Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Assessing the Benefits of the Patriot Act. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 4 page paper discussing cost-benefit analysis and its usefulness for determining whether the US Patriot Act should be expanded, discontinued or left unchanged. The question to be evaluated here is how to assess the relative value of the Patriot Act? Should it be continued, based on the benefits it provides as weighed against its detriments? The purpose is to discuss attempting to answer these questions through the use of cost-benefit analysis. Bibliography lists 3 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: CC6_KSpolCBApatriot.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Passed six weeks after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (Patriot Act) likely
is the most intrusive piece of American legislation since the federal government implemented the federal income tax. Patriot II is slated to replace the Patriot Act, but it is
not yet fully refined and defined in its scope (Drake, 2003). Likely components of Patriot II promise to be even more intrusive than the original.
The question to be evaluated here is how to assess the relative value of the Patriot Act? Should it be continued, based on the benefits it
provides as weighed against its detriments? The purpose here is to discuss attempting to answer these questions through the use of cost-benefit analysis. Cost-Benefit Analysis Theory
Trumbull (1990) explains that "cost-benefit analysis has its theoretical grounding in Paretian welfare economics ... it is related to the familiar value assumption that a change
is socially desirable if the change makes some persons better off without making any others worse off" (p. 201). This concept is the Pareto improvement. Of course the
point of the Patriot Act is to make all Americans "better off" by enhancing national security to guard against future acts of terrorism.
Some condemn cost-benefit analysis as being short on ethics in that it cannot account for or measure all situations. Robert Solows response to the criticism is that "it is
not the case that cost-benefit analysis works, or must work, by monetizing everything from mother love to patriotism. Cost-benefit analysis is needed only when society must give up some
...