« Scream this from the rooftops | Main | Will the Democrats raise taxes? »
The Federalization Fraud
Every time there is a nationally publicized crime some Federal politician stands ready to get tough and pass a law. In recent years, we have had The Juvenile Crime Control Act, The Church Arson Prevention Act, The Sex Crimes against Children Prevention Act and so forth leading the naive to wonder why Church arson wasn't illegal before the act was passed.
Of course, arson has always been illegal and well prosecuted under state law. Federal law is not only unnecessary in many cases it is a fraud. Take the most recent example, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act passed this year. The act dramatically increases the penalties for aggravated sexual abuse (or an unsuccesful attempt at such abuse) to a mandatory 30 year prison sentence with no opportunity for parole. The penalties are draconian but here's the kicker. The penalties only apply to Indians on reservations, citizens of Washington DC and those few offenders who might cross a state line in commission of their offense. No other citizens face anything like these kinds of penalties.
For more on the Theory of Federalism and an application to crime see my powerpoint discussion given last week to a group of Federal judges.
Posted by Alex Tabarrok on November 15, 2006 at 07:10 AM in Law | Permalink
Comments
Thank you for the excellent presentation. Here is a recent example from China. As part of a major crackdown on crime, the power of issuing final verdicts on capital punishment was handed down from the Supreme People’s Court to the provincial courts in 1983. The number of criminal cases dropped 31 percent in the 8 months immediately following the change. However, in recent years, there have been a series of reports on errors in death sentence cases, and criticisms around “insufficient supervision” of death sentences. Two weeks ago, China’s top legislature decided, effective January 1, 2007, to give the power back to the Supreme People’s Court.
Posted by: Yan Li at Nov 15, 2006 10:57:30 AM
I fail to see the "fraud" here. Obviously, there is no fraud -- you are simply abusing the English language. Though I have to say that the alliteration in "Federalism Fraud" is kind of catchy.
Is your complaint that it is arbitrary to punish people who cross state lines differently? If so, it could be equally argued that it is arbitrary to punish someone differently who commits a crime in Virginia differently than in Maryland.
I don't see the point of your claim.
BTW, I don't think the penalties here are draconian at all. 30 years for the aggravates sexual assault of a child is nothing. I think they should add mandatory physical castration and another 20 years to the sentence.
Posted by: Ragerz at Nov 15, 2006 3:19:07 PM
Ragerz, the fraud is that Federal politicians take credit for passing laws that have very little effect - not only are all the crimes already illegal at the state level the federal portion applies only to a very small subset of offenders.
Posted by: Alex Tabarrok at Nov 15, 2006 3:47:50 PM
I dont really see the fraud either. But i do think that some laws are passed
for the simple reason of pleasing voters. the Adam walsh act makes no sense if it only stiffin penalities to those small groups. i also dont understand just now making
burnibg down a church illegal, as far as i know that has always been bad.
Posted by: blake at Nov 15, 2006 9:46:50 PM
I dont really see the fraud either. But i do think that some laws are passed
for the simple reason of pleasing voters. the Adam walsh act makes no sense if it
only stiffin penalities to those small groups. i also dont understand just now
making burning down a church illegal, as far as i know that has always been bad.
Posted by: blake at Nov 15, 2006 9:49:45 PM
I wonder if it would be easier to frame the point for people by alluding to political hot air everyone is vehement about abhorring by retitling "Federalistic Flatulence"?
Posted by: am at Nov 15, 2006 10:17:11 PM
This is what television has done to politics. Yuck.
Posted by: save_the_rustbelt at Nov 15, 2006 10:18:03 PM
I forgot to mention. Although I have only skimmed the piece so far, it looks interesting and presents a point of view I find very sympathetic.
Posted by: am at Nov 15, 2006 10:19:49 PM
Politicians are just trying to make a name for themselves. In order for a politician to be effective in his job he has to have influence. They need to have publicity to be influential. The best way for a politician to grab headlines is to tack his name on a bill that addresses a heinous crime. The bill will be strongly supported, that senator or representative then appears to be effective in his job (which is to get laws passed). The fact that the law is really hollow or redundant makes no difference. He will appear to be able to get things done. His constituents back home won’t know that the bill is really meaningless. All they will remember is that he was “that guy that got child molesters a 30 year sentence”. It’s all a game of show business.
Posted by: Lee Vandeberg at Nov 15, 2006 11:34:52 PM
Instead of making new laws every time there is a heinous crime commited, why don't they just spend more time enforcing the old laws? Why should there be a seperate laws for things like burning down churches. It seems like society would benefit more from enforcing laws that are already in place rather than going out of their way to make new laws to fit every situation. Isn't it just a waste of time and resources to come up with a new law everytime a high profile crime is commited?
Posted by: Robert S at Nov 16, 2006 5:12:56 PM
数控机床数控机床。。数控改造。。
数控机床。。
数控机床改造。。
数控机床仿真软件数控机床改造。。
数控机床。。
数控机床。。
数控机床。。
数控车床数控车床。。
数控车床。。
华中数控车床。。
大连数控车床。。
无锡数控车床山东数控车床。。
南京数控车床。。
数控车床。。
数控车床。。
广州数控车床数控车床。。
广州数控车床。。
华中数控车床。。
数控车床。。
数控车床北京数控车床。。
数控车床简介。。
教学车床。。
教学数控车床。。
数控铣床南通数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
教学数控铣床教学铣床。。
数控机床实训设备。。
加工中心。。
加工中心。。
加工中心加工中心。。
微型加工中心。。
数控加工中心。。
加工中心。。
加工中心加工中心。。
加工中心。。
上海加工中心。。
加工中心
Posted by: 南京北春 at Aug 20, 2007 10:33:14 PM
Posted by: regt at Mar 31, 2008 9:00:17 AM
Weight loss is easier than you think!
Posted by: adipex at Mar 4, 2009 2:54:09 PM
