The United States of America (U.S) declared its independence from the United Kingdom (U.K) in 1776. Before its independence, the founders of the 13 states of America had sort many ways to break free from British top-down, centralized government that ruled in a tyranny. The founders attempted to create the first Constitution. They named it the Articles of Confederation (AOC), which vested all its powers in individual state legislatures, leaving out powers for the national government. As a result, there was crippling debts and political chaos that almost sunk the entire nation. The founders met again in 1787 at a place called Philadelphia, and a new Constitution was drafted that saw the separation of national powers and state, commonly known as Federalism. The word “federalism” does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, but it was/is the guiding principle that safeguards Americans by providing a check and balance against bad governance. Thus, as it shall be demonstrated in this paper, the founding fathers were correct in introducing Federalism and separating state powers.
According to Amadi et al. (2017), Federalism is a government system where sovereignty is divided between a constituent political unit and central governing authority. In other words, it is based on democratic rules and institutions where the governing power is shared between the state and national government; thus, creating a federation. Federalism is a political movement that rose to become more influential, arising from the discontent of the AOC (Wright & Jensen, 1941). The political movement was significantly strengthened by Shay’s Rebellion in 1786, an army uprising consisting of farmers in Western Massachusetts. The prolonged poor economy fueled the rebellion further when they watched the federal government deal effectively with the American Revolution debt. Additionally, the federal government was incapable of forming an army that could quell the rebellion. Massachusetts had to develop its own.
Federalist No. 46 is an essay written by Madison that reminds his audience that the American people are the only denominator for the federal and state governments. While these two governments have different powers, they are subject to control the voters for other purposes. Thus, Madison uses a series of arguments to convince people that state governments have various natural benefits over federal governments when securing the votes of the people (McDowell, 2019). Given the advantages posed by the state governments, Madison argues that citizens can only be loyal to the federal government if it becomes more capable. And if that happens, then the state will have little to fear as the federal power can only be advantageously administered to a specific sphere. In case one arm goes too far, then the advantage will lie within the State government. This is because the state actions have presumably been popular with Americans. The federal government can only overcome the state by using force, which can be taken with reluctance. Assuming the federal government goes too far, there will be no co-operation from the state’s people, which could lead to an obstruction of the federal actions.
While the framers had hoped to develop a unitary system of government, both states were kept as they were well-established and functioning. Also, the Americans had a popular attachment to their states. Thus, the Framers gave the national government a few expressed powers and reserved the remaining forces to the state. The most vital concept of Federalism is the idea of dual sovereignty. The fact that two governments are manning the same territories means a constant power struggle. Hence, it ensures that no one abuses their power. For instance, the federal government can force states to use the Bill of rights through sanctions and court rulings.
Furthermore, Madison assumes that the power advantage of states is that an individual elected in the federal government will have some local interests and dispositions over a particular state. On the other hand, no state official will favor the national interest over local interests. Indeed, Madison’s analysis has proved accurate for the longest time. It does not matter the state of affairs; state governments with solid support have been known to frustrate the unpopular demands of the federal power.
Overall, Federalism is not only good for the government but Americans. It is a more responsive system to citizens as local governments allow laws to be tailored to suit the local population. Notably, it is easier to change things at a state level than at a federal level. Also, while Federalism has accommodated diversity of opinions, it promotes policy innovation (Ryan, 2016). For instance, a few laws have been passed that have become American’s breakthroughs. Some of these laws include child labor laws, which were inspired by state policies. Some rules were given that allowed women to vote; some states established environmental policies to curb fuel emissions. States like Kentucky, Connecticut, and Washington have had health insurance exchanges that have improved their health policies.
From the point of liberty, the three branches of government do not belong to anyone or a particular class. In the same breath, people should not feel that Congress belongs to them, but the Constitution belongs to them. The separation of powers is the best weapon for preventing tyranny and promoting a good government. Further, it allows the federal branches of government to perform their functions actively. Therefore, the framers of the Constitution saw it fit for powers of government to be divided to avoid a group of men wielding them all at once. If that happens, there will constantly be a case of injustice and tyranny.
However, some opposed Federalism, and they were popularly known as Anti-Federalists (Gatica, 2019). They were local and not cosmopolitan, whose orientation focused more on farms and plantations than finance and commerce. In simple words, they wanted a weaker national government with a strong state government. Besides, they believed that the legislative branch had unchecked powers, the executive had too many powers, and the chief executive had no check. The Anti-Federalist wanted the Bill of Rights coupled with the Constitution to avoid a dictator exploiting Americans. Contrary, the federalists strongly opposed that idea, arguing that it was impossible to list all the rights and those that were not listed were not in the official Bill of rights, thus, could be overlooked.
Moreover, the Wilsonian approach changed the executive branch’s role by equating their argument to “political witchcraft.” Their system advised countrymen to have a “fearless ‘criticism” against the Constitution Wilson’s political thought, in a real sense, rejected the separation of powers by favoring a modern approach of separating politics and administration (Aligica, 2016). Also, in rejecting the doctrine of separation of powers, the Wilsonian method reformulated the political debate and put democracy and the rule of checks and balances at the last bottom in the evolution of a good government. As a result, this approach changed the role of government as enshrined in the Constitution. Instead, the government has to adjust to changes in the environment, as its structure constantly is no longer ordained by the laws of Nature.
Madison does not expect the Constitution to be the leading cause of the conflicts between federal authority and state government. Instead, he strongly opposes his opponents’ arguments of the federal command crushing state governments. He alleges that such chimerical predictions are entirely unfounded. Federalism has been the most outstanding achievement of America since the framers were able to create an effective constitutional structure that comprised all political institutions. The two crucial aspects of the Constitution that still linger on is the separation of powers and Federalism. To save the country from political chaos, the framers had to divide government powers. Hence, the crucial function of Federalism was to limit the powers of government by establishing two sovereign powers- the state and national governments.
Aligica, P. D. (2016). Public Administration and the Classical Liberal Perspective. Administration & Society, 49(4), 530–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715581044
Amadi, O., Echem, M., & Nwoko, M. (2017). The Theory and Practice of Federalism: A Critical Analysis of History and Global Trend. International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Science, 1(7), 42. http://ijses.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/109-IJSES-VIN6.pdf
Gatica, O. F. (2019). Federalist and Anti-Federalist: Two Divergent Concepts of Politics. Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia, 14(1), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.19195/1895-8001.14.1.9
McDowell, G. L. (2019). Forging the American Nation, 1787–1791: James Madison and the Federalist Revolution. Journal of American History, 106(3), 742–742. https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jaz545
Ryan, E. (2016). Secession and Federalism in the United States: Tools for Managing Regional Conflict in a Pluralistic Society. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2775377
Wright, B. F., & Jensen, M. (1941). The Articles of Confederation: An Interpretation of the Social-Constitutional History of the American Revolution, 1774-1781. The New England Quarterly, 14(1), 174. https://doi.org/10.2307/360116
Feed-in-Tariffs For Renewable Energy Essay Sample For College
Long-term contracts for renewable energy producers are part of a feed-in tariff (FIT), a regulatory tool meant to spur investment in renewable energy technology. One of its key objectives is to provide long-term contracts and price stability to assist finance renewable energy projects (Alizada, 2018). FITs often offer varying rates to various renewable energy sources to stimulate the development of one renewable energy technology over another. Wind and solar power, for example, are paid more per kilowatt-hour than tidal power. Fits frequently incorporate “degression”—a progressive decline in tariffs and prices—to stimulate and support technical cost savings.
It is customary for FITs to have features such as assured grid access and long-term contracts. Feed-in tariffs allow you to be paid depending on the actual cost of generating renewable energy. This comprises residential, commercial, and agricultural properties, as well as private investors (Baur & Uriona, 2018). Wind, solar, and biogas are just a few examples of potentially lucrative energy sources. The Renewable Energy Sources Act of 2000 in Germany explains this idea. Scientists used scientific research to establish the compensation rates, predicated on the assumption that an installation may be run at an affordable cost when adequately managed, using cutting-edge technology and utilizing locally accessible renewable energy sources.
Numerous variables come into play here, including the technology, location (such as a rooftop or ground-mounted solar PV plant), size (such as a home or commercial building), and geographic region. Because of the rapid pace at which technology advances, tariffs are often set to decrease over time. A long-term (15–25 year) guaranteed purchase agreement is the norm for FITs. Producers are rewarded for increasing their project’s productivity and efficiency through performance-based pricing. Over 50 nations have put in place feed-in tariff programs by 2019. The marginal cost of a feed-in tariff may be used to discriminate between taxes. Using the notion of pricing differential, this is an alternate hypothesis. Depending on the program, the tariff price might range from little over the market rate to the price required to reach a government-specified maximum output level (Alizada, 2018). Feed-in tariffs for firms with low marginal costs result in higher revenues but not as much as the uniform tariffs for all firms: the more significant the tax, the more marginal the producer. There are two goals in this iteration of the policy. We may start by reducing a few of our manufacturing facilities’ profits.
The geographic location of many renewable energy sources is critical. When it comes to renewable energy sources, wind turbines and solar panels do best in windy environments. As a consequence, generators prefer to cluster in the most lucrative regions. Tariff differences are aimed at promoting the distribution of generators, which many consider an unwanted product in the region (Baur & Uriona, 2018). This would be not good for the environment if we cleared all the trees to create wind farms. As a result, renewable energy generation becomes less cost-effective as efficient locations are underutilized. Tariffs varied based on marginal cost might also serve the secondary goal of reducing the overall program budget. As a result of a uniform tax, all producers get the same payment, which at times exceeds the price that would stimulate them to produce (Zhao et al., 2021). As a consequence of the increased revenue, profits are made. For this reason, each producer will get a varied rate in order to ensure that the market has enough renewable energy production.
When it comes to trade, feed-in tariffs are a growing problem because they can directly impact other countries’ economies and policy-making. The World Trade Organization (WTO) may be able to assist in coordinating the handling and enforcement of this policy instrument. This brings in the topic of the theory of harm (Leiren & Reimer, 2018). To explain why an agreement or practice between two or more businesses may undermine competition and hurt customers. Market structure is considered, but motivations and capabilities of the enterprises engaged are also considered.
Safe renewable energy markets are built via subsidies and RPS. Renewable portfolio standards (RPS) mandate that electric utilities get a certain amount of their power from renewable sources. Utilities in the United States, the European Union, and Australia may get Renewable Energy Certificates, Renewable Energy Certificate Systems, and Renewable Energy Certificate Registries, respectively, to fulfill this requirement (Alizada, 2018). Emission Reduction Credits Renewable energy suppliers get these certificates based on the amount of energy they produce. Another income stream for the renewable energy generator is the sale of certificates. The cost of renewable energy certificates varies with the general demand for energy and the level of competition among providers.
As with carbon trading in Europe, certificate prices may plummet if the needed quantity of renewable energy is generated. The economic viability of renewable producers may be harmed due to this. Due to quota systems, big, vertically integrated generators and multinational electric utilities have an advantage over smaller, independent producers (Baur & Uriona, 2018). Because they are harder to develop and install than FIT, they are also more expensive. A more cost-effective approach to promoting renewable energy development may be to mandate dynamic pricing for user-initiated meter upgrades (especially for distributed energy uptake).
Alizada, K. (2018). Rethinking the diffusion of renewable energy policies: a global assessment of feed-in tariffs and renewable portfolio standards. Energy research & social science, 44, 346-361.
Baur, L., & Uriona, M. (2018). Diffusion of photovoltaic technology in Germany: A sustainable success or an illusion driven by guaranteed feed-in tariffs?. Energy, 150, 289-298.
Leiren, M. D., & Reimer, I. (2018). Historical institutionalist perspective on the shift from feed-in tariffs towards auctioning in German renewable energy policy. Energy Research & Social Science, 43, 33-40.
Zhao, G., Zhou, P., & Wen, W. (2021). Feed-in tariffs, knowledge stocks and renewable energy technology innovation: The role of local government intervention. Energy Policy, 156, 112453.
Female Sex Offenders: Prevalence And Typologies Sample Paper
Naturally, women are stereotyped to be protective of their children, nurturing and caring so that they are rarely seen to be involved in criminal behaviors, especially in sexual offending (Zack et al., 2018). As a result of the contrasting perception of women and their roles in society, the studies showing that men are most likely to engage in sex offending crimes make female sex offending neglected in the criminal justice system. Anderson et al. (2020) note that little research has been done on female sex offenders. On many occasions where a woman is found to have committed a crime, it is always assumed that there must be an underlying reason for their actions because their stereotyped roles show the inequality of males and females in the criminal justice system. In addition, the limited research on female sexual offending has left significant gaps in understanding female sexual offenders compared to male sexual offending (Comartin, 2018). This paper examines the prevalence and the typologies of sex offenders, including the theories used to explain the behavior of sex offenders.
The prevalence of Female Sex Offenders
According to Anderson et al. (2020), men and women perpetrators target adolescents and children regarding sexual abuse crimes, with women committing 4% of the crimes and men having the majority at 96%. The female sex offenders use different approaches to abuse the victims, including using their statuses as caregivers or teachers to abuse children and adolescents they are close to sexually. In their article examining the factors related to female sex offending, Comartin et al. (2018) found that majority of the female sex offenders who abuse children might be the child’s caregiver, the parent, or have a co-offender. Studies show that only 10% of the arrested sexual offenders are female, with a majority being juvenile offenders (Cortoni et al., (2017). Cortoni et al. (2017) found that young female offenders are more than adult offenders by 2%, showing a significant difference between the two groups. The findings support Anderson et al. (2020) claim that many female sex offenders, especially adults, started committing the crime at a younger age and evaded the criminal justice system. Because it is difficult for victims to report cases of sexual abuse, and women not being the first suspects when it comes to those cases.
In a report by Tozdan et al. (2019), they found that among the 40 804 sexual crimes that women committed between 1991-1996, 49% of the victims were between 12-17 years old, 305 were between 6-12 years old, and 21% of the victims were less than six years old. However, it is essential to note that these are statistics from the cases reported to the police. These statistics can be very different from what is happening, considering many sexual crimes are not reported. They remain between the offender and the victim, especially in conservative families or children who do not know when they are sexually abused. While examining the prevalence of female sexual offending between 1991-2011, William & Bierie (2015) found that only a third of the female sexual offending has a co-offender, mainly male, meaning that most female sexual crimes are solely male done by women. They also found that female sexual offenders selected both males and females compared to their male counterparts who majorly offended against female individuals.
The victims of female sexual offenders are also majorly less than 18 years old and are often related to the offenders in one way or another, whether as a parent, teacher, or babysitter. Despite having relations or knowing their victims, most female sex offenders do don use violence compared to the male sex offenders who have been recorded to use more violence and cause physical injuries to their victims (Comartin et al., 2018). Comartin et al. (2018) also note that many female offenders are victims of previous trauma, including physical abuse, sexual abuse, mental illnesses, or substance abuse, so they use sex to compensate for the trauma they experienced in childhood. It has also been found that the criminal justice system treats female sex offenders differently than their male counterparts so that men receive 6%-31% longer prison sentences than women. The difference in the punishment is attributed to the traditional stereotyping of women as caregivers and nurturers or the need for the criminal justice system to protect women despite their illegal position. Gender difference is noted without any blurry lines in this section of the criminal system, especially with the belief that women can hardly be involved in sexual abuse as the abuser. If they are, then they are coerced by dominant men.
Typologies of Female Sex Offenders
Anderson et al. (2020) have examined different groups of female sex offenders, considering the difference in the modus operandi between the female sex offenders. Some of the typologies include solo offenders who abuse adolescents, co-offenders, repetitive abusers, sexually curious, and predisposed offenders.
The solo offenders who abuse adolescents are the female offenders who act alone on their own accord to abuse their victims through teacher/student or heterosexual nurturer relationships. They voluntarily enter into sexual relations with their victims, majorly their students or the people they babysit, with the excuse that it is consensual and mutual. These offenders often come from healthy backgrounds as children but lack emotional connections, live in loneliness, and have feelings of abandonment in adulthood. Therefore, they fall in love with their victims, hoping they will fill the voids of loneliness and emotional closeness (Anderson et al., 2020). The heterosexual nurtures and teacher/lover offenders are mainly motivated by the need to feel powerful and in control of their relations that they haven’t had in their adult relationships. They often feel like their victims are old enough and fail to notice that the relations are illegal and might negatively affect the victims.
The co-offenders typology includes the female offenders accompanied by male offenders in committing sexual crimes. Anderson et al. (2020) note that this group consists of offenders who are in “physical or abuse relationships with men who desire or fantasize about bringing children into their sexual relationship” (p.3). Therefore, they can either be forced into committing the offense or can give their consent to the relationship. Despite the finding that most of the female offenders with male co-offenders are mainly people with substance abuse problems who depend on the men in their lives to dictate how they live and the kind of relationships they have, Comartin et al. (2018) note that some of the co-offending females are willing to commit the crime without force. In some cases, however minimal, they are the ones who suggest and take control of participation in the offense.
There are also the predisposed offenders who act alone in assaulting prepubescent children. These offenders are often characterized by psychopathologies so that they have the post-traumatic disorder as a result of the sexual abuse they experienced in childhood. Their behavior motivated by sexual arousal and the need for power makes them aggressive and sadistic towards children as they often want the children to feel the same way they did in childhood. These offenders often target the youngest group of children who have no power to defend themselves, usually six years old or younger (Anderson, 2020). They are not afraid to be involved in incense acts since they experienced the same in childhood. These offenders can be considered one of the most violent female sex offender typologies because of their aggressive motivations and psychological problems. On the other hand, repetitive abusers are adolescent offenders who share the same characteristics as the adult predisposed offenders as they are also emotionally unstable and have been victims of sexual abuse in childhood. To prevent these adolescents from becoming predisposed offenders in adulthood, they should be treated because they are always violent abusers with many victims if their mental health is not treated early enough.
On the other hand, the sexually curious, mainly adolescents are the offenders who target the younger people they babysit because of their curiosity (Anderson et al., 2020). They are the young people who do not know much about sex because they have not had any sexual experiences and want to learn more by using the unknowing younger people as their experiment. Even though they do not have any emotional or psychological problems that mediate their behaviors, they are usually teenagers who have not had boyfriends but have seen many of their peers with boyfriends who have had sexual relations. There is also a group involved in sexual offenses for financial gain where they act directed by others so they can be paid. These offenders can include those involved in filming pornographic videos with minors, those who “pimp” out juveniles to adults, and those who have sexual relations with children in exchange for money. Overall, all the groups of female sex offenders are motivated by different factors, including money, power, sexual arousal, or emotional closeness. Ultimately, despite the situation that leads them into committing the crime, they are still considered sex offenders and need to be investigated and punished under the criminal justice system.
According to Anderson et al. (2020), two major theories are used to explain female sexual offending, including the multifactor theories and the single factor theory. Anderson et al. (2020) note that “single-factor theories rely on a narrow set of elements to explain sex offending” (p.4). For example, when an individual is said to have committed a sexual offense because they were sexually aroused, the explanation is biological and under the single factor theories. On the other hand, multifactor approaches, which also includes the integrated view by Marshall & Barbaree, relies on the principle that “sex offending is caused by multiple factors that include one’s developmental experiences, biological processes, cultural norms, and psychological vulnerability” (Anderson et al., 2020, p.4).
The integrated theory especially explains the behaviors of the offenders who have emotional instability like the repetitive abusers and predisposed offenders who try to imitate the bad things they experienced in childhood to compensate or make themselves feel better. Those who experienced physical and sexual abuse in childhood commit sexual offenses to feel powerful and competent in a way they did not get to be or feel when they were younger. On the other hand, those abandoned by their parents and who always feel alone will commit sexual offenses to treat their psychological wounds to fill the emotional voids they have always had or gotten in adulthood, like in the case of teacher/lover relationships.
Comartin et al. (2018) also briefly notes the three pathways established by other researchers, including the explicit approach, directed avoidant, and implicit disorganized offenders. In the explicit approach, offenders are actively involved in sexual offenses intentionally without pressure from others. On the other hand, the directed avoidant offenders are pressured by male accomplices into committing sexual assault despite having no intention to do so. The implicit disorganized offenders are partially involved in the planning and act impulsively without much intention. Therefore, as Turner et al. (2018) note, one of the most significant factors that explain sexual offending behavior is impulsivity, where individual acts without intention, strongly driven by their emotional status at a specific moment. According to the theories used to understand sexual offending behaviors, the factors that lead to or contribute to the behavior can range from biological, psychological to cultural, so either of the elements can trigger an individual. For example, in a society where images of children are sexualized, an individual with a sexual desire can decide to fulfill the desire by sexually assaulting a child, either impulsively or intentionally.
In conclusion, female sex offenders are also just as guilty as male sex offenders because the consequences of their actions are also just as dangerous and impactful on the victims. However, there is still no fairness and equality in the sentencing decisions for women, which is still considered to be complicated since women are less likely to commit sexual offenses. Despite this, as years go by, more women are continually reported to be offenders in sexual crimes, theoretically motivated by their need to be in control, feel powerful, or even lack emotional closeness. These motivations are caused by different psychological, sociocultural, or biological factors under the theories of single factors or multifactor. Therefore, the different types of female sex offenders, including the sexually curious, repetitive abusers, solo offenders who abuse adolescents, co-offenders, and predisposed offenders, are driven by different factors so that some are more aggressive and violent than others. Ultimately, those caused by mental illness, psychological issues, or abuse they experienced in childhood are the most violent and should be treated appropriately before they become adults to reduce the incidence of female sexual offenses. Legal actions also need to be properly taken so the public can know the existence of female sex offenders and to warn the female sex offenders that they will not be treated lightly, primarily when they act alone without pressure from their male counterparts. Overall, female sexual offending is also a serious criminal issue that continues to grow and needs to be given more attention by researchers and the criminal justice system.
Anderson, J. F., Lee, T., Langsam, A. H., & Reinsmith-Jones, K. (2020). Female sexual offending: A Neglected criminal justice issue. Int’l J. Soc. Sci. Stud., 8, 1-9.
Comartin, E. B., Burgess-Proctor, A., Kubiak, S., & Kernsmith, P. (2018). Factors related to co-offending and coerced offending among female sex offenders: The role of childhood and adult trauma histories. Violence and Victims, 33(1), 53-74.
Cortoni, F., Babchishin, K. M., & Rat, C. (2017). The proportion of sexual offenders who are female is higher than thought: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(2), 145-162.
Tozdan, S., Briken, P., & Dekker, A. (2019). Uncovering female child sexual offenders—Needs and challenges for practice and research. Journal of clinical medicine, 8(3), 401-411
Turner, D., Laier, C., Brand, M., Bockshammer, T., Welsch, R., & Rettenberger, M. (2018). Response inhibition and impulsive decision-making in sexual offenders against children. Journal of abnormal psychology, 127(5), 471.
Williams, K. S., & Bierie, D. M. (2015). An incident-based comparison of female and male sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse, 27(3), 235-257.
Zack, E., Lang, J. T., & Dirks, D. (2018). “It must be great being a female pedophile!”: The nature of public perceptions about female teacher sex offenders. Crime, media, culture, 14(1), 61-79.