US Healthcare: A "Disaster" of a System

The United States has seen presidential administrations with lofty goals for healthcare policy come and go time and again since its founding, but never an efficient healthcare system. The healthcare debate has been raging in America for years. Should healthcare be universal? Should it be publicly or privately funded, or both? Should all citizens have the right to healthcare? Should all citizens be required by law to have healthcare? The case for universal healthcare seems to be the strongest because it is the most cost-effective way for society to fulfill its humanitarian obligations.

Drinks on Us: Defending the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

According to to Yuengling: the History of America’s Oldest Brewery, the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB) was designed to, in the words of then-Governor Gifford Pinchot, make liquor sales “as inconvenient and expensive as possible.” The PLCB is the state agency with sole control over the distribution and sale of alcohol in Pennsylvania. State House Republicans agree with Gov. Pinchot and have been arguing that it is time to privatize the PLCB. They charge that the agency is “archaic” and losing money. Supporters of the PLCB argue that privatization would result in higher prices for consumers and the loss of well-paying Pennsylvania jobs. While the PLCB does have some inherent features making it harder to buy alcohol, the best option for the citizens of Pennsylvania is a modernized PLCB.

The Third World War: A Look at the Implications of Climate Change on Global, National Security

President Donald Trump ran to be president of the United States on a platform rife with statements denouncing the credibility of anthropogenic — man-made — climate change. In a separate, but equally important, vein, President Trump also expressed a commitment to ensure the security of US citizens both domestically and abroad. Today, however, it’s difficult to address national security effectively without simultaneously addressing global climate change. The two issues are intimately interwoven, and ignoring one issue will compromise the success of solving the other.

How Much Democracy is too Much Democracy?

Despite their widespread use, many rightfully question the prudence of using popular elections to fill state courts. A key difference between federal and state courts is that while federal judges are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the majority of jurists at the state level are elected. The reason federal judges, at least judges on the Article III courts, are made by executive selection is the same reason that Supreme Court justices are given life tenure: to insulate them from the whims of public opinion. In this passage, Hamilton articulates the fundamental paradox of democracy, a question that genuine republics have always grappled with: how can we control for the “tyranny of the majority?” In other words, how can we entrust people with the power to govern themselves but also prevent them from stripping away the rights of minority groups or from posing a danger to others?

Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Abuse of Pretrial Detention in America

Although few principles of law are as widely lauded and universally accepted as the presumption of innocence, this principle is violated daily by a practice that has become standard in our justice system, exceptional only in how unexceptional it seems. Pretrial detention—the practice of holding a defendant in custody before trial while he or she is still entitled to the presumption of innocence—is, in its current status, a clear contradiction of this principle and a staple of the American legal system.

Reclaiming the Center: The Case for a Ceasefire in America's Culture War

Partisan news sources of all political stripes would have us believe that there’s a war raging on in American society. Increasingly prevalent is the notion that America is in the grips of what some despairing analysts (and gleeful news anchors) have labeled a “Culture War”- the ultimate expression of our increasingly polarized political life, in which the two competing viewpoints stay in their own yards, only seeking out media sources that validate their existing ideals, and lobbing attacks across the fence at the enemy camp.

Renewable Energy: Non-environmental Reasons to Make the Transition

Environmentalists continuously push for us, as a country, to decrease our fossil fuel usage and transition to a society powered by renewable energy. The money of oil companies and other corporations persuade our government to continue investing in fossil fuels as opposed to renewable energy. There are, however, other reasons which should convince us as a nation to invest in alternative energy sources. Eliminating our dependence on fossil fuels will benefit the nation economically and prepare us for a rapidly changing future. We, as Americans, should increasingly pursue renewable sources of alternative energy not only for the documented environmental reasons but also because investing in renewable energy technologies will provide jobs for Americans, decrease our dependence on other nations, and benefit the health of all Americans while decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels.

Table of Contents

Letter from the Editor-in-Chief and Table of Contents

Under the Skin: Russia’s Budding Healthcare Crisis

Behind the ghost of the Iron Curtain lurks a public health crisis. Superseded in the media by East-West tension and military flare-ups, infectious disease has launched its own war on the Russian Federation. Besides the HIV epidemic, which has continued to escalate for decades, the Russian Federation has become a greenhouse for multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB). This problem is not just a problem of the Russian Federation, but has worldwide significance due to the spread of resistant TB. Furthermore, the issue has not received the attention it deserves from the international media or the Russian government. MDR-TB in Russia needs to be taken more seriously.

Shahs and Sanctions: The Story of Past, Present, and Future Tensions with Iran

It’s hard to deny that the historically intense distrust between the United States and Iran helps motivate some of the anti-deal sentiment in each country. It’s also, however, this same shared history of suspicion that may hold some of the most import-ant insights about the deal itself. The context for this understanding is the thread of Iranian-Western relations through the ages of colonialism and decolonization, the Islamic Revolution, and the formation of the current regime in Iran. A further layer of complexity in looking at the nuclear negotiations is added with the consideration of the contemporary social and political atmosphere in the Iranian domestic sphere. This often-overlooked background speaks of a situation far more complex than what many who oppose the accords seem to entertain and that must be taken into account if the United States and the West want to see long-term diplomatic success with Iran.