Educational Policy-Making and the State Legislature: The New York Experience. By Mike M. Milstein and Robert E. Jennings. (New York: Praeger, 1973. Pp. xiii, 156. $15.00.)

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 367-368
Author(s):  
Stephen K. Bailey
1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 367
Author(s):  
Stephen K. Bailey ◽  
Mike M. Milstein ◽  
Robert E. Jennings

Significance National and state leaders of his Democratic Party had been pressing Cuomo to resign since last week’s publication of a report from State Attorney-General Letitia James detailing his sexual harassment of eleven women, including state employees. Cuomo’s impeachment by the state legislature was looking all but certain by the time he resigned. Impacts Prosecutors in five New York State counties will continue to pursue separate criminal investigations despite Cuomo’s resignation. The State Assembly may complete the impeachment process, despite Cuomo’s resignation, in order to prevent him from running again. Cuomo will continue to talk up his liberal polices, his opposition to Donald Trump, and his leadership during the pandemic.


1980 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-294
Author(s):  
L. Ray Gunn

Given the centrality of legislatures in our representative system of government, it is a remarkable fact that there is today no general, systematic history of state legislative development in America. There are numerous studies of particular laws or individual legislators, but the process by which this important institution evolved historically and its role in the political system remain largely unexplored. The internal development of state legislatures in the century or so after the Revolution, as Ronald Formisano (1974: 480) has observed, is “generally almost terra incognita to historians” (see also Zemsky, 1973; Bogue, 1974; Campbell, 1976). The men who served as legislators in this period are equally obscure. Historians have also assumed, without investigating the proposition, that policy making was the primary function of legislatures and that citizens were linked to that policy-making process through representatives. Studies of past legislative behavior have focused principally on the role of political parties and interest groups in the conversion of constituent demands into public policy.


1961 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 870-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth C. Silva

[What follows below is the substance of a document Miss Silva prepared, which was filed on June 6, 1961, with the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as an Appendix to the petitioners' complaint in the case of W.M.C.A., Inc. et al. v. Caroline K. Simon, Secretary of the State of New York, et al. (61 Civil No. 1559, 1961). The suit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and alleges that the apportionment and districting provisions of the New York Constitution deny the petitioners and others similarly situated both due process and the equal protection of the laws, contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal constitution. Miss Silva had been employed in 1959–60 as special consultant on legislative apportionment by the State of New York Temporary Commission on Revision and Simplification of the Constitution, which reproduced in two volumes as Staff Report No. 33 (April, 1960) the study she made for it.Litigation in the federal courts concerning legislative apportionments, from Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946) to Baker v. Carr, the Tennessee case pending in the Supreme Court at this writing, has been largely preoccupied with questions of federal jurisdiction. The document below does not touch this issue, but rather is confined to the practical effects of the apportionment and districting provisions of the New York Constitution. Man. Ed.]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document