Is the sun setting on California?

In order to get out of its nightmarish financial situation, the state of California has decided to vote two bills supposed to help solving this problem. Indeed, its penitentiary system is to be lightened and marijuana is to be legalised.

I can see the point of why it would be easier to save and gain money. I am also aware that the judiciary system in California is tough and thus it is one of the main causes in the overpopulation of its penitentiary facilities. 150,000 inmates are at the moment in the prisons and the bill aims to reduce this number by 55,000 over 3 years by shortening sentences, releasing people inculpated for minor sanctions and other mechanics. Prisons are often reaching the double of their designed capacities making the living conditions in them hard to manage; classrooms and gymnasiums had to be converted so that they could allow prisoners to sleep in. This reform would save from $803M to $906M per year and is endorsed by Governor Schwarzenegger. However, this problem does not only concern the state of California but the whole country, and as a matter of fact a lot of nations suffer from this problem. In 1972, there were 172,000 prisoners in the USA while now this number has skyrocketed to 1,403,091 people.

The bill on the legalisation of the marijuana would make of California the first state to legalize its use in the USA. A poll in April 2009 revealed that 56% of the Californians were favourable to it while in October 44% of the Americans would not mind this step. Proponents argue that it would diminish crime linked to the traffic as the ban has bolstered an aggressive underground economy while opponents argue that it would increase the problems linked to social behaviour notably on the road.

This bill, if passed, in conjunction with the prison bill would allow California to significantly reduce its prisons population and increase its finances thanks to a tax on the commercialisation of marijuana.

I am a bit dubitative at this double decision as I do not really know what would be the impact of such measure on the society. Does this mean that the cartels controlling drug traffic are going to be out of business without trying anything and thus crime will fall? Does this mean that people susceptible of a federal offense will take more liberties confident in the fact that minor crimes will be less punished? Will there be more troubles linked to the consumption of marijuana? Or are these more laxist measures supposed to perpetuate the ideal of happiness in the country blessed by God?

These events combined with the failure of the education in California do not announce a bright future to me. I do not really see how it would be beneficial for the society to profit from these bills. Is it a sign of the degeneration of the American society or of an evolution?

-C

Pursuit of Happiness

In connection with my previous post, I have found a little solace. I spent the other night watching the first two episodes of the John Adams miniseries. I was reminded of a few things and began to analyze how American government impacts my life.

My favorite politician, or the one that I find I am in most agreement with, is Thomas Jefferson. He has many admirable qualities but those are not the purpose of this discussion. I wish to address the Declaration of Independence—American independence that is. He was the author of the infamous document and used theory of John Locke to provide its foundation. John Locke claimed that innate rights of man included life, liberty, and property. Thomas Jefferson however did not fully agree as he claimed that man is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This last point is the one that I want to further discuss.

I, for one, might be unhappy with my unemployment or my personal situation but I am granted the right to pursue happiness. At first I found it quizzical that Jefferson just didn’t say that man should have life, liberty, and happiness. Why did he include the pursuit? In thinking further about it, I determined that Jefferson realized that happiness doesn’t come easily. There is struggle associated with pursuit. I think this struggle is the essence of even achieving happiness. In such an instance it is understandable why he included the phrase over ‘property’. The pursuit of happiness is not only my American right but my human right. Why then, would I not utilize my right and pursue happiness? Regardless of the economy, I can and should pursue the happiness that is granted to me. However in this, I acknowledge that it may not come cheap or easily—I must pursue it. Happiness does not fall into one’s lap (as far as I know) so I must endeavor to seize it. Thomas Jefferson must have also believed that this pursuit was highly important to level it with life and liberty. Whew, he valued this struggle as much as liberty or life itself. That makes me reevaluate what is really important in life.
~PB