Article
Trump’s newly appointed drug czar Tom Marino has been accused of failing to enforce new opioid laws. While nothing has been confirmed, these accusations are certainly troubling and need to be looked into. According to the article, he “pushed a bill that reportedly stripped a government agency of the ability to freeze suspicious painkiller shipments.” Many people believe that Marino seems to be more inclined to help companies rather than fulfill his job.
Opioid addiction has been cited as America’s biggest health crisis in recent years. Heroin, morphine, and other painkillers are opioid products, and some of the most dangerous drugs in our country.
When asked about the allegations against Marino, Trump responded, “He’s a great guy. I did see the report. We’re gonna look into the report.”
In addition, it seems to be that corrupt businesses and companies have discouraged the crackdown on recreational drugs, something that is troubling to the United States.
Trump appointed Marino to be the drug czar, but he has been accused of going against what he was entrusted to do in his job. Does this reflect badly on Trump?
How should the government handle corrupt companies and officials?
6 comments:
I think it does reflect poorly on Trump's decision making skills, but honestly, what's new. As to how the government should handle corrupt officials, the best option I can think of would be to replace them with someone who can actually do the job. Of course, the company that the official is conspiring with should be reprimanded in some way, but I don't know if the gov't has the power to do that in every circumstance. Overall, this isn't very surprising, nor do I see it as a problem that Trump will fix.
Trump already has a pretty bad reputation (approval rates are extremely low), so, like Elena, I think that while I agree it does reflect poorly on Trump's decision making skills, it doesn't exactly come as a surprise for many people. Trump has done a lot of controversial things in his presidency, and I think that supporting Marino is more or less consistent with his past actions. I admit that I strongly dislike Trump and his presidency ,which probably makes my comment extremely biased, but Trump is first and foremost a business man and like Bridget mentioned, a lot of corrupt businesses want to support more relaxed drug laws. I don't see Trump really taking a strong stand against this corruption any time soon and I also doubt that his investigation will be prompt or detailed if he can help it. Corrupt officials should definitely be impeached and thrown out of office, but since there is no substantial proof yet that the allegations are true and because there has not been very much done against the controversial firings and appointments under the Trump administrations, I also doubt any impeachment or removal from office will be happening any time soon.
I agree with Both Elena and Caroline, Trump has already had problems with other members of his campaign, whether they're corrupt, incompetent or just strongly disliked by the public, but rarely does Trump respond to the public's disapproval, so I believe Trump will not follow through with Marino's actions. However, what Trump should do is replace Marino for obviously his interactions with drug companies seem sketchy and selfish.
I doubt this reflects too badly on Trump since there's some distance between him and this incident. It was Marino who pushed this bill, not Trump. So while Trump did nominate Marino to be in this position, he can still make moves to save his own reputation, such as declaring the national opioid emergency mentioned in the article. On top of that, apparently Marino is withdrawing from becoming the drug czar, which eases a great deal of the limelight on him. As for what government should do to corrupt companies, there aren't many options. Most major corporations will have some level of corruption, and, being private businesses, there's little the government can do about how they're run. Drugs themselves could be further regulated with the passage of legislation or maybe executive orders if Trump ever felt so compelled. For corrupt politicians, on the other hand, parties themselves should try to set up the system of incentive mentioned in the Atlantic article. Outside of that, unless there is solid evidence of blatant illegal dealings with corporations, what is said about politicians can only really be considered speculation, and the government likely won't act on it.
Brandon makes a very good point in saying that it is unlikely for there to be any action taken against this. Naturally, I also agree with the above on Trump's reputation, for one cannot really see this incident as a large issue when compared to the grander scale of issues that have occurred during this presidency. However, I would like to point out that Mario's job as a "drug czar" is to direct drug control policies (per the definition provided in collinsdictionary.com). If you think about, he isn't really doing anything against his job. Perhaps his idea is that taking the government out of this part of prescription drugs follows his president's agenda. And honestly, if he is getting bribed by large pharmaceutical companies, then he is merely living up to the name of a politician in this day and age (reference the Rauch article).
Trump appointed Marino to be the drug czar, but he has been accused of going against what he was entrusted to do in his job. Does this reflect badly on Trump?
It reflects badly on President Trump, but not Trump the republican, and certainly not Trump the businessman. At the risk of sounding like a socialist, I have to say that Trump is simply a businessman, using his influence as President to help big business succeed, often at the cost of ordinary blue-collar workers who voted for Trump in the first place. All of Trump's big policy agendas (Healthcare reform, Tax reform) are designed to help out businesses and the 1%, working under the principle that people will eventually benefit from unregulated big business and an untaxed upper class. The Opioid crisis is one of those issues that disproportionately affects blue-collar and lower-class Americans-and despite the War on Drugs that conservatives are wont to wage, the painkiller/opioid industry is a million dollar industry, despite the best efforts of those conservatives. The Republicans-and by exertion, Trump-for all their calls for more government overreach when it comes to drug-related crimes, their primary objective is to make life easier for big businesses by lowering taxes and easing regulations. So while this makes Trump seem like a bad president, Trump is still a VERY good fiscal conservative.
How should the government handle corrupt companies and officials?
The government shouldn't do anything-one of the perks of democracy and life under a free market is that people get to weed out the bad seeds within both the government and the markets. In terms of companies, the government shouldn't get in the way of businesses and the free market, nor do they need to-the people should make ethical choices that benefit them. At the risk of sounding cold, even if someone chooses to resort to an opioid addiction, then that is their choice-who are government officials to stop them? Speaking of government officials, I'd like to point out that Tom Marino (R-PA) is an elected official-he represents Pennsylvania's 10th congressional district. If the people of Williamsport, PA, note that Marino is indeed a stooge of big painkiller and thus is intentionally not doing the job the president set out for him, perhaps they will vote for a democrat in 2018, as is their Constitutionally-mandated prerogative.
Post a Comment