent, they are sent to prison for the rest of their sentence.

There is much controversy about the insanity defense but some of this controversy is from ignorance on the subject. Facts aren’t commonly known about this, which cause fear in some people. A common misconception about the insanity plea is that people may fake psychosis in order to get their case acquitted. The truth is, even before the policy of Guilty but Mentally Ill, only one percent of criminal cases nationwide involved the defendant pleading NGRI. Of the one percent who did try, less than twenty five percent succeeded (Insanity Defense History, 2011).

Current Situation

Since 1963 when the Clean Air Act was passed, air quality has gone up significantly. According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website, 160,000 people were saved in 2010 alone as a direct result of the Clean Air Act (Jones, 2011). In the 1997 EPA report to congress, the EPA stated the in the first 20 years of enactment programs from the Clean Air Act led to the prevention of 250,000 premature deaths, 843,000 asthma attacks, and eighteen million child respiratory diseases (Environmental, 2011).

In 2011 analysis showed that the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 prevented over 160,000 premature deaths; the same analysis projected that the amendments will prevent around 230,000 premature deaths in 2020. It is also projected that the amendments will prevent the loss of seventeen million work days in 2020. In the time between 1970 and 2009 the total emissions of the 6 common air pollutants dropped by 63%, at the same time the GDP rose by 204% and the amount of private sector jobs increased by 86%; this data suggests that while the Clean Air Act improves the environment, it can improve the economy as well (Environmental, 2011).

(Environmental, 2011).

A study observed the effects of placing environmental standards on industries; the study found that on average, employment rises in firms required to meet said standards.

In addition to the increase in employment in the environmental protection industry, environmental standards also create employment in industries that provide intermediate goods to the environmental protection industry. A capital expenditure to reduce air pollution involves the purchase of abatement equipment. The equipment manufacturers, in turn, order steel, tanks, vessels, blowers, pumps, and chemicals to manufacture and install the equipment (Environmental, 2011).

The Institute of Clean Air Companies also discovered that 200,000 jobs were created by just the Clean Air Interstate Rule alone (Environmental, 2011). In a 2005 Census Bureau survey it was revealed that the cost of all pollution controls totaled to $26.6 billion, at the same time the total value of all shipped out goods was $4.74 trillion. This makes the total cost of pollution control less than one percent of the total revenue for manufacturing firms; air pollution control makes up for half this cost (Environmental, 2011).

Current Situation

Underage drinking is a currently a problem with today's youth. Underage drinking is defined by the United States Congress as the consumption of an alcohol-containing beverage if you are in a public place and are under the age of 21 (Hanson, 2009b). Idaho has also decided to add an additional stipulation that says if you are under the age of 21 you cannot partake in the consumption of an alcoholic beverage anywhere, public or private (Idaho legislature, 1984). The consequences of violating this law can be a fine of not more than $1,000. The second conviction under this law shall be punished by a fine of not more than $2,000, and up to 30 days in jail. The third and subsequent conviction under this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than $3,000, and up to 60 days in jail (Idaho legislature, 1984).

The problem with underage drinking can not only be seen by the percent of people participating in it, it can also be seen by the monetary amount it costs to control and fix the problems it creates. In the United States 51.6% of all people ages 12-20 have consumed alcohol in the past 30 days. Of those underage drinkers 23.3% report being binge drinkers with another 6.9% reporting being heavy drinkers. Binge drinking can be defined as having consumed five or more alcoholic drinks on the same occasion (i.e., at the same time or within a couple of hours of each other) on at least one day in the past 30 days. Heavy drinking is defined as consuming five or more alcoholic drinks on the same occasion on each of five or more days in the past 30 days (Results, 2009). Before the National Drinking Age Act of 1984 the percentages of alcoholic consumption in underage persons was much higher than the current percentages (Hanson, 2009).

Idaho, due to its law prohibiting the consumption of alcohol by a person under the age of 21 at any place or any time, has significantly lower rates. Only 40% of 9-12 graders in Idaho have consumed an alcoholic beverage in the last 30 days. Of those underage drinkers, 28% reported being binge drinkers (Results, 2009). Some people do not view underage alcohol consumption in Idaho as a problem; this is obviously wrong when you look at how much it costs Idaho to control and fix this problem. In 2006, $228 million dollars was spent on underage drinking. If you divide the total cost spent on underage drinking in Idaho between every minor of the state each person would be required to pay approximately $1,500 (Results, 2009). The money spent on underage drinking was broken up into the following categories:

Problem / Total cost (in millions)
Youth Violence / $84.4
Youth Traffic Crashes / $76.2
High-Risk Sex, Ages 14-20 / $22.1
Youth Property Crime / $10.6
Youth Injury / $12.4
Poisonings and Psychosis / $1.9
FAS Among Mothers, Ages 15-20 / $4.8
Youth Alcohol treatment / $15.0

Underage Drinking in Idaho. (2007). Retrieved January 31, 2011, from The Institute for International Alcohol Awareness: http://www.iiaaonline.org/pdf/ID_Underage.pdf

The situation of underage drinking is a serious problem in today's youth. The alcohol industry, in 2007, made approximately one billion dollars in profit on underage drinking (Underage drinking, 2007). The effect that underage drinking can have on the mind is staggering. One study found that if a person under the age of 21 drinks alcohol on a regular basis he/she is five times more likely to develop some form of alcoholism or some other disease later in life (Underage drinking, 2007). Research indicates that not only do underage drinkers suffer from memory loss and depression, but that it can also lead to social problems and thoughts of suicide.