1.) The Attorney General, John Ashecroft, has called for greatly enhanced police powers in order to search out suspected terrorists, including wire taps, surveillance cameras, and eavesdropping on visits with suspected terrorists. Other measures hthat have been proposed include detaining suspects without charges being filed, and using more extreme measures of interrogation to "make suspects talk". Libertarians argue that this expansion of government power will unfairly deprive innocent citizens of their liberty and privacy, also,  and will hurt more than it will help. Where do you place yourself in this debate, or do you see a compromise position? If so, what would it be?

2.) Legalized gambling has expanded rapidly in the last decade in the United States. The latest
venue to be developed is gambling over the internet. Those who are in favor of this, see it as a
convenient form of entertainment that should be available to people if there is a market for it.
They further argue that individuals can decide for themselves, using their own judgment, how
much they can risk gambling and will suffer the consequences and learn from them  if they
gamble more than they can afford to lose (the libertarian position). Others point out the
problems associated with compulsive gambling in current locations and argue that internet
gaming should be banned altogether because there aren't enough safeguards in place to protect
against problem gambling and it is difficult for the government to regulate the payback rates,
etc. What do you think?

3.) One of the concerns of many libertarians is that, in order to enforce the current federal drug laws, that the police power of the government has expanded and is therefore, threatening the right to protection against illegal search and seizure of citizens. Others argue that because of the potential harm and destruction caused by the effects of illegal drugs, the government has to make a strong statement through laws to try to protect American citizens and American society. Where do you place yourself in this debate? Who seems more right here? Why?

4.) One of the policy positions that President Bush has come out strongly for is a "voucher" program for public schools. The voucher would allow parents who were unhappy with their children's schools, to send them to a school that would more sucessfully educate them. Introducing some competition  between schools in this way might be the best way for failing schools to be spurred on to improve their performance and for all children ultimately to get a better education. Critics of this position argue that vouchers can only serve a small number of students and that drawing money and motivated students away from troubled public schools will only make it more difficult for them to succeed. Providing more funds to failing schools is a better way to help all the students rather than market competition between schools. Where do you place yourself in this debate? Why?