Process of Rewrite:
When I started to rewrite this paper, I attempted to redraft my introduction to the problem several times. Unfortunately, every attempt seemed to be a weak imitation of the initial opening. After the third or fourth attempt at rewriting the lead-in, I determined that the original was the best that I was going to come up with, so I decided to retain it.
I then went on to revisit my solutions. In my first paper, I only came up with one viable alternative to the current method of handling the problem. However, after careful deliberation and much thought I was able to come up with a resolution that I think is almost equally as viable as my original answer. Nevertheless, there was a more sound argument against the new solution, so I decided to retain the original as the best one for this problem.
Other than adding one small part, and making some minor grammatical, punctuation, and word changes to the primary document, I decided to keep the paper relatively intact.

Ethics of Development: Revised
Flooding is a cyclic and natural occurrence. Rain and melting snow cause rivers to rise and streams and lakes to overflow their banks onto the surrounding land. Floods have etched out these areas, known as floodplains, for the specific purpose of carrying excess floodwaters. Homes, businesses, and even whole communities abound in floodplain areas, giving little regard to the purpose and function of floodplains. The development of these floodplains has resulted in continual and oftentimes severe economical loss.
The weather in Utah is prone to extremes, being either exceptionally dry or exceedingly wet. In the wet cycles, landslides and debris flows are common in the Utah foothills along the base of the Wasatch Range. In 1983 alone, landslides and floods, caused by rapid melting of a record snow pack, accounted for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
The 1981-82 water year, precipitation measured from October 1 of one year to September 30 of the following year, broke all previous records in Utah, and September 1982 climaxed with ten times more moisture than normal. However, that “once-in-a-century flood” was but a shadow of things to come. Although January and February of 1983 proved mild, records where again broken in March as torrents of rain and snow continued to fall on soil that could no longer absorb moisture. Then April roared in and eclipsed the moisture level for March. May reached a pinnacle overall. Rain and snow forestalled signs of spring until the month’s end when temperatures soared into the 80s. Mountain snowdrifts melted furiously into swollen streams and sodden ground, and by Memorial Day, temperatures were in the 90s.
The water impregnated soil led to the disastrous Thistle landslide which blocked a main highway and railroad corridor and dammed a river, drowning a community and costing more than $200 million. Utah Lake breeched its shores and washed over the I-15 highway, and the River Bottoms in Spanish Fork disappeared under more than 4 feet of water. That was also when the face of Mahogany mountain started its ominous decent toward the city of Cedar Hills.
Recent landslides in 1997 and 1998 caused major damage throughout the Wasatch Front. The 2001 landslide in Layton destroyed several homes and cost the community and homeowners more than $1 million. The landslide on Mahogany mountain, which started in 1983, abruptly ended its journey in 2005 at the back doors of many newly constructed homes, costing millions of dollars in repairs and clean up and leaving in its wake several homeless families. Nearly all of these recent landslides occurred in areas of pre-existing geological instability.
Just over twenty years after it was flooded, a large section of the Spanish Fork River Bottoms is now under the process of developmental planning. In their haste to secure new tax revenue for the city, and financial profit for the developers, the city planners have neglected the issue of flood hazard for this historically unstable area. Should the tax paying citizens have to shoulder the responsibility when the inevitable happens? If history is an indicator, the answer to that is a fervent yes!
Traditionally, planning for flood control has focused on providing emergency relief and recovery assistance to flood victims following a disaster, and protecting existing development(s) through structural works such as dams, diversions, or levees. These endeavors, while crucial, are expensive and leave the burden chiefly on the taxpayers and homeowners. Moreover, these methods have not been wholly effective in reducing flood damages. Despite considerable expenditure on flood control works, annual damages due to flooding continue to rise, meanwhile, developers heedlessly collect their money and move on to the next project.
It is apparent that there is a need for an alternative to the current system of flood management, one that does not place the onus solely on the taxpayer. While we do need to maintain and enhance the current system of structural works and continue to provide relief and recovery assistance, we need to be proactive rather than reactive in our flood management policies.
One alternative is to close all floodplain areas off to development. To make this effective, we would need to buy out and relocate people whose properties are already located in floodplain areas. We could then find alternate uses for the bought out floodplain properties. The destruction of such things as parks and picnic areas would not be so devastating as homes and businesses.
The downside of this is the resistance that would develop from the people who are losing their properties. There would also be a substantial upfront cost to the taxpayers. Furthermore, this policy would dramatically limit the growth of development in many areas of Utah, creating opposition from developers and city planners alike. The planners, in addition to being afraid to tell developers no, would not like the idea of limiting their tax potential, and the developers would obviously refuse to accept a limit to easy profit.
I think that there is a more reasonable and equitable solution. In order to procure approval to develop an area the developers should be required to finance studies on the geological area, and provide the structural developments to ensure the future safety of the new communities. Furthermore, it should be mandatory that homeowners seeking to purchase in these hazardous areas be informed of the danger up front, and the developers must guarantee availability of insurance coverage for the existing hazard threatening the community. In addition, homeowners should be required to carry said insurance, thus alleviating much of the financial burden on the taxpayers.
Developers may view this as an unfair responsibility. However, they must be held to a degree of liability in flood management to cause them to look beyond the financial benefits, and care for the long-term well being of the communities they are creating. If there is no accountability beyond the development of new communities, developers lack incentive to be concerned about the future of the development. Conversely, when developers know that once the project is complete they are still responsible to return and help clean up a disaster area that might have been prevented, they will be more inclined to take the necessary steps to avoid the problem in the first place.
It would be absurd to think that we can avoid all devastation caused by acts of nature, but if we share the responsibility and hold all parties equally liable, I believe we can make great strides in lowering the impact of natural disasters on our communities and economic resources. Additionally, we must learn to work with the forces of nature instead of simply trying to eliminate them. If we do not, we will continue to pay the price in human tragedy and money. In the end, nature always trumps man-made developments.

~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~

~ Fyodor Dostoevsky

Nearly 80% of all inmates are functionally illiterate. Nevertheless, almost 80% of prison efforts go toward security, with prison policies and budgets allowing very little effective effort to help inmates reach a level of education that will allow them to be independently productive once they reach the outside. It would seem reasonable that educational reform is the key to reducing recidivism and deterring future criminals. However, it appears that society focuses on punishment and incapacitation, deeming criminals as no longer fit to mingle in society, and for the most part neglecting to help them reform and reintegrate into society.

Is there merit in mandating education as an integral component of all prison sentences, furthermore will doing so facilitate the conversion of our current prisons from holding pens and schoolhouses for criminals to true rehabilitation centers?

Ultimately, there are three kinds of inmates. First, there are those who will not change no matter what. To them, life is a game they are playing, and prison is simply a penalty box akin to the ones in hockey. Second, there are those who are struggling between old habits and the idea of trying to break away from them. Many of these will have a hard time breaking away from their habits because of the lack of education. Third and last, there are those who are committed to making changes, but again they are hamstrung by a lack of education and knowledge.

For the first group little can be done. They are caught up in a fallacy of their own creation, believing that they are impervious to the law, and it is the role of society to try to stop them. Conversely, the other two groups could profit greatly from educational rehabilitation programs. While the second group would undoubtedly retain a higher recidivism than the third due to addictions and other problems relating to their habits, both groups would benefit from the intrinsic ability to reason and resolve that comes with education.

There would still be the obvious obstacles that come with a criminal record, however compared to the expense of re-incarceration, which costs yearly from $25,000 to $45,000 per inmate, prison education is a bargain at one-tenth the cost. It seems obvious that educational rehabilitation programs are needed to help prepare inmates for success in the outside world. Not necessarily because criminals deserve the chance, that is an entirely separate issue, but because it is in the best interest of society.

I have found many articles where politicians cite lower crime rate statistics, but the politicians fail to mention the possible correlation between the number of incarcerated criminals and the lower crime rate. As I have studied articles from the last thirty or so years, I have found that the prison policies and concepts of rehabilitation have often changed to fit the current political mindset. The objective being to garner votes for politicians, meanwhile the interests and welfare of society are being ignored.

My research into this subject is far from completed, but already I have found some very interesting facts and statistics. I look forward to more in-depth study.

~George Washington, 1st US president (1732-1799)

What has caused this shift from seeking greatness to wallowing in mediocrity? I think in part it stems from the fact that there are no great leaders today. Greatness has become a thing to laugh at and scorn. It is hard for the young generations to seek greatness when they do not have great leaders to show them that it is acceptable to step out from the herd. It could be that I am wrong and history will tell a different story. Did people consider Abraham Lincoln to be as great in his day as we see him today? We know that John F. Kennedy was revered during his life, but have we romanticized his life to legend status as time has shaded in the facts? Perhaps it is nostalgic hind-site and the shutters of time that make great people.

Is it our culture of instant gratification that has led us to believe that there is not a need for great people? What messages do our children receive when their icons would rather use drugs to out-perform their peers instead of hard work? Much like graphite in a pencil and a diamond, two things that are so similar in composition yet so very different. Both are made from carbon. However, one is commonplace and not really of any notable worth. The other, forged under tremendous pressure and heat, is precious and of great worth. This might be the lacking force. So rarely these days are we forced to develop in the furnace of adversity and trial. Our parents and grandparents have fought so hard to create a world of luxury and ease, that we do not have to struggle and fight for what we want.

I wonder if history will show that there were in fact great people in our day, or have we reached that point of equilibrium where we have become stagnant and ceased to move forward? Only history can tell.