The federal spending power: Building forward after the pandemic

The phrase, “the federal spending power,” identifies the federal government’s ability to spend in areas beyond its constitutional authority to legislate—a power that has supported the development of a national system of universal healthcare coverage in Canada. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, this power was critical to the expansion of Canada’s narrow but deep basket of universally covered services. The challenges exposed by the pandemic mean that still more federal investment will be required. Yet for traditionalists, the material basis of this power is now constrained: the federal government may possess the constitutional authority to invest, but it lacks the fiscal capacity; some form of belt tightening—even austerity—will be necessary. As debates over public spending intensify, health leaders will need to address these questions. Depending on how they do so, health leaders will either support or detract from a healthy recovery.

Taxing the Taxpayers: An Empirical Investigation of the Drivers of Baseline Changes in U.S. Federal Government Technology Programs

Problem definition: The U.S. federal government makes significant investments in technology programs to deliver essential services to the public. The execution of a program is monitored against a baseline—an aggregate plan representing the program’s planned budget, schedule and scope. Recent reports suggest that federal technology programs are re-baselined multiple times, resulting in additional spending of taxpayer money. Although a program’s scope has often been considered a driver of baseline changes, we have a limited understanding of the execution factors that may affect this relationship. Academic/Practical Relevance: With increasing bipartisan scrutiny of federal spending in technology programs and continuing debate in the media about their execution, a nuanced understanding of the drivers of baseline changes in federal technology programs is a critical and contemporary line of inquiry relevant to both policymakers and managers. Our study also responds to recent calls in the operations management literature for research on public sector operations. Methodology: The study sample comprises detailed archival data on 240 U.S. federal government technology programs across 24 federal agencies. We estimate a negative binomial regression specification that accounts for agency fixed effects and several program-specific characteristics to test four hypotheses on the interrelationships between a program’s scope, granularity, management competency, execution methodology and baseline changes.. Results: The results indicate that program scope is positively associated with the number of baseline changes. However, increasing levels of program granularity and program management competency attenuate this positive relationship. Additional analysis highlights the significant savings in taxpayer contributions that can occur by reducing baseline changes in programs of greater scope through an increase in the levels of program granularity and program management competency. Managerial Implications: The study results emphasize the need for federal agencies to invest greater efforts in granularizing a program and in identifying managers with high levels of program management competency when program scope is high, as such efforts can translate into a reduction in the number of baseline changes. The results also highlight the role of number of baseline changes as a valuable in-process metric for program managers and federal agencies to monitor the execution of federal technology programs and identify programs with greater potential. for experiencing cost overruns.

A Seat at the Table or a Power Seat: The Impact of Simple Representation Versus Power Representation of Women in Government on Funding for Primary Education

Scholars have repeatedly shown that female politicians focus more on common good issues such as health care and education than their male counterparts. When men hold the majority of positions of political power these issues may not be raised for debate within government even if women are present. Using a cross-country dataset, this research examines the impact of women in government on public spending on primary education. Specifically, it explores whether it is enough for women to be represented in government, or if they must have a position of power to effect policy outcomes. The analysis results indicate that both women’s simple representation and power representation are significantly positively correlated with increases in federal spending on primary education; however, when women hold positions of political power there is a greater impact on funding than when they simply hold a seat in the legislature.

Opinion: CASE Act will Harm Researchers and Freedom of Inquiry

The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020 (CASE Act) was swept into law during the final days of 2020 as a part of the 5,500 page federal spending bill. In theory, the CASE Act aims to provide a venue for individual creators (such as photographers, graphic artists, musicians) to address smaller copyright infringement claims without spending the time and money required to pursue a copyright infringement lawsuit in Federal court. In reality, however, this additional bureaucratic structure created outside of the traditional court system is fraught with problems that will mostly incentivize large, well-resourced rightsholders or overly litigious copyright owners to take advantage of the system. At the same time, it will confuse and harm innocuous users of content, who may not understand the complexities of copyright law, and who do not know whether or how to respond to a notice of infringement via this small claims process. From our perspective, it will chill users who rely on crucial statutory exceptions to copyright, such as fair use, in their research and teaching activities.

PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS ON ENGINEER MANUAL 385 EFFECTIVENESS OF REDUCING NUMBER AND SEVERITY OF MISHAPS

The United States Army Corps of Engineering Manual 385 (EM 385) has become a vital part of construction operations on all Department of Defense (DOD) construction projects to create a safer work environment. With tremendous effort on developing and enforcing the EM 385, the question of whether the EM385 provides any value for project safety is critical to the construction industry at large. This study looks for causation between the EM 385 and mishap reduction by isolating three dependent variables and a variety of explanatory variables. The data was compiled using both the OSHA Data Initiative (ODI) and the Federal Spending Database. A structural equation is developed to conduct multiple regression analysis assuming EM 385 will reduce the number of mishaps and the severity of mishaps. However, the result shows the effectiveness of EM 385 on reducing the number and severity of mishaps is not significant.

Decriminalization of the agro-industrial complex as the most important factor in ensuring food security

Purpose: The purpose of current work is to study the decriminalization of the agro-industrial complex as the most important factor in food security, as well as a way to solve problems affecting the state of food security of the Russian Federation, problems of legal support of national priorities related to food independence. Design/methodology/approach: The methodological basis of the research was formed by general scientific and private scientific methods. Findings: Today the agro-industrial sector is faced with a fundamentally new socio-economic and political-legal situation. It is not coordinated with the state policy in the field of agriculture, food production and food security, although initially this policy is intended to be a tool for the development, maintenance and functioning of the agro-industrial complex. Originality/value: The conducted research allowed us to draw the following conclusions: given the significant contribution of the agro-industrial complex to the national economy, it is self-sufficient and can develop independently; federal spending on said government support should provide agricultural producers with a margin that provides incentives to improve worker efficiency and an affordable credit system for the technical and technological upgrades of equipment needed to produce competitive goods; issues of increasing the competitiveness of agricultural products require solutions, first of all, at the federal legislative level.

Territorial Exceptionalism and the American Welfare State

Federal law excludes millions of American citizens from crucial public benefits simply because they live in the United States territories. If the Social Security Administration determines a low-income individual has a disability, that person can move to another state and continue to receive benefits. But if that person moves to, say, Guam or the U.S. Virgin Islands, that person loses their right to federal aid. Similarly with SNAP (food stamps), federal spending rises with increased demand—whether because of a recession, a pandemic, or a climate disaster. But unlike the rest of the United States, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa receive a limited amount of federal food assistance, regardless of need. That’s why, after Hurricane Maria, despite additional congressional action, over a million Puerto Rican residents lost food assistance. And with Medicaid, federal law caps medical assistance for each of these five territories, a limit that does not exist for the fifty states or the District of Columbia. This Article draws much-needed attention to these discrepancies in legal status and social protection. It surveys the eligibility rules and financing structure of disability benefits, food assistance, and health insurance for low-income Americans in the states and the territories. A comprehensive account of these practices provokes questions about the tiers of citizenship built by a fragmented and devolved American state. Part I invokes the scholarship on social citizenship, the idea that an individual cannot meaningfully participate in society without some modicum of economic security. Part I then explores the tension between that normative commitment and one of the defining features of the American welfare state—federalism. It then elaborates the exceptional legal status of Americans who live in U.S. territories. Part II provides a comprehensive overview of federal food, medical, and disability assistance and, in doing so, demonstrates how the American territories inhabit a different and, in many ways, dilapidated corner of the American welfare state. Part III begins with an analysis of ongoing cases in federal court that challenge this facial discrimination. It then canvasses legislation introduced in Congress that would make significant progress in putting territorial Americans on par with Americans in the fifty states. To conclude, Part IV brings the states back in, using the earlier discussion of territories as an invitation to imagine an American welfare state built on a foundation other than a racial order.

ACCELERATING THE PACE OF INNOVATION FOR THE GREATER GOOD

The COVID-19 pandemic has created the need for an accelerated drug development paradigm to bring vaccines to the masses. Several public-private partnerships, including Operation Warp Speed (OWS), helped fund an accelerated research & development (R&D) framework in which low-risk vaccines, likely to be successful, were supported via federal spending. This investment bore fruit less than a year later, with the approval of the first COVID-19 vaccines by Pfizer and OWS-supported Moderna. The collaborative problem solving and disruptive thinking demonstrated in the race to a COVID-19 vaccine has ushered in a new era of openness that has sped up global efforts. This race serves as proof-of-concept for an accelerated R&D framework. Establishing a “National Institute of Cures” could help cement this disruptive drug development process as permanent policy.