Excellent summary of how/why Constitution is structured the way it is and why it has endured. Clear analysis of where things went wrong and how to bring them in line w/ original intent. Excellent first book on the subject from astute Constitutional lawyer Whitehead who defends rights of religious liberty in an increasingly hostile era unintended by the framers.

This is a fabulous book. It begins with early concepts from ancient Greece, lays out the fundamental differences between "natural law" and "the law of the real world," then extends the history of legalistic ideas through the Roman epoc, middle ages, etc. The book identifies the bases of difference between the legal systems of the west and those of communist states, e.g., common law and code law vs. Marxist law. It fully describes the influence of Christianity on western legal thinking. There are "plots" and "sub-plots" in this book that are absolutely fascinating. Finally, it is deliciously written; for those who truely appreciate the english language.

I think this is something that every planning and zoning officer of a small community needs. This book is an excellent reference. It gives step by step directions for conducting surveys, writing a mini plan, special ordinance for special issues (such as signs) and more. There are charts and graphs and pictures that help clarify the text.

I am sure that by the size of it and the way it reads this is a text book for a college class somewhere. IT does read a little bit dry, but I'm not sure how much more exciting you can get with law, legalities, procedures and such.

Good information.

Reading this book is an cheerful thing.it is fit for all kinds of people.

Dr. Johnson has written a moving portrait of Tinker v. Des Moines, a major 1960s Supreme Court decision. The "Struggle" that he discusses deals with the right of non-violent expression while in the confines of a public school. The narrative is richly grounded in newspaper articles, interviews, and letters to and from the primary individuals. This makes the story extremely personal and enlightening. An in-depth look into the workings of the Supreme Court may be the book's most profound contribution. Taking a controversial stand in time of war is never easy. The Tinker case shows that the heart of our democracy rests with those who dare to point us in a different direction.

Excellant source of information specific to Alabama divorce law. Saves you costly errors that you can pay for later! I highly recommend this book to anyone contemplating a divorce in Alabama!

Not only is the book easy to read and understand, but the author has a sense of humor and history. There are facts salted into the usually amusing examples that, at least to me, seem to relate to past events. For example, when he explains partnerships, the sample of an agreement is for a partnership called Leaks Anonymous. It is a plumbing business and the partners are Glenda Liddy, Eduardo Hunt and, ____ McCord... I think from the Watergate burglary.
Anyway, the book gave common sense advice and was really useful. I recommend it highly.
CJ==

The author not only takes a stand and expresses an opinion, he backs up his views with specific examples. He dispels many myths about individual liberties and makes a convincing argument why liberty is so essential to our existence. It is somewhat frightening to learn about the very real errosion of our liberty. This book brings all of this to light is a very readable and interesting presentation.

This book is an outstanding addition to the small but growing canon of literature on term limits. Carey clearly and successfully limns this complex issue. This is a rigerous academic book with important real world conlcusions: a good read for serious scholars and politicos alike.

In politics, many different rules and regulations create problems for consumers. Regulations that cause people to die - or contribute to their deaths - should bear the highest possible level of scrutiny. In this book, medical doctor and former Food and Drug Administration official Henry Miller addresses problems with the way the FDA reviews and approves new medicines. His analysis is extremely important because, when the government delays the introduction of critical medical innovations, people can die.

The key point in Miller's argument is that imposing excessive regulatory costs on American pharmaceutical firms forces them to experience corporate mergers, reduced competition, and higher prices. In the long run, this leads companies to focus on shorter-term, lower-risk research and development intended for larger patient populations. Thus, smaller groups of patients in need of new medical innovations that require long-term study at higher per-capita costs suffer the most from delays in approving new products.

Miller addresses the myth that there must be a tradeoff between promoting more efficient drug research and improving drug safety. Efficiency and safety can both be improved simultaneously by introducing competition where regulatory oversight has become excessive and changing the FDA's role in the process. Rather than evaluating data itself, it should allow other organizations to evaluate clinical testing and focus on monitoring their efforts instead.

A key problem that many drug manufacturers face is that regulations are not static. When new rules are enacted, regulators generally adopt narrow interpretations of them, but broaden those interpretations as time goes on. Because of this, regulators must be viewed as a special interest group - expanding their turf by skirting congressional oversight and gradually inflating burdens for manufacturers underneath the radar screen.

These problems lead many companies to alter their research priorities. Instead of focusing solely on prospective benefits for consumers when choosing which products to develop, firms must account for potential regulatory costs as well. The high costs of getting drugs approved reduces the diversity of products being prepared - leading many companies to devote more energy to dealing with the regulatory apparatus. Innovation suffers as a result.

The biggest problem with the FDA's current system, though, is its lack of accountability to the public. Consumers cannot participate in its product-review process and cannot obtain judicial review of its decisions. In addition, seldom is information about delayed or rejected drugs and medical devices made available to the media. Thus, the nature of the evaluation process itself reduces consumers' freedom of choice and individual autonomy. It leads many frustrated consumers to travel abroad to obtain safe drugs and services not available here in the U.S.

Fortunately, Miller offers a solution to the problem: allow independent, non-profit drug certifying bodies - instead of the FDA - to review test results from companies. Then allow the FDA to monitor the technical, scientific, and managerial expertise of these bodies to ensure they perform proper reviews. This would be similar to OSHA's accreditation process for testing laboratories. It would also introduce much needed competition, innovation, and efficiency into the oversight process and help alleviate many of the perverse incentives regulators face when interpreting new standards.

Overall, America's drug review procedure is in need of reform. Excessive regulations that lead to increased suffering or death among consumers should be repealed. In addition, when the regulatory process itself delays new technologies or innovations that can reduce suffering or death among the public, the procedure itself should be closely examined. Miller's book sheds new light on a frequently-ignored cost of overregulation: how preventing the adoption of new products or services that save lives can be just as costly as overlooking those that cost lives. His arguments should be given careful consideration by anyone who is concerned about the state of health care in the United States.