Political Science

The spillover method in what ways did or did not the European founding fathers  step-by-step approach proves to be successful in the development of European construction

The founding idea of the European Union was to have the Union possess almost all powers in making decisions pertaining key policy areas. The aim was to have a federal state with no independent area. The spill over strategy was that one area of the European cooperation would require support from another in order to work effectively (Warleigh-Lack, 2009, p 4). As such, there was supposed to be integration of sectors beginning from one sector to the others. It was for instance planned that the integration of the steel and coal industries would later lead to the harmonizing of the defense sectors which depended on the minerals. This would in effect lead to the need of having a universal foreign and defense policy. The spillover would culminate in having a universal European government. This integration approach was referred to as the Monnet Method after Jean Monnet, a founding father of the EU.

To some extent, the approach was successful but there were areas and extents into which it did not succeed. In particular, it was possible to harmonize certain economic fields but the politicalgovernmental integration was and has been a challenge. While it was possible to come up with an Economic and Steel Community, it was impossible to come up with the European Defense Community. The founding of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to ensure food security was a successful integration approach although the policy has had its own harms. The idea of functionalism governance as proposed by the founding fathers of the EU can be said to have failed as states differ more on sovereignty and the amount of power that ought to be bestowed on the EU. Currently, the EU member states retain sovereignty although they retain links with the EU and its institutions. Only a few areas of cooperation such as agriculture and trade are regulated by the EU body. In short, the step-by-step approach of integration of the EU as proposed by the founding fathers has only been controversially successful in economic integration but little on political integration (Warleigh-Lack, 2009).

To what extent are each one of the EU institutionsCouncil of Ministers, Commission, and European Parliamentmarked by supranational or intergovernmental tendencies or practices

A supranational tendency is a neo-functionalist idea of integrating economic sectors as well as political fields to come up with a larger regional community governing individual members of the Union. On the other hand, intergovernmental tendencies are inclinations towards having individual states retain sovereignty and be allowed to make their independent decisions. The national governments may cooperate on say economic grounds but should not be subjected to political integration as is the tendency of supranational community. There are three main institutions of the EU (namely the European Parliament, the European Commission and the European Council of ministers) which to some degree advance either of the above tendencies.

The European Parliament (EP) is a body that is elected by the citizens of all the member states in a democratic manner. It was instituted in the 1950s during the development of the EU. The members of the parliament serve a five year term. The fact that the parliament is elected by all the citizens of the member states to a greater extent is an intergovernmental approach. The European parliament is mandated to pass European laws such as agricultural and economic policies which are eventually supranational tendencies.

The European Commission (EC) to some extent is an institution that propagates supranational tendencies. This is because the institution operates independent of the national governments with its main mandate being to represent and uphold the interests of the EU as a whole (Europa, 2009, para 1). The EC was established in the1950s during the setting up of the European Union. Although the EC operates on a supranational ground, its membership which is made of commissioners from every nation is to extent shows that it upholds to intergovernmental approach. The intergovernmental tendencies of the EC are rendered meaningless by the fact that commissioners are not supposed to represent the positions of their individual governments but rather pay loyalty to the Unions interests. Perhaps it is more of an intergovernmental approach to have the ECs president being proposed by Member State governments though this role is rendered insignificant as the other EU institutions play important roles in endorsing the appointee.

The Council of the European Union was also established during the founding of the EU in 1950s and has the role of making decisions on the activities of the EU. A minister from each member state has to represent the state in the meetings of the Council. There is no specific minister who attends all the meetings but rather the choice of the representative depends on the agenda at hand. It is therefore likely to have council meetings being referred to as Environmental Council when it is an environmental issue under discussion. To this extent, the Council is more of an advocate of intergovernmental tendencies. The EU Council is the best advocator of intergovernmental approach as ministers in the various Council configurations are bestowed the authority to represent their states to the best. The answerability of the ministers to the home government and citizens means that the minister has to air the concerns of hisher nation to the best of their abilities thus representing an intergovernmental approach (Europa, 2009).

The involvement of the presidents of the individual member states in the Council to resolve contentious issues shows that this institution has more of intergovernmental approaches.  The best examples of intergovernmental cooperation of the Council is their coming together to develop a common foreign and security policy as well as ensure that national courts and police forces co-work. Each member state has its own sovereignty regarding foreign and security policy with very minimal involvement of the EP and the EC.

What has been the contribution of the different European treaties in shaping a European foreign policy

The European Union was established on a number of treaties. The issue of foreign policy was however left to be decided by individual states and therefore a common European policy was not given much weight. As mentioned earlier, the Council for European Union does not have a final decision on the EU foreign policy since each member state retains its own foreign policy making decisions.

The founding Treaty of Rome led to the EU being less interactive with the rest of the world as seen by the establishment of various policies. The Common Agricultural Policy for instance led to poor international relations due to restrictions on goods entering the European Union jurisdiction yet its goods were freely traded to other countries. The EU member states can therefore be said to have suffered in their supranational tendency of agreeing to the CAP. However, a common foreign and security policy was more of the view of the Maastricht Treaty due to need for defense against surging terrorism as well as need to offer humanitarian and military aid more so to the third world countries (Warleigh-Lack, 2009). 

The 1992 Maastricht Treaty was a step towards developing a common foreign and security policy.  The member sates were initially operating under national foreign policies but need for a common stand in issues affecting the EU as a block propelled the decision to have a common foreign and security policy in the 1992 treaty. The treaty however did not realize the goal of having a common foreign policy hence the Treaty of Lisbon. Coming under the pressure of globalization and need to maintain good international relations with its allies, the EU has been forced to rethink on agreeing on a common foreign policy.

The Treaty of Lisbon has come up with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HRFASP), a personality with the mandate of spearhead the streamlining of the EU foreign policy.  Acting as the representative of the EU highest institutions, the HRFASP is supposed to direct foreign policy agenda from an intergovernmental agenda to a supranational issue. In essence, it can be said that the Lisbon Treaty has had the highest influence in charting the way for the EU foreign policy as it mandates the Council to take this role (Gaspers, 2009).

The Russian mafia refers to a group of organized criminal organizations that originated from the Soviet Union. After the fall of the Soviet Union in the last decade of the 20th century, the Russian mafia has spread all over the world gaining control and influence in the black market. The group consists of international criminals from Russia who are involved in multibillion illegal trade such as oil trade, smuggling of dangerous weapons and money laundering (Glenny, 2008). 

The rise in organized criminal syndicates which led to the creation of the Russian mafia took place after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990s which resulted into economic hardships and massive emigration. As more people who had lost their government jobs became more desperate for money, they embraced criminal life. Due to emigration, the criminal element spread to overseas which has made the Russian be active in all parts of the world. The increased level of corruption in the government and poverty led to the high rate of growth of the Russian mafia. The opening of Russia to the outside world enabled the mafias to link with other international criminal syndicates (Glenny, 2008).

However, crime in the Russian society has existed for many centuries. However, the criminal gangs were not involved in international and well organized crime as the Russian mafias who emerged in the 1990s. They were mainly involved in theft and banditry. They were commonly known as the Vory v zakone and at one time controlled the black market in the Soviet Union where they supplied electronics and cooperated with corrupt government officials. These criminal groups were however not connected to other international criminal groups outside Russia as the Russian mafias.

After the 911 terror attacks the concept of domestic security has changed drastically and our government has responded to it with a good measure of change with our existing law enforcing agencies. Since 911, several changes have been made to help the law enforcing agencies across the board. The biggest of them all is the enforcement of the Department Of Homeland Security. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 ensures better performance among our security branches to an extent that these agencies are now working together and collecting, analyzing and disseminating information together. I think that the US has more effectively reorganised the government structures to ensure security for our citizens. Before 911 there were sundry law enforcing agencies that took care of the entire security system of this nation and lack of cooperation and coordination betwen them was a common complaint. Sdudies showed that this drawback on the part of our agencies collaborated to the undected terror attacks on September 11, 2001. Now all security agencies have come under one umbrella organization and that is The Daparment of Homeland Security.
                   
I think that the responsibilities put on the head of the secretary of the HS is too big to handle. The secretary has to look into the overall performance of the HS and in addition to that he has extra tasks to resolve turf battles, incostistent and overlapping missions, budgetary problems etc. So I think that its too heavy a task to handle for one person. One suggestion is that to decentralize the whole Department of Homeland Security to the regional centres to overcome problems that this organization is facing now. I think thats a good idea. It will not add up to another layer of bureaucracy rather it will strengthen the whole organization by locally monitoring individuals and ground level of intelligence work. I do not tink that the law enforcement agencies alone are capable of collecting data on the threats originating inside or outside of the US aginst us. Previously the FBI was given the sole task of tackling terrorism inside the US border and US Secret Services were used as a tool to collect and research data gathered outside of US border. Sharing information between them was rare and complicated. Under the Department Of Homeland Security this task is going to be more accureate and easy since all agengies are working now under HS.
                     
The process that I would recommend to set up to share law enforcement data with intelligenge community is to create a council or a special committee within Homeland Security. The task of this councilcommittee will be to collect data from both CIA and other intelligenge services and tranfer them directly to law enforcement branches across the nation and vice versa.   

The Italian Mafia has been present in Canada for a long time.  The most prominent Mafia family, which was also among the first to settle in is the Cotroni family.  This family, which is also referred to as the Calabria Cotroni, moved to Montreal in 1934 (Lamothe and Humphreys 56).  It then began to establish itself into the Mafia rings of the city.

By the 1940s the Calabria Cotroni ran a number of both legal and illegal businesses in and around Montreal.  Under the leadership of Vic Cotroni, the Mafia group established extortion rings, drug smuggling operations, protection rackets, and labor racketeering and loan sharking operations.  On the flip side, Vic Cotroni also owned and controlled legally established construction companies, ice-cream manufacturing firms, food importing firms and distribution operations, hotels, restaurants and bars (Schneider 257).

In the 1970s, with the Mafia entrenched in the economic, social and political circles of the Montreal society, there began to emerge divisions within the Italian Mafia.  These divisions were evident not only within the Cotroni family but also the various leadership ranks and members of the Mafia (Schneider 259).  It was also during this period that personalities like Paolo Violi emerged as a formidable leadership force within the Cotroni decina (260).  Paolo Violi was later appointed the interim leader or underboss of the Mafia group in 1974 (274).

In 1973, there began a feud over the control of the Mafia activities and criminal activities in Canada.  In 1970, Niccolo Rizzuto, a long-time nemesis of Violi, succeeded in killing him.  He took control of all criminal activities in Canada in 1984 following the death of Vincent Cotroni.  Niccolo was convicted for cocaine trafficking in 1988 and left his son, Vito Rizzuto to become the boss of the Mafia family (Manning 195).

With the Rizzuto family at the helm of its leadership, the Mafia in Montreal controls most of the citys criminal activities.  It is most recognized for controlling gambling activities that consist of book making, video poker machines and casino operations.  The Montreal Mafia is also involved in narcotics, extortion, corruption and money laundering (196).

In 2000, feuds within the Mafia society emerged again.  This time, Vito Rizzuto was being targeted for assassination from individuals from both within the Montreal Mafia and outside gangs (550).  On May 4th 2007, after a series of brushes with the authorities, Vito Rizzuto pleaded guilty to a racketeering charge and was handed a ten year sentence (552).

There exist many similarities between Mafia activities in Montreal and in America.  Noteworthy is the fact that both of them engage in similar practices like drug trafficking, money laundering and violent crime.  Both also infiltrate legitimate enterprises and politics.  It is however imperative to note that the American Mafia is seen to be continuously adopting to the changing law enforcement mechanisms while continuing to maintain its historical practices (Mallory 102).  This has made it more difficult for authorities to curtail them. 

On the other hand, the Canadian government has in the recent past made a significant headway in efforts to stop organized crime.  It has had successful police round-ups of gang members, made arrests of important Mafia leadership and reduced the increase of organized crime activities in its cities.
In addition to the Mafia, Montreal has a number of gangs operating in the city.  The two dominant gang groups are the Hells Angels and the Haitians.  The Hells Angels are the most powerful and arguably the largest motorcycle club.  They are involved in money laundering, murder, theft, loan-sharking, counterfeiting, extortion, prostitution and strip clubs.  Unlike the Mafia that dominates the trade of hard drugs like heroine and cocaine, the Hells Angels are involved in cultivation of Marijuana and trafficking of Methamphetamine, LSD and ecstasy (Liddick 43)

What is clear is that when the strength or control of one organized crime group goes down, there is always another ready to take its place.  The demise of the Hells Angels following a police round up was quickly replaced by the Mafia.  This was in turn brought to a halt by the arrest of the Mafia leaders leaving room for the Haitians to take over (Montreal Gazette 1).

According to a Montreal Gazette report on the 29th of December 2009, Nick Rizzuto Junior, the son of Vito Rizzuto was shot dead.  With Vito serving his sentence, the death of his son means that the Montreal Mafia has been significantly weakened.  As had been noted earlier, the weakening of one group in Montreal usually proves to be advantageous for another.  Without the Mafia any other gang, street or otherwise is able to take over.   It is therefore possible that either the Hells Angels or the Haitians are responsible for Nick Juniors death in an attempt to gain supremacy.

Another theory that may suffice to explain the killing of Nick Rizzuto junior may be that his death was to avenge the burning down of the Hells Angels bunker in 2008.  It is evident that the incident was a blow to the Hells Angels and that it could have been done by any of the existing organized criminal groups in Montreal.  It is possible that the death of Nick junior was over suspicion of the Mafias involvement in the fire.

The killing of Nick Rizzuto, coupled with the burning down of the Hells Angels banker has created worry of impending feuds between the organized crime groups in Montreal. The Montreal Gazette rightfully terms as Quebec is in for a war, is an illustration of the possible troubles that Canada is likely to face if the existing suspicion between the groups continues.

Justice Antonin Scalia rejects the notion of a living constitution which can be used holistically to account for social change. According to him, the constitution changes as the standards of decency changes over time. Now, in the process of restructuring, the constitution becomes a dead document. The changes adopted destroyed the original intention of the constitution. These changes are however helpful because it upgrades the interpretative power of the constitution as far as law and morality are concerned. Moreover, these changes are only adopted if they are rational and necessary.

Now, the notion of a living constitution is a myth. For a constitution to be holistically universal, it must be valid from one historical period to another. This is impossible because the standards of decency (morality) changes over time. Because morality is subject to social change, the law must therefore be subjected to change.

Laurence Tribe agrees with Scalia on the notion of a changing constitution. According to him, the constitution must adopt to social and political changes in order to retain legitimacy. However, the elements of the old constitutions are still in place, unrevised. Despite radical changes in form and content, the constitution still appeals to its historical value as a legitimate document. According to him, change not only makes the constitution valid, it also reinforces the idea of a shadow document  a document where the key historic values of a nation are kept.

Now, it is possible, as Scalia concurs, for a given right or power to be textually absent in the constitution while at the same time legally accepted. The constitution may serve as a hint for interpretation, and thus as an operative reference to a given problem. As Tribe noted, the constitution is not a simply aggregate of laws, it is a governing legal principle.

The Congressional District Method (CDM) adopted by Maine and Nebraska for choosing delegates to the Electoral College is an attempt to actualize the principle of one-man one- vote. It abandons the practice of winner takes it all and tries to apportion the presidential vote according to the way voters cast their ballots. Whereas this method has its advantages, there is a great risk that it could balkanize the state between those who voted for and those who voted against the president.

In certain circumstances, this method may serve to balance the electoral process and give a voice to those who are perennially shut out because of the policy of winner takes all. Party affiliation may consistently determine the way a state votes for presidential candidates, ignoring the views of a considerable number of people who support a different party (Linton  Southcott, 1998). Republican dominated states are more likely to vote for a Republican candidate irrespective of whether their candidate is the best person for the job. This policy ignores the weight of other voters ballots and promotes mob democracy where the greatest number will always achieve their goals.

The CDM gives minority groups a voice provided they dominate the vote in the congressional district (Linton  Southcott, 1998).  A combination of such votes throughout the United States can propel an independent candidate to the top seat and break the traditional voting pattern that pits Republicans against Democrats.

In situations where the vote is evenly split between two candidates, CDM effectively represents the view of the electorate. All electors will feel satisfied that their choice was represented at the Electoral College and that their vote mattered in the determination of the next president.

In conclusion, the CDM of choosing delegates to the Electoral College has its pros and cons. Minority groups stand a better chance of being heard at the national level because their vote will inform the incoming president of their issues. The real danger lies in dividing the state on partisan lines and increasing political tensions because of electoral differences.

The Supremacy clause was included in the text of the United States Constitution to resolve the potential conflict that may arise should traditional practices of state sub-units run contrary to the provisions of the fundamental law. According to Article VI, Section 2, the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding (US Constitution). The text emphasizes that the Constitution reigns supreme and all possible legal controversy should be judged according to what is stated in the highest law.

The concept of federalism in the United States follows a coming together model so that the uniqueness and distinct political traditions, values, and principles of a state government are respected and harmonized with the general goals and aims of the federal government (Goodin, 1996). The supremacy of the Constitution is the uniting factor where possible inconsistencies between state laws and traditions are harmonize to conform to the supreme law. This arrangement, however, creates several potential conflicts. First, it has the tendency to undermine the authority and legitimacy of practices that are accepted as legal norms in a state. For instance, the practice of polygamy in Utah has been embraced since the establishment of the Mormon church and considered one of the basic foundations of their religion. Because the said tradition was repugnant to the monogamous marriage held sacred in the supreme law, the leaders of Utah were forced to abandon this principle in favor of statehood. Second, the supremacy clause has the tendency to erode historical and cultural loyalties which the citizens of a federal state may have toward their own state by virtue of shared experience as members. A supreme law is institutionally designed in a federalist state to guarantee that citizens abandon ethnocentric tendencies and feel an overarching loyalty to the federal government as a whole (Goodin, 1996). Third, considering that state units under a federation are not equal in power and resources, the democratic will of the majority (usually held by larger and wealthier states) may leave the state units no choice but to give up dearly held beliefs and traditions to retain allegiance to the federation.