Government Policy

¶ … government policy in criminal justice. Specifically it will answer the question: Do government policy and regulation help or hurt in the racial, ethnic, religious, gender, and sexual orientation area? These members of society could be called "vulnerable populations," and all are quite affected by society and governmental policies. These populations are "different" from the general population, and so, their needs, their reactions, and their experiences are often different, too.

Governmental policy initially was meant "for the people and by the people," but today's governmental policies often ignore segments of the population, or make it harder for them to synthesize into the general population, both in society, and in the criminal justice system as it exits in America today. Governmental policy has long been scrutinized, criticized, and manipulated as to where it stands on issues regarding the vulnerable populations. Sometimes, governmental policy shifts, as it has somewhat regarding gays and lesbians serving in the military.

Today, the governmental policy is "don't ask, don't tell," which is superficial at best. Gays and lesbians are forced to keep their sexual preferences a secret, just when much of the country is becoming more open and aware of gay and lesbian issues. For example, military leaders cannot come out and directly ask a service member if they are homosexual. However, they can investigate information that may lead to discovery of homosexual acts, and they can discharge a soldier if they are found to be truly or openly homosexual.

Thus, the military is operating in a paradox, where they hide the fact that soldiers are gay unless the fact becomes well-known. This is only one of many governmental policies that seems both ridiculous and harmful to the homosexual population who wants to serve in the military. There, if they want to "succeed," they must hide their lifestyle, exactly as many homosexuals felt they had to do decades ago to fit into "acceptable" society.

This governmental policy has not furthered the lives of homosexuals and their careers in the military, it has hampered them by turning them into liars to protect their military careers. There are numerous criminal justice theories which attempt to explain criminal behavior and the nature of crime.

One of the latest, which has at least some of its origins in the teachings of Karl Marx is the social conflict theory, which is essentially the belief that much of crime is caused by societal conflict and pressures between the upper class wealthy, who society consistently protects, and the lower class poor, who the criminal justice system consistently prosecutes. For example, it is well-known that a disproportionate number of criminals prosecuted are Black or Hispanic.

While most police departments disavow knowledge of profiling, many ethnic minorities will testify that they are consistently targeted by the police, especially if they seem to be "out of place" in a white neighborhood, for example. This unofficial policy of racial profiling leads to a higher number of incarcerated minorities, and also leads to overcrowded prisons, a clogged criminal justice system, and the need for legal and justice reforms.

While profiling may not be an "official" policy, it is common, and many more people believe that profiling is necessary, and even essential to locate terrorists and other violent members of society after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Ethnic minorities who appear Arabic have also been targeted by government policies that allowed search and seizure because of a national emergency.

In addition, the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba are facing a rigid and perhaps even rights-bending policy that has come under fire recently because of the many atrocities and social issues surrounding their capture and continued captivity. These mostly Arabic prisoners are being held without the ability to contact family or representation, and they have been held for several years, and it looks like they will continue to be held in the future.

Some of them may indeed be enemies of the state and of the people, but violating their civil rights, and using government policy to do it seems to go against what this country has always stood for at home and in the world. Clearly, the government policy here, to hold these prisoners indefinitely, is hindering their personal freedom and their right to a fair and speedy trial if they indeed are guilty of various crimes. Government policies continue to affect religious groups in the nation, too.

While more Christian conservatives in the Congress and White House have brought about more interest in Christianity and a renewed interest in religious education in the schools, this has come at a high cost to many other religions.

In addition, because of the broad range of views on free speech and what constitutes free speech, there have been many government and legal sanctions on what seem to be fairly innocuous religious references, such as the Pledge of Allegiance, which was "outlawed" by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, who said it was "unconstitutional" because of the words "under God" in the Pledge, which is said violate the First Amendment for those who do not believe in God.

It took nearly two years for the Supreme Court to dismiss the case, and when they did, it was because of a technicality with the atheist father who brought the case, rather than the constitutionality of the issue itself. Clearly, issues like this strain the criminal justice system, and they also strain the fabric of America. Americans take emotional sides in controversial issues such as these, and it drives a wedge between people, rather than bringing them together.

Here, the problem of how complex issues are seen and ruled on by the courts of American can create government policies that damage a great number of religious citizens, and also create doubt in the minds of many Americans that the judicial system is indeed working for all Americans. While many government policies seem to hinder those vulnerable populations of the country, some governmental policies have helped women and minorities gain a more equal footing in the workplace.

It is still true today that women make less than men, and the government standard minimum wage tends to keep those lowest paid workers in America in a continual state of poverty that they cannot escape. The minimum wage does not provide a living wage.