Siga este link para ver outros tipos de publicações sobre o tema: United States. Congress 1964). House).
Artigos de revistas sobre o tema "United States. Congress 1964). House)"
Crie uma referência precisa em APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, e outros estilos
Veja os 50 melhores artigos de revistas para estudos sobre o assunto "United States. Congress 1964). House)".
Ao lado de cada fonte na lista de referências, há um botão "Adicionar à bibliografia". Clique e geraremos automaticamente a citação bibliográfica do trabalho escolhido no estilo de citação de que você precisa: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
Você também pode baixar o texto completo da publicação científica em formato .pdf e ler o resumo do trabalho online se estiver presente nos metadados.
Veja os artigos de revistas das mais diversas áreas científicas e compile uma bibliografia correta.
1
Owens, John E. "Extreme Advocacy Leadership in the Pre-Reform House: Wright Patman and the House Banking and Currency Committee". British Journal of Political Science 15, n.º 2 (abril de 1985): 187–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123400004154.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Committee chairmen in the United States House of Representatives were often very powerful figures until the reforms of the early 1970s – as the numerous tales about those stereotyped villains, the southern Democrats, bear witness. Yet, surprisingly little explicit typologizing about leadership in congressional committees appears in the academic literature despite a growing awareness of the different goals which congressmen pursue and the variety of environments in which they operate. Just two different models of chairmen's power were developed in the context of the pre-reform Congress. In the 1950s and early 1960s, the accepted view, perhaps caricature, was that committee chairmen were autocratic, obstructionist (at least as far as liberals were concerned), conservative, possibly senile, and more than likely representative of constituencies outside the mainstream of national politics. A list of chairmen seen as fitting into this mould would include men such as ‘Judge’ Howard Smith, chairman of the Rules Committee from 1955 to 1967; his somewhat less skilful successor from 1967 to 1972, William Colmer of Mississippi; Graham Barden, the provocative chairman of the Education and Labor Committee between 1953 and 1960; and the authoritative Carl Vinson of Georgia, chairman of the Armed Services Committee for seventeen years until 1966.
2
Patterson, Samuel C., e Gregory A. Caldeira. "Party Voting in the United States Congress". British Journal of Political Science 18, n.º 1 (janeiro de 1988): 111–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s000712340000497x.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
By the standard of most European parliaments, levels of party voting in the United States Congress are relatively low. Nevertheless, party voting does occur in the House of Representatives and the Senate. In the American context, a party vote occurs when majorities of the two congressional parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, oppose one another. The authors construct measurements of levels of party voting in Congress in the years after the Second World War. They then develop a model to test the effects of a number of independent variables that influence fluctuations in party voting levels over time. The study models the time series for party voting and demonstrates striking differences between the House and Senate in the correlates of partisan cleavage.
3
Jordan, Larry. "Federal Trauma Legislation: The 101st United States Congress". Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 5, n.º 3 (setembro de 1990): 255–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x00026923.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The United States Congress presently is considering comprehensive legislation regarding emergency medical services (EMS) and trauma systems planning. This legislation amends the Public Health Service Act and, if enacted, would represent the federal government's first significant statutory mandate to exercise a leadership role in EMS since the federal EMS program was abolished in the early 1980s. On 14 November 1989, the House passed House Resolution (H.R.) 1602, Trauma Care Systems Planning and Development Act of 1989, authored by Representative Jim Bates. The Senate is considering similar legislation (S. 15) by Senator Alan Cranston, titled the Emergency Medical Services and Trauma Care Improvement Act of 1989. The Senate Bill is awaiting final action by the full Senate. If the Senate approves S. 15, a joint House and Senate conference committee will meet to present its own conference report to each of those bodies for consideration and passage.
4
صبري شاكر, أحمد, e أزهار عبد الرحمن عبد الكريم. "نشوء وتنامي الصلات التجارية الأميركية مع الصين حتى عام 1844". Journal of Education College Wasit University 1, n.º 23 (17 de janeiro de 2018): 161–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.31185/eduj.vol1.iss23.197.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
1- D.C.U.S.A , The Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States Archive. . 2- L.C.C. , The Letters of Continental Congress
3- A.C.U.S.C.D.D., Annals of Congress , U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates ,1774-1875.
4- A.C.C.R., Annals of Congress Commercial Report.
5- U.S.H.R.E.D. ,United States House of Representatives Executive Documents.
6- (T.E.C.F.P.) ,Treaties The Empire of China Foreign Powers.
5
Corbett, Charles R. "UNITED STATES PROGRESS TOWARD ENACTMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE OIL SPILL LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION LEGISLATION". International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings 1987, n.º 1 (1 de abril de 1987): 559–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.7901/2169-3358-1987-1-559.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
ABSTRACT Comprehensive oil spill liability and compensation legislation, including adoption of two important international oil spill treaties, has eluded the United States for too long. Although there is broad agreement in the Administration, both houses of Congress, oil and shipping interests, state governments and the environmental community that we need comprehensive oil spill legislation, these often divergent interests have not been able, at least as of this writing (December 1986), to agree on a compromise package. Both houses of Congress passed bills during the 99th Congress, the latest House versions in Titles VI and VIII of H.R. 5300 and, in the Senate, S. 2799. These bills were dissimilar in several ways. However, most informed interests suggested that, had a compromise House bill emerged near the end of the Congress, a Senate-House conference committee could have reached agreement between the House offer and S. 2799. Unfortunately this did not occur. Also, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported out favorably (to the full Senate), the ratification of the 1984 protocols to the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 Fund Convention (CLC and Fund), with a “reservation” and a number of “understandings.” The need for appropriate legislation arises from deficiencies in and the patchwork approach of current U.S. legislation.
6
Rogova, Natalia. "Midterm Elections in the United States". Russia and America in the 21st Century, n.º 6 (2022): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/s207054760023481-6.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article deals with the midterm elections of 2022 in the United States. It analyses the race, ethnic, gender and age composition of the electorate of the two main political parties. It also discusses priorities of the supporters of the Democratic and Republican parties. The article provides analyses of the outcome of the elections of members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, and of the new balance of power in the US Congress.
7
Jenkins, Jeffery A., e Justin Peck. "Building Toward Major Policy Change: Congressional Action on Civil Rights, 1941–1950". Law and History Review 31, n.º 1 (fevereiro de 2013): 139–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0738248012000181.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The mid-1960s witnessed a landmark change in the area of civil rights policy in the United States. After a series of tortuous internal battles, with Southern legislators using all available procedural tools to maintain their states' discriminatory Jim Crow legal systems, the United States Congress adopted two statutes—the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—which insured civil and political equality for all Americans. The Acts of 1964 and 1965 were the culmination of a decade-long struggle by black Americans to secure the citizenship rights that had been denied to them for more than a half century. Beginning with the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Supreme Court decision, the civil rights movement built momentum, as formal organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) grew in strength and informal (grass roots) organizations spread throughout the South and the Nation. As national public opinion shifted increasingly toward providing new civil rights guarantees for blacks, Congress responded with new legislation: the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (the first civil rights law since 1875), the Civil Rights Act of 1960, and a legislative proposal to prohibit the poll tax in 1962 (which would be ratified by three-quarters of the states in 1964 and become the 24th Amendment to the United States Constitution).
8
Manchikanti, Laxmaiah. "Evolution of US Health Care Reform". Pain Physician 3, n.º 20;3 (9 de março de 2017): 107–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2017.110.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Major health policy creation or changes, including governmental and private policies affecting health care delivery are based on health care reform(s). Health care reform has been a global issue over the years and the United States has seen proposals for multiple reforms over the years. A successful, health care proposal in the United States with involvement of the federal government was the short-lived establishment of the first system of national medical care in the South. In the 20th century, the United States was influenced by progressivism leading to the initiation of efforts to achieve universal coverage, supported by a Republican presidential candidate, Theodore Roosevelt. In 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat, included a publicly funded health care program while drafting provisions to Social Security legislation, which was eliminated from the final legislation. Subsequently, multiple proposals were introduced, starting in 1949 with President Harry S Truman who proposed universal health care; the proposal by Lyndon B. Johnson with Social Security Act in 1965 which created Medicare and Medicaid; proposals by Ted Kennedy and President Richard Nixon that promoted variations of universal health care. presidential candidate Jimmy Carter also proposed universal health care. This was followed by an effort by President Bill Clinton and headed by first lady Hillary Clinton in 1993, but was not enacted into law. Finally, the election of President Barack Obama and control of both houses of Congress by the Democrats led to the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), often referred to as “ObamaCare” was signed into law in March 2010. Since then, the ACA, or Obamacare, has become a centerpiece of political campaigning. The Republicans now control the presidency and both houses of Congress and are attempting to repeal and replace the ACA. Key words: Health care reform, Affordable Care Act (ACA), Obamacare, Medicare, Medicaid, American Health Care Act
9
Mozumi, Seiichiro. "The Kennedy–Johnson Tax Cut of 1964, the Defeat of Keynes, and Comprehensive Tax Reform in the United States". Journal of Policy History 30, n.º 1 (19 de dezembro de 2017): 25–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0898030617000379.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract:In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson, the successor of John F. Kennedy, signed into law the largest tax cut in U.S. history until 1981, the so-called Kennedy–Johnson tax cut. Many scholars have evaluated it as representative Keynesian tax policy; this article focuses on the effort of the Treasury Department, tax experts such as Stanley S. Surrey and Wilbur D. Mills, the chairman of House Committee on Ways and Means, to reform the federal income tax system comprehensively—making it simpler, fairer, and more equitable—and their defeat by the 1964 tax cut. Through the policymaking and legislative process, the Kennedy administration’s Council Economic Advisers defeated the Treasury and Surrey by domesticating Keynes’s ideas on tax policy. Until the 1964 passage of the tax cut, Mills, with his inconsistent action, abandoned the accomplishment of their ideal tax reform.
10
Merriam, Scott. "Olmsted, Challenging The Secret Government; The Post-Watergate Investigations Of The CIA And FBI". Teaching History: A Journal of Methods 22, n.º 1 (1 de abril de 1997): 53. http://dx.doi.org/10.33043/th.22.1.53.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Almost immediately after Watergate, the news broke that the CIA and FBI had been guilty of huge abuses of power both in the United States and abroad. The media, Congress, and the White House all promised investigations. However, contrary to popular expectations, the inquiries were stymied. The end result, Olmsted argues, was that neither Congress nor the press pushed for changes, or challenged the executive branch, in the oversight of the intelligence community.
11
Mixon, Franklin G., Chandini Sankaran e Kamal P. Upadhyaya. "Is Political Ideology Stable? Evidence from Long-Serving Members of the United States Congress". Economies 7, n.º 2 (6 de maio de 2019): 36. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/economies7020036.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This study extends the political science and political psychology literature on the political ideology of lawmakers by addressing the following question: How stable is a legislator’s political ideology over time? In doing so, we employ Nokken–Poole scores of legislators’ political ideology for members of the United States (U.S.) House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate who were elected prior to the 103rd Congress that began in early 1991 and who served consecutively through the 115th Congress, which ended in early 2019. Results from individual time-series estimations suggest that political ideology is unstable over time for a sizable portion of the members of both major political parties who serve in the U.S. Congress, while analysis of the pooled data suggests that, after accounting for inertia in political ideology and individual legislator effects, Republican legislators become more conservative over time. These results run somewhat counter to the finding in prior studies that the political ideologies of lawmakers and other political elites are stable over time.
12
Nikolova, Ivana. "[The Fate of Healthcare Reform in The United States in the 1940s". Istoriya-History 30, n.º 4 (10 de setembro de 2022): 428–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.53656/his2022-4-5-res.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article focuses on the attempts at healthcare reform by the Truman administration alongside the liberal wing of the Democratic party in the 1940s. The proposals of both the White House and different groups of congressmen are laid out in detail. The main reasons for the failure of healthcare reform, as proposed by the author, are the lack of coordination among the Democrats supporting healthcare reform, Truman’s poor influence on Congress, and the role some key professional organizations play in weakening public support for the administration’s initiatives.
13
Peterson, Paul E., e Jay P. Greene. "Why Executive-Legislative Conflict in the United States is Dwindling". British Journal of Political Science 24, n.º 1 (janeiro de 1994): 33–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123400006773.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
An examination of executive-legislative conflict occurring in US congressional committees between 1947 and 1990 reveals that, despite current concerns of gridlock, the overall level of conflict declined during this period. There are two structural sources of inter-branch conflict – constituent and partisan. The constituent basis for conflict in the United States is rooted in the differing manner in which members of the two branches are elected. Because the executive has a national constituency, it is primarily concerned with matters of national policy. Members of Congress, who have smaller, more homogeneous constituencies, are more concerned with the geographically distributive effects of these policies. The authors' evidence suggests that conflict between the executive and legislative in the United States is greatest on issues that are of both national and distributive significance. The partisan basis for conflict, long established in the House and increasingly visible in the Senate, is reinforced by competitive political contests. Yet conflict between members of Congress and executive officials of the opposite party did not increase between 1947 and 1990. And conflict with executive officials of the same party declined, producing an overall drop in executive-legislative conflict.
14
Cummings, K. Michael, Jonathan Gdanski, Nichole Veatch e Ernesto Marcelo Sebrié. "Assumption of Risk and the Role of Health Warnings Labels in the United States". Nicotine & Tobacco Research 22, n.º 6 (25 de maio de 2019): 975–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntz089.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract Introduction This article provides historical context for understanding how the cigarette industry have manipulated language used in health warning labels (HWLs) to protect them in litigation. Methods Review of previously secret internal business records from 1964 discussing the role HWLs on cigarettes. Review of the legal challenges made by cigarette manufacturers surrounding HWLs as mandated in the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act and the language in corrective statements ordered by US Department of Justice. Results Within days after the Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee issued its 1964 Report the cigarette companies plotted how they could use HWLs on cigarettes as a defense in future litigation. Industry lawyers discussed drafting legislation that would preempt other government agencies from requiring HWLs on cigarette containers and in cigarette advertising with language mirroring the key findings of the Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee report. In July 1965, Congress did pass legislation which mandated a single watered-down cigarette pack HWL which excluded cigarette advertising, just as industry lawyers had recommended. Subsequent HWL laws passed by Congress in 1969 and 1984 along with the more recent history of manufacturers opposing updated graphic HWLs and corrective statements reflects a consistent and continuing effort by cigarette companies to insulate themselves from taking responsibility for harms caused by smoking. Conclusion Beginning in the mid-1960s and continuing even through today, lawyers working on behalf of cigarettes companies have worked to manipulate the language of consumer warnings to focus responsibility for the harms caused by smoking on smokers. Implications In tobacco litigation, juries should be informed about the industry’s coordinated effort to draft legislation and water down the original caution statements proposed on cigarette containers and in advertising even though Congress ultimately is responsible for the law that was enacted. In addition, even though the 1992 Supreme Court decision in the Cipollone case preempted post-1969 failure to warm claims against cigarette makers, this protection does not apply on pre-1969 warning claims where the evidence shows that cigarette companies understood they were selling a defective product that when used as intended would harm their customers. Thus, those initiating smoking before 1969 and subsequently harmed by cigarettes can hold cigarette makers responsible for their failure to warn them about health risks.
15
Senyk, Yaroslav. "UKRAINIAN CAUSE IN WASHINGTON DURING THE COLD WAR (FROM THE ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION OF THE VASYL STEFANYK NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY OF UKRAINE IN LVIV)". Naukovì zapiski Nacìonalʹnogo unìversitetu "Ostrozʹka akademìâ". Serìâ Ìstoričnì nauki 1 (17 de dezembro de 2020): 174–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.25264/2409-6806-2020-31-174-184.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article examines activities of the Ukrainian community in Washington in the 1950s and the 1960s. The relevant historical materials kept in the archives of Omelan and Tetiana Antonovych are submitted for scientific circulation for the first time. The papers relate to the activities of the Association of Ukrainians in Washington, headed by O. Antonovych, and of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, headed by L. Dobriansky, as well as to their cooperation with the US Congress in support of the Ukrainian cause. The Ruthenians (Ukrainians) were already mentioned in the Senate document of the 61st US Congress in 1911. After the Second World War, the Ukrainian question came up on the agenda in connection with the formation of the United Nations. The center of Ukrainian political emigration has moved to the US. At that time L. Dobriansky kept continuous contacts with members of the Congress. In 1959 both Houses of the Congress passed the Captive Nations Week Resolution submitted by L. Dobryansky. On June 7, 1960 the House of Representatives decided to issue the brochure known as “Europe’s Freedom Fighter. Taras Shevchenko. 1814–1861 as an official House document”. On June 27, 1964 President D. Eisenhower inaugurated the monument to Taras Shevchenko in Washington, DC. The US Congress celebrated the anniversary of the proclamation of Ukraine’s independence on January 22, 1918 on annual ceremonial meetings with prayers for free Ukraine delivered by the Ukrainian priests. The US Senators and Representatives regularly included statements and letters from the Ukrainian organizations in the Congress Records.
16
Rubio, Antonio Daniel Juan, e Isabel María García Conesa. "<p>CONGRESSWOMAN ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: A GREEN NEW DEAL OUTRIDER</p>". RAUDEM. Revista de Estudios de las Mujeres 10 (20 de dezembro de 2022): 28–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/raudem.v10i1.6986.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Since 1899, at least one Hispanic has served in every Congress of the United States (U.S.). When the U.S. 116th Congress convened on January 3, 2019, it comprised the highest number of Hispanics in its history with a record of 48 between both chambers (44 in the House of Representatives and 4 in the Senate). This article focuses on the figure of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, perhaps being the most important emerging Hispanic member in the current Congress, whose top policy priority is a “Green New Deal”, a comprehensive plan to address climate change in the U.S.
17
Uscinski, Joseph, Michael S. Rocca, Gabriel R. Sanchez e Marina Brenden. "Congress and Foreign Policy: Congressional Action on the Darfur Genocide". PS: Political Science & Politics 42, n.º 03 (26 de junho de 2009): 489–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049096509090799.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
ABSTRACTAs of January 2008, more than 400,000 people have been killed and more than 2.5 million people have been displaced in the regions of Darfur and Chad. This event has not gone unnoticed in the United States, as the 109th United States Congress (2005–2006) considered several measures in the House of Representatives to provide funding and peacekeeping forces to quell the violence in Darfur. The goal of this article is to explain individual members' of Congress (MCs') support for Darfur legislation by examining the influence of their individual, district, and institutional characteristics. The Darfur case provides the opportunity to analyze factors critical to congressional behavior in a context where there is reason to expect an MC's usual set of incentives—e.g., reelection and adherence to party—to be less prominent. In all, we contribute to congressional and foreign policy research by parceling out the determinants of congressional support for foreign policy in comparison to domestic policy.
18
Wilsford, David. "Le Département d’État : une administration d’étrangers ou une étrange administration ?" Revue française d'administration publique 69, n.º 1 (1994): 67–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/rfap.1994.2775.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The United States Department of State A Government of Strangers or a Strange Government ? Within American government, the United States Department is typical of a fragmented ‘stateless’ bureaucracy. It shares a great deal of power with the Congress, interest groups and the mass media, and has seen its influence gradually eroded by the White House and the Department of Defense. Because other institutional actors are structurally very strong in the American political System, the American Department of State is correspondingly less powerful within its universe compared to its counterparts in most advanced industrial democracies. It is both a ‘government of strangers’ and a ‘strange government’. Nonetheless, as an actor on the international stage, the American Department of State is powerful because of the position of the United States on the geopolitical scene.
19
Pitts, Britney. "“Uneasy Lies the Head that Wears a Crown”: A Critical Race Analysis of the CROWN Act". Journal of Black Studies 52, n.º 7 (2 de junho de 2021): 716–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00219347211021096.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Black hair in the United States remains misunderstood and othered against Eurocentric standards of beauty and professionalism as evidenced by the ongoing policing of Black hair in schools and workplaces. The CROWN Act of 2019 was passed in several states to protect Black adults and children from hair-biased discrimination, and was introduced to the United States Congress in December 2019. In September 2020, the CROWN Act passed in the US House of Representatives, however, it has not been passed in the Senate, yet. In this paper, I provide a critical race analysis of hair policies and challenges collected from news articles, the CROWN Research Study, and testimonies in support of the CROWN Act to demonstrate the importance of this bill’s passing at the federal level.
20
Ress. "Chicago's Marillac House: A Case Study in Diversifying Our Understanding of the Settlement House Movement in the United States, 1914–1964". Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1998-) 113, n.º 1 (2020): 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.5406/jillistathistsoc.113.1.0040.
Texto completo da fonte
21
Shchyhelska, Halyna. "Interaction of Ukrainian Diaspora and the USA Government Regarding Celebration of Ukrainian Independence Day on January 22". Науковий вісник Чернівецького національного університету імені Юрія Федьковича. Історія 1, n.º 47 (30 de junho de 2018): 136–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.31861/hj2018.47.136-145.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
2018 marks the 100th anniversary of the proclamation of Ukrainian independence. OnJanuary 22, 1918, the Ukrainian People’s Republic proclaimed its independence by adopting the IV Universal of the Ukrainian Central Rada, although this significant event was «wiped out» from the public consciousness on the territory of Ukraine during the years of the Soviet totalitarian regime. At the same time, January 22 was a crucial event for the Ukrainian diaspora in the USA. This article examines how American Ukrainians interacted with the USA Government institutions regarding the celebration and recognition of the Ukrainian Independence day on January 22. The attention is focused on the activities of ethnic Ukrainians in the United States, directed at the organization of the special celebration of the Ukrainian Independence anniversaries in the US Congress and cities. Drawing from the diaspora press and Congressional Records, this article argues that many members of Congress participated in the observed celebration and expressed kind feelings to the Ukrainian people, recognised their fight for freedom, during the House of Representatives and Senate sessions. Several Congressmen submitted the resolutions in the US Congress urging the President of United States to designate January 22 as «Ukrainian lndependence Day». January 22 was proclaimed Ukrainian Day by the governors of fifteen States and mayors of many cities.
Keywords: January 22, Ukrainian independence day, Ukrainian diaspora, USA, interaction, Congress
22
McKEEVER, ROBERT J. "Race and Representation in the United States: the Constitutional Validity of Majority–Minority Congressional Districts". Journal of American Studies 33, n.º 3 (dezembro de 1999): 491–507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021875899006210.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In an effort to maximize the representation of African Americans and Hispanics in the United States House of Representatives, many state legislatures have consciously sought to create so-called “majority–minority” congressional districts. This involves carving out districts in which African Americans or Hispanics constitute more than 50 per cent of the voting age population. The expectation is that such districts will elect a minority member of the House, which in turn will lead to a Congress that is more sensitive and responsive to the needs and interests of America's two largest ethnic minorities. Indeed, this expectation has become an article of faith for the mainstream civil rights movement and its white sympathizers.However, like other forms of affirmative action, majority–minority districting sits rather uncomfortably alongside the Constitutional principle of race-neutrality. In a series of recent cases, the United States Supreme Court has declared that, by subordinating traditional districting principles to the overriding need to draw boundaries along racial lines, states have violated the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
23
Garber, Judith A. "THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT, THE FEDERAL COURTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION IN THE UNITED STATES". Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 15, n.º 1, 2 & 3 (24 de julho de 2011): 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/c9967g.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Twenty-five years have passed since the newly formed Moral Majority helped put Ronald Reagan in the White House and a Republican majority in the United States Senate. The Moral Majority was one organization (and its founder, the Reverend Jerry Falwell, one figure) at the centre of an emerging evangelical Protestant social movement. This movement was galvanized by two aims: defeating the Equal Rights Amendment,3 which Congress submitted to the states for consideration in 1972, and contesting the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade4 ruling, which recognized a constitutional right to abortion. In the early 1980s, “New Christian Right” was an accurate description of the first widespread public engagement of evangelicals in half a century.
24
Makurin, A. I. "WHITE HOUSE AND UNITED STATES CAPITOL: BATTLE FOR THE SUPREME COURT (SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY)". Вестник Пермского университета. История, n.º 2 (61) (2023): 84–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.17072/2219-3111-2023-2-84-95.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The U.S. Constitution requires the President to submit Supreme Court nominees to the Senate for its advice and consent. The appointment of a Supreme Court Justice is an event of major significance in American politics. Since the early 20th century, Presidents have submitted 62 nominations for the Court, including those for the post of Chief Justice. Of this total, 55 were confirmed (seven declined to serve). The article dissects the crucial constitutional disputes between the executive and legislative branches of government from the Eisenhower administration to the end of the Clinton administration, and examines the day-to-day working relations between the President and Congress, which go beyond the traditional discussions of Supreme Court decisions. The article analyzes the conflicts between the President and Congress in the field of shared power – nomination and confirmation of the Supreme Court Justices in the Senate. The research is based on historical and statistical data on the Supreme Court: its institutional development; decision trends; background, nomination; its relations with public, governmental, and other judicial bodies; and its influence. A special place in the article is given to the analysis of the policies of the Nixon, Reagan and Clinton administrations.
25
Schultz, David. "The Implementation and Evaluation of the United States Affordable Care Act". Medicine, Law & Society 12, n.º 1 (26 de abril de 2019): 17–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.18690/mls.12.1.17-38.2019.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In 2010 the United States Congress adopted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), more commonly referred to as Obamacare. The ACA was proposed by President Barack Obama while running for president and it was passed with a near straight party-line vote of Democrats in the US House and Senate in 2010. The ACA was meant to address several problems with the American health care delivery system, including cost, access and outcomes. This article describes the major features of the ACA including the context of the US health care system, evaluates the ACA’s implementation history and assesses its fate and future reforms throughout the presidency of Donald Trump. The overall conclusion based on its implementation is that while the ACA made significant reforms in terms of access to health care, it is not clear that it addressed affordability or began to improve health care outcomes in the US.
26
Horner, Jennifer R. "Clogged systems and toxic assets". Journal of Language and Politics 10, n.º 1 (28 de junho de 2011): 29–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jlp.10.1.02hor.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, also known as the “Wall Street Bailout,” authorized the allocation of $700B US to address the financial crisis of 2008. The “bailout” did not pass easily; members of the United States Congress reported feedback from angry constituents urging them to vote against it, and the measure failed its first vote in the House of Representatives. This essay focuses on metaphors used in public discourse to describe the “bailout” in the ten days between its introduction to Congress and its failure in the House. Advocates of the economic stimulus plan relied on metaphors that evacuated human agency, portraying the plan as an emergency measure necessitated by crises such as illness, natural disasters, and mechanical failures. Opponents to the plan extended and modified the administration’s metaphors to communicate a critique of the transfer of federal funds to private entities for the good of the public.
27
Lee, Ji-Eun. "Can the Japanese Military ‘Comfort Women’ speak in English?: Americanization of the ‘Comfort Women’ issue and The Politics of Representation of “I Can Speak”". K-Culture·Story Contents Reasearch Institute 3 (31 de julho de 2023): 77–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.56659/kcsc.2023.07.3.77.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This article targets the movie “I Can Speak”, which was produced based on the actual case in which the “Resolution on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery (H. Res. 121)” was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in 2007. Through the analysis of “I Can Speak”, this paper critically examines the discourse of ‘Comfort Women’ in the United States. Today, ‘Comfort Women’ issue is raised in the United States as a matter of human rights for universal women, but on the other hand, this discourse omits the issue of American intervention and (neo)colonialism in the Pacific War and post-war processing. At this time, 'universal value' means built by the state-knowledge power of the United States, and at the same time reproduces it. “I Can Speak” puts the U.S. outside the issue by erasing the U.S. political landscape surrounding the ‘Comfort Women’ issue and reducing it to just ‘Korea-Japan’ relations. In “I Can Speak,” the U.S. Congress is represented as a place where historical truth wins, and the victim receives an apology from the audience in a parliament surrounded by a statue of an American great man. This paper confirms that the U.S. Congress is also a powerful place to capture Servalton's speech with its ruling discourse by revealing the action of power that the word ‘universal value’ conceals. What is important is that these limitations are not only “I Can Speak,” but also our view of recognizing the ‘Comfort Women’ issue being publicized in the United States today. Therefore, the analysis of “I Can Speak” allows us to critically examine the discourse and movement that is ‘globalizing’ the ‘Comfort Women’ problem through the United States.
28
Siburian, H. M. Sahat Radot. "Constitution Formulation and Amendment in Indonesian and American Legal System: A Comparative Study". Journal of Law and Legal Reform 3, n.º 1 (31 de janeiro de 2022): 39–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v3i1.49536.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The purpose of this study is to find out the comparison of constitutional law in Indonesia and the United States in terms of the development of the constitution and the mechanism for changing the constitution (UUD). The method used in this research is in the form of legal research. The type of research used for this approach is normative legal research. As in the United States constitution, Article V regulates how to amend the constitution. Meanwhile, in Indonesia, the mechanism for this change is regulated in Article 37 of the 1945 Constitution (UUD). The United States and Indonesia are countries that have adopted a presidential system of government with a republican form of government. In addition, the state institution authorized to make changes to the constitution of each country is the legislature. If in the United States the one who can amend the Constitution is the Congress consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate, then in Indonesia the authority to make changes to the Constitution is the MPR, which includes the DPR and DPD. Then, the form of the constitution used by the two countries is the same as the Written Constitution. The existence of the United States Constitution is actually an effort to realize the principles stated in a Declaration of Independence (1776). The Declaration is based on French philosophical and English Enlightenment schools. The main purpose of the United States constitution is to guarantee the rights of the states.
29
Darusman, Yoyon Mulyana. "PENTINGNYA PENERAPAN SISTEM STRONG BICAMERAL DALAM KEKUASAAN LEGISLATIF REPUBLIK INDONESIA". ADIL: Jurnal Hukum 14, n.º 1 (11 de julho de 2023): 69–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.33476/ajl.v14i1.3226.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Lembaga parlemen dalam praktek negara-negara di dunia pada umumnya menggunakan sistem dua kamar, walaupun terdapat juga negara-negara yang menggunakan sistem satu kamar. Lembaga parlemen dalam praktek ketatanegaraan disebut dengan kekuasaan legislatif. Republik Indonesia menggunakan sistem dua kamar, sebagaimana yang disebutkan dalam Article 2 Section 1 naskah asli UUD 1945 menyebutkan adanya lembaga MPR yang di dalamnya terdapat DPR, ditambah dengan Utusan Golongan dan Daerah. Seperti halnya United States of America juga menggunakan sistem dua kamar sebagaimana yang disebutkan dalam Article 1 Section 1 Constitution of USA menyebutkan adanya Congress of United States which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Setelah amandement UUD 1945 sebagaimana yang disebutkan pada Article 2 Section 1 terjadi perubahan pada kekuasaan pada lembaga legislatif Indonesia, yang berbunyi : MPR yang di dalamnya terdapat DPR dan DPD. Namun demikian kedua kamar ini sebagaimana disebutkan dalam UUD 1945 naskah perubahan tidak memiliki kekuasaan yang sama, di mana DPR memiliki kewenangan membentuk UU sedangkan DPD tidak memiliki kewenangan membentuk UU hanya memiliki kewenangan untuk mengajukan RUU kepada DPR. Hal ini sangat berbeda dengan dua kamar di United State of America yaitu di mana Kongres di dalamnya terdiri dari Senate and House of Resentatives sama-sama memiliki kewenangan membentuk UU.
30
Mabry, Donald. "The US Military and the War on Drugs in Latin America". Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 30, n.º 2-3 (1988): 53–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/165979.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In The Face Of The Unsuccessful Efforts of law enforcement agencies (including the Coast Guard) to staunch the flow of illegal narcotics into the United States, Congress and the public have been demanding that the military increase its role in the nation's anti-drug campaign. These demands vary in scope. The minimum demand is that the military provide more logistical support and intelligence data. Another, which was approved by Congress in 1988, is also to give military personnel powers of search, seizure, and arrest outside the land area of the United States. Some also advocate giving civilian police powers to the military to patrol the national borders, including ports of entry. In May 1988, the US House of Representatives voted to demand that the military “seal the borders” to drug traffic within 45 days, an effort which would require both naval and border interdiction, and the Senate voted overwhelmingly to expand the role of the military in the anti-drug campaign. The most extreme demand has come from Representative Arthur Ravenel, Jr. (R-SC) who has called for the military shoot-down, on sight, of any aircraft suspected of smuggling drugs.
31
Tuohy, Carolyn Hughes. "The Self-Undermining Peril of “Mosaic” Reform Strategies: A Comparative View". Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 45, n.º 4 (11 de março de 2020): 693–707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/03616878-8255601.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract The American Democratic leadership in the White House and Congress in 2009–10 and the British Conservative/Liberal-Democrat Coalition government in 2010–12 each pursued a strategy of rapidly assembled multiple adjustments to the prevailing policy framework for health care rather than attempting a “big-bang” strategy of sweeping institutional change. Despite their relative modesty, each set of reforms encountered a highly conflictual and tortuous process of legislative passage. Subsequently, the reforms failed to gain broad public acceptance and were variously hobbled (in the United States) and transformed (in the United Kingdom) in the course of implementation. These two cases thus offer some common lessons about the potential and the pitfalls of such complex “mosaic” reforms.
32
Farrier, Jasmine. "Louis Fisher on Congress and the Budget: Institutional Responsibility and Other Taboos". PS: Political Science & Politics 46, n.º 03 (21 de junho de 2013): 510–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049096513000735.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The serial fiscal policy and budgeting woes of the United States over the last three decades have been compounded by a bipartisan evasion of institutional responsibility by elected leaders. Long before “sequestration” and “fiscal cliffs,” Louis Fisher argued that presidents and members of the House and Senate undermined constitutional power balance and the spirit of budgeting law. A variety of ill-conceived process “reforms” further damaged the separation of powers system. As a scholar, Fisher uses an institutional lens to explore budget concepts that are rare in political science, such ascapacity, accountability, andduty. And as a public intellectual, Fisher's relevance has been secured by his repeatedly broaching these scholarly and political taboos.
33
Tomaszewski, Norbert. "Reclaiming the House of the Representatives from Republicans: Case Study of Districts TX-32 and NJ-3". Political Preferences, n.º 23 (21 de agosto de 2019): 37–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.31261/polpre.2019.23.37-54.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
2018 midterm elections in the United States allowed more ethnically and racially diverse candidates to become members of the Congress. The use of social media tools helped them to reach out to their community and get out the vote, which is especially important in Democratic campaign tactics. The article, by focusing on Colin Allred's and Andy Kim's Congressional bids, focuses on how their issue-oriented campaigns helped to mobilize the liberal voters. Furthermore, by analysing the rapidly changing demographics, it tackles the crucial question: do they mean the doom of the Republican Party?
34
Goldstein, Judith, e Robert Gulotty. "America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform". International Organization 68, n.º 2 (2014): 263–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020818313000490.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
AbstractAmong scholars, delegation of power to the US president in 1934 is widely believed to have been a necessary requisite for tariff reductions in ensuing years. According to conventional wisdom, delegation to the president sheltered Congress from constituent pressure thereby facilitating the opening of the US economy and the emergence of the United States as a world power. This article suggests a revision to our understanding of just how that occurred. Through a close study of the US tariff schedule between 1928 and 1964, focusing on highly protected products, we examine which products were subject to liberalization and at what time. After 1934, delegation led to a change in trade policy, not because Congress gave up their constitutional prerogative in this domain but because presidents were able to target the potential economic dislocation that derives from import competition to avoid the creation of a congressional majority willing to halt the trade agreements program.
35
Shenk, Elaine M. "H.R. 2499 Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2010". Journal of Language and Politics 12, n.º 4 (31 de dezembro de 2013): 583–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jlp.12.4.05she.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives passed The Puerto Rico Democracy Act, a bill that ostensibly focused on the authorization of a plebiscite on the Island’s future political status in relationship to the United States. Nevertheless, the final text included language policy on (a) ballot language, (b) official language legislation, and (c) language ideologies favoring English as the “language of opportunity ”. Using CDA, this paper examines the House discussion of the bill on April 29, 2010, as found in the Congressional Record Proceedings and Debates of the 111th Congress. The paper focuses on how the discussion of the bill shifted from political status issues to the inclusion of language policies to be imposed on the Island, the role of the Burton Amendment in shaping these policies, and the ways in which the construction of identity with and through language was both promoted and erased on the House floor.
36
Kolkmann, Michael. "Zurück zum „Divided Government“: Die US-amerikanischen Kongresswahlen vom 8. November 2022". Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 54, n.º 1 (2023): 3–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/0340-1758-2023-1-3.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The 2022 Congressional elections have ended with ambivalent results . Typically, the party of the governing president loses seats in midterm elections, sometimes several dozens . In this regard, President Joe Biden and his party managed to achieve a surprisingly good result . While his Democrats lost their narrow majority to Republicans in the U .S . House of Rep- resentatives, they succeeded in keeping their equally narrow majority in the U .S . Senate . In the 118th Congress, Washington will be dominated by “divided government”, meaning one party has control over the House and the other party dominates the Senate and the White House . In regard to its composition, the new Congress is more diverse than ever . The elec- tion of Republican Kevin McCarthy as new speaker after 15 ballots indicates that, due to its heterogenous membership, it will be very hard in the upcoming two years to secure majori- ties for far reaching legislative projects . Republicans have already announced that they will focus on investigating various policy areas of the Biden administration as well as the presi- dent and his family himself . After last year’s midterm election, all eyes will be on the con- gressional and presidential elections of 2024 which will overshadow current political devel- opments in the United States .
37
Cope-Kasten, Cali. "It's Time to Start Showing a Little Restraint: In Search of a Compromise on Federal Seclusion and Restraint Legislation". University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, n.º 47.1 (2013): 217. http://dx.doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.47.1.time.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In 2009, the United States House of Representatives heard testimony that hundreds of students had been injured in schools by teachers secluding or physically restraining them. Congress had never legislated on seclusion and restraint, but the alarming allegations of student injuries and deaths prompted many parents to demand a ban on the use of the techniques in schools. In the continuing debate, school officials have protested that seclusion and restraint are important tools for teachers to protect their classrooms from out-of-control students. Torn between these two extreme positions, Congress has twice attempted — but failed — to pass federal legislation regulating seclusion and restraint. This Note examines the most recent failed legislative attempts and proposes a more moderate statute that has a greater likelihood of passing through a polarized Congress. By banning certain forms of restraint, raising safety standards for seclusion spaces, and broadening grant authority to help schools develop alternatives to seclusion and restraint, this Note’s proposed statute would protect both student safety and teacher autonomy.
38
Goldstein, Leslie Friedman. "The Specter of the Second Amendment: Rereading Slaughterhouse and Cruikshank". Studies in American Political Development 21, n.º 2 (2007): 131–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0898588x0700017x.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In 1866, members of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction introduced the Fourteenth Amendment into the House of Representatives and the Senate, respectively. Several speakers indicated that the force of the new amendment would be to protect basic or fundamental citizen rights against adverse action by state governments, and would allow Congress for the first time to protect such rights against such state action. The clause that would do this was the privileges or immunities clause: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”
39
Wang, Jianwei. "China: A Challenge or Opportunity for the United States?" Journal of East Asian Studies 3, n.º 2 (agosto de 2003): 293–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1598240800001375.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Ever since the end of the Cold War, the United States—from the government to the public, from the White House to Congress, from policymakers to pundits, from China specialists to people who know little about China—has engaged itself in the seemingly endless debate on China. Immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union, people debated whether China was still important to the United States and whether the Sino-U.S. special relationship was worth preserving. Since the early 1990s, with China's remarkable economic “soft landing” and the consequent robust and sustained economic growth, Americans seemed to have reached a consensus that China still matters to the United States for better or worse. U.S.-China relations were often referred to as one of the most important bilateral relations to the United States. But important in what way? Much debate ensued with a series of frictions between the two countries that climaxed in the dispatch of two U.S. aircraft carriers to the South China Sea during the Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996, the U.S.-led NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, and the midair collision between the two air forces in 2001. The U.S. media tirelessly asked the question: “China: friend or foe?” The pattern for U.S. China policy since the end of the Cold War is that whenever the relationship appeared to be stabilizing and a consensus was shaping, new crises emerged and destroyed the hard-won progress, triggering another round of debate on China as if people never learned anything from the previous debate; the old and familiar discourse started all over again.
40
Lee, Hwan-Kyung. "A Study on the Legislative Process of the American Congress". Kyung Hee Law Journal 58, n.º 2 (30 de junho de 2023): 99–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.15539/khlj.58.2.3.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The legislative process of the United States Congress has been largely divided into four stages: first, writing and submitting bills; second, deliberating and voting by the committee; third, deliberation and voting by the plenary session; fourth, the president's signature and the procedure of fear. When a bill is submitted to the Senate or House of Representatives in Congress, it is referred to the Standing Committee for a hearing to determine whether the bill will be adopted or modified. Once adopted, the bill will be brought to the plenary session for debate and voting. Thus, the passed bill will be transferred to another circle, namely, the Senate bill will be transferred to the House of Representatives and the House of Representatives bill will be transferred to the Senate, where the same procedure will be taken. The bills can be deliberated and reviewed according to parliamentary procedures if each senator or congressman submits them to a party to which they belong.
When a bill is submitted, the President of the House Speaker of the Senate and the House of Commons shall refer the bill to the respective competent committees in accordance with the rules of Congress. There are quite detailed rules and precedents concerning the jurisdiction of the Committee, so there is little room for discretion in the submission of the Bill. However, a private bill can be referred to a committee desired by the proposal. Once the bill is referred to the committee, it will be put on the committee's calendar.
Each committee will have a subcommittee, which will review the submitted proposal in detail.
The Committee's resolution is not just a preliminary review process and does not mean final decision-making rights, but the Committee's deliberation process can be said to be a decisive process in passing bills, since it is a general tendency to accept the Committee's decision as it is.
A bill passed by a standing committee is usually deliberated in the House of Representatives before the Senate. By the time the bill is completed in the House of Representatives, the same bill will be passed by the Senate committee and the lawmakers who proposed the bill will discuss the schedule for deliberation at the plenary session with the Congressional leaders.
41
Kraśnicka, Izabela. "Dwukrotny impeachment prezydenta Donalda Trumpa jako precedens w historii Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki". Przegląd Sejmowy 2(169) (2022): 85–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.100.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In January 2021, an unusual precedent was set in the history of the political system of the United States. For the second time in a single term, an incumbent president was impeached by the House of Representatives of the U.S. Congress. Due to the unusual circumstances of the expiration of the president’s term and the change in the balance of power in the upper chamber, the Senate hearing of the charges was accompanied by legal problems of a constitutional nature, for which answers had to be sought in the Constitution itself and in the possible previous practice of Congress. The analysis of Donald Trump’s second impeachment, as the aim of the presented article, seems necessary not only to historically document the specifics of the subsequent acquittal, but also to indicate the dissimilarities accompanying this particular political process.
42
Lohmann, Susanne, e Sharyn O'Halloran. "Divided government and U.S. trade policy: theory and evidence". International Organization 48, n.º 4 (1994): 595–632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020818300028320.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
If different parties control the U.S. Congress and White House, the United States may maintain higher import protection than otherwise. This proposition follows from a distributive politics model in which Congress can choose to delegate trade policymaking to the President. When the congressional majority party faces a President of the other party, the former has an incentive to delegate to but to constrain the President by requiring congressional approval of trade proposals by up-or-down vote. This constraint forces the President to provide higher protection in order to assemble a congressional majority. Evidence confirms that (1) the institutional constraints placed on the President's trade policymaking authority are strengthened in times of divided government and loosened under unified government and (2) U.S. trade policy was significantly more protectionist under divided than under unified government during the period 1949–90.
43
Pekarnikova, Marina E., e Alexander Borisovich Polonskiy. "The changing vector of the United States climate policy in 1992-2023". USA & Canada Economics – Politics – Culture, n.º 10 (15 de dezembro de 2023): 70–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s2686673023100073.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The purpose of the work is to analyze the US climate policy, starting with the preparation and signing of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) and its Kyoto Protocol (1997) and ending with the debate on raising the US public debt ceiling by 2023. It is shown that this policy is characterized by pronounced inconsistency, which is a reflection of bipartisan disagreements and an ambiguous approach to this problem, which is demonstrated by the Congress and the Administration of the US President. The country that signed the Kyoto Protocol has not ratified it. At first, supporting the Paris Climate Agreement (2015), the United States then withdrew from it and almost immediately after that rejoined the Agreement. The reason for this inconsistency is that, in general, the two main US political parties have fundamentally different attitudes to the problem of controlling the anthropogenic climate change. Therefore, almost every change of the White House Administration, with the victory of a candidate for the US presidency from an opposition party, leads to a reversal of the climate policy vector by 180 degrees. Such political practice is one of the reasons why it is impossible to fulfill the main goal of the Paris Agreement.
44
Mikhaylenko, Ekaterina B., e Elena I. Sinitsyna. "The role of the U.S. Congress in Determining Nuclear Arms Control Policy under the Biden Administration". Koinon 2, n.º 2 (2021): 205–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/koinon.2021.02.2.023.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
On November 3, 2020, a general election was held in the United States, as a result of which Joe Biden was declared the new president and a third of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives were re-elected. Under the new administration, nuclear arms control, one of the very few possible spheres of U.S.-Russian cooperation, is believed to be reanimated. At least, the president-elect has kept his promise to extend the last remaining treaty in this sphere, the New START, for five years without any preconditions. However, despite the traditionally stronger role of the executive branch in the development and implementation of U.S. nuclear policy, the legislative branch, represented by the U.S. Congress, has particular instruments to influence the decision-making process. This paper sets out to analyze how the new balance of power in Congress established after the 2020 general election will affect actions taken by the Biden administration in the sphere of nuclear arms control. For this purpose, the authors used methods of situation analysis, analytical and predictive measures. In the end, the authors conclude that, despite the Democratic majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, the continued strong opposition from Republicans in both houses of Congress will not allow the president-elect to significantly change the current political course in the field of nuclear arms control.
45
Furnas, Alexander C., Michael T. Heaney e Timothy M. LaPira. "The partisan ties of lobbying firms". Research & Politics 6, n.º 3 (julho de 2019): 205316801987703. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2053168019877039.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This article examines lobbying firms as intermediaries between organized interests and legislators in the United States. It states a partisan theory of legislative subsidy in which lobbying firms are institutions with relatively stable partisan identities. Firms generate greater revenues when their clients believe that firms’ partisan ties are valued highly by members of Congress. It hypothesizes that firms that have partisan ties to the majority party receive greater revenues than do firms that do not have such ties, as well as that partisan ties with the House majority party lead to greater financial returns than do partisan ties to the Senate majority party. These hypotheses are tested using data available under the Lobbying Disclosure Act from 2008 to 2016. Panel regression analysis indicates that firms receive financial benefits when they have partisan ties with the majority party in the House but not necessarily with the Senate majority party, while controlling for firm-level covariates (number of clients, diversity, and organizational characteristics). A difference-in-differences analysis establishes that Democratically aligned lobbying firms experienced financial losses when the Republican Party reclaimed the House in 2011, but there were no significant differences between Republican and Democratic firms when the Republicans reclaimed the Senate in 2015.
46
Editors, Policy Perspectives. "Susie Saavedra". Policy Perspectives 25 (11 de maio de 2018): 84–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.4079/pp.v25i0.18393.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Susie Saavedra was recently promoted to Vice President for Policy and Legislative Affairs at the National Urban League Washington Bureau. Prior to this role, she served as Senior Director for the same department. Specifically, Ms. Saavedra is the League’s chief education and health policy officer, a responsibility she has held since 2013. She offers over 15 years of federal legislative, policy, and political experience along with a passion for advancing social and economic justice. Before joining the National Urban League, Ms. Saavedra spent a decade working in both the United States House of Representatives and United States Senate for four Members of Congress, as a Legislative Aide to former Senator Hillary Clinton, and as a Legislative Director for Representatives Karen Bass, Al Green and Joe Baca. She also promoted diversity in the halls of Congress as former President of the Congressional Hispanic Staff Association (CHSA) and has advocated for expanding opportunities for Hispanics in higher education as a governing board member of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU). Ms. Saavedra is also the Vice President of the Hispanic Lobbyists Association which is dedicated to building diversity in the government relations profession. She holds a Master of Public Administration degree from George Washington University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Denver.
47
Rozental, Dmitry M. "Venezuelan Puzzle for Joe Biden". Russia and America in the 21st Century, Спецвыпуск (2021): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/s207054760018192-8.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article is devoted to the American-Venezuelan relations at the present stage. Their confusion is explained by the ongoing revision of US foreign policy under 46th President Joe Biden, the confrontation between Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and political and economic instability in the Bolivarian Republic. At the same time, an analysis of the main components of bilateral interaction can contribute to a better understanding of their features. Washington's pressure on Caracas takes place because of the domestic political reasons and the strategic objectives of the United States in the Western Hemisphere. In these conditions, the probability that the White House will continue the pressure on the government of Nicolas Maduro remains high enough.
48
Majette, Gwendolyn Roberts. "PPACA and Public Health: Creating a Framework to Focus on Prevention and Wellness and Improve the Public's Health". Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 39, n.º 3 (2011): 366–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720x.2011.00606.x.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), a major piece of health care reform legislation. This comprehensive legislation includes provisions that focus on prevention, wellness, and public health. Some, including authors in this symposium, question whether Congress considered public health, prevention, and wellness issues as mere afterthoughts in the creation of PPACA. As this article amply demonstrates, they did not.This article documents the extent of congressional consideration on public health issues based on personal experience working on the framework for health care reform — specifically, my experience as a Fellow for a member of the Health Subcommittee of the Senate Finance Committee from 2008-2009. I also include a review of congressional activity in the United States House of Representatives. Analysis of the congressional meetings and hearings reveals that Congress had a deep understanding about the critical need to reform the U.S. public health and prevention system.
49
Kavka, Gregory S. "Disability and the Right to Work". Social Philosophy and Policy 9, n.º 1 (janeiro de 1992): 262–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500003678.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
It is, perhaps, a propitious time to discuss the economic rights of disabled persons. In recent years, the media in the United States have re-ported on such notable events as: students at the nation's only college for the deaf stage a successful protest campaign to have a deaf individual ap-pointed president of their institution; a book by a disabled British physicist on the origins of the universe becomes a best seller; a pitcher with only one arm has a successful rookie season in major league baseball; a motion-picture actor wins an Oscar for his portrayal of a wheelchair-bound person, beating out another nominee playing another wheelchair-bound person; a cancer patient wins an Olympic gold medal in wrestling; a paralyzed mother trains her children to accept discipline by inserting their hands in her mouth to be gently bitten when punishment is due; and a paraplegic rock climber scales the sheer four-thousand-foot wall of Yosemite Valley's El Capitan. Most significantly, in 1990, the United States Congress passed an important bill – the Americans with Disabili-ties Act – extending to disabled people employment and access-related protections afforded to members of other disadvantaged groups by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
50
Karako, Thomas. "Nuclear Weapons in the 112th Congress: Politics and Policy after New START". PS: Political Science & Politics 45, n.º 02 (14 de março de 2012): 346–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s104909651200008x.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
AbstractPassed by the US House of Representatives as part of the annual defense authorization bill in May 2011, provisions of the New START Implementation Act (NSIA) represented an attempt by Congress to exercise more robust involvement in US nuclear policy, an area historically subject to a great deal of deference to the executive branch. The bill sought to implement the “grand bargain” that preceded the ratification of the New START treaty—namely, that the treaty's seven-year window of reductions to US nuclear forces should be made in tandem with a 10-year modernization program of both the weapons themselves and their aging delivery systems. The context of this arrangement was growing concern about the ability of the United States to retain a sustainable nuclear deterrent for the indefinite future. Although the NSIA provisions were abandoned during conference with the Senate in December 2011, their underlying concerns remain unresolved, and the sustainability of the nuclear enterprise is certain to reappear as a future point of controversy.