Insanity Plea: National Survey of Frequency and Success

1985 ◽  
Vol 13 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 101-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Pasewark ◽  
Hugh McGinley
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Insanity Plea ◽  
Policy Concern

The 50 states were surveyed to determine the operative insanity rule and frequency and success of the insanity plea. Reflecting the dearth of information regarding this important public policy concern, only a limited number of jurisdictions could provide statistics on the plea's frequency and success. Among these, incidence of the plea was generally low, while its success rate was quite variable.

Independent Living for the Handicapped Elderly Community: A National View

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (7) ◽  
pp. 305-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.E. Crews ◽  
W.D. Frey ◽  
P.E. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Independent Living ◽  
Baseline Data ◽  
Blind Persons ◽  
Policy And Planning ◽  
Independent Living Services

The first national survey of state blind rehabilitation units provides baseline data regarding independent living services for older and multiply disabled blind persons. The paper examines history and existing services, and defines policy and planning concerns. Ninety-one percent of 53 states and territories responded to the survey, and the article reveals directions for public policy.

When Do Renters Behave Like Homeowners? High Rent, Price Anxiety, and NIMBYism

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL HANKINSON
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
Spatial Scale ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Experimental Measurements ◽  
High Rent ◽  
Neighborhood Scale ◽  
The City

How does spatial scale affect support for public policy? Does supporting housing citywide but “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY) help explain why housing has become increasingly difficult to build in once-affordable cities? I use two original surveys to measure how support for new housing varies between the city scale and neighborhood scale. Together, an exit poll of 1,660 voters during the 2015 San Francisco election and a national survey of over 3,000 respondents provide the first experimental measurements of NIMBYism. While homeowners are sensitive to housing’s proximity, renters typically do not express NIMBYism. However, in high-rent cities, renters demonstrate NIMBYism on par with homeowners, despite continuing to support large increases in the housing supply citywide. These scale-dependent preferences not only help explain the deepening affordability crisis, but show how institutions can undersupply even widely supported public goods. When preferences are scale dependent, the scale of decision-making matters.

National Survey of the Frequency and Success of the Insanity Plea and Alternate Pleas

1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Mcginley ◽  
Richard A. Pasewark
Keyword(s):  
National Survey ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Basic Data ◽  
Insanity Plea ◽  
Basic Understanding

The 50 states and the District of Columbia were surveyed for the operative insanity rule and frequency and success of the insanity plea and related alternate pleas. These data were compared with data collected for the year 1983. As in the earlier report, there seems to be a dearth of information about the use and success of the pleas. The information that is available is quite varied. There is a discussion of why basic data may not be available and what information is needed in order to have a basic understanding of the use of the insanity plea and alternate pleas.

Does Partisanship Shape Attitudes toward Science and Public Policy? The Case for Ideology and Religion

2015 ◽  
Vol 658 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M. Blank ◽  
Daron Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Hydraulic Fracturing ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Attitudes Toward Science ◽  
Willingness To Accept ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Party Ideology ◽  
Scientific Expertise

Despite the apparent partisan divide over issues such as global warming and hydraulic fracturing, little is known about what shapes citizens’ willingness to accept scientific recommendations on political issues. We examine the extent to which Democrats, Republicans, and independents are likely to defer to scientific expertise in matters of policy. Our study draws on an October 2013 U.S. national survey of 2,000 respondents. We find that partisan differences exist: our data show that most Americans see science as relevant to policy, but that their willingness to defer to science in policy matters varies considerably across issues. While party, ideology, and religious beliefs clearly influence attitudes toward science, Republicans are not notably skeptical about accepting scientific recommendations. Rather, it seems that Democrats are particularly receptive to the advice and counsel of scientists, when compared to both independents and Republicans.

Meaningful Work and Freedom

2019 ◽  
pp. 50-72
Author(s):  
Keith Breen
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
Meaningful Work ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Individual Freedom ◽  
Human Flourishing ◽  
Work Arrangements ◽  
The Third ◽  
Policy Concern ◽  
Working Practices

One value invoked in arguments for taking meaningful work seriously as an ethical aspiration, and for rearranging our working practices to accommodate this aspiration, is that of individual freedom. This appeal typically takes three forms. The first, drawing from an Aristotelian ideal of human flourishing, appeals to freedom conceived as self-realization. The second centers on freedom understood in the sense of personal autonomy or self-determination. The third appeals to freedom conceived as non-domination, which is deemed a precondition for enjoying self-realization and self-determination in work. These freedom-based claims for institutionalizing and maintaining meaningful work are compelling both in normative and empirical terms. Moreover, they are in no way undermined by counterclaims to the effect that meaningful work is not an appropriate public policy concern or that the ideals of self-realization and autonomy can be harnessed to legitimize exploitative work arrangements.

Public Policy and Population Distribution: Developing Appropriate Indicators of Settlement Patterns

10.1068/c9826 ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Coombes ◽  
Simon Raybould
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Settlement Patterns ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Population Distribution ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Local Government Finance ◽  
Policy Concern ◽  
Introductory Discussion ◽  
Statistical Indicators

In this paper we are concerned with the measurement of aspects of population distribution, or settlement patterns, and the use of these measures in public-policy contexts in particular. More specifically, we query the adequacy of the population-density indicator, which is widely used in statistical formulae such as those by which the British government allocates funding to English local authorities. Our approach is to work through a series of topics, starting with an introductory discussion of the ideas raised by analyses of population distribution, and followed by a section on issues involved in the measurement of settlement patterns. In the third section, we outline the types of public-policy concern which call for statistical indicators of settlement patterns, and then present a set of guidelines for measurements which will be of value in the specific context of British local-government finance-allocation systems. In the next three sections, these guidelines are used to assess the appropriateness of settlement-pattern indicators which are already in use in such systems, in each case moving on to outline an alternative form of measurement designed in the light of weaknesses of current indicators. In the penultimate section, we provide an empirical assessment of the new measures developed here, then in the final section we briefly review the appropriateness of the approach that has been adopted.

Is There a General Conserving Consumer? A Public Policy Concern

1993 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory M. Pickett ◽  
Norman Kangun ◽  
Stephen J. Grove
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Environmentally Friendly ◽  
Psychosocial Variables ◽  
Composite Measure ◽  
Composite Scale ◽  
Policy Concern ◽  
Conservation Activity

The authors conducted a survey to identify conservation activity among the general populace of a midsize Southwestern community to increase our understanding of those who do and do not engage in a broad section of environmentally friendly activities. Numerous self-reported behaviors were gauged and combined to form a composite measure representing the conserving consumer. They then explored both demographic and psychosocial variables as predictors of this self-reported composite scale of conservation. The results and their implications are discussed for researchers and public policy officials.

scholarly journals Presidential Power, Vetoes, and Public Policy: a Comparative Study between Brazil and the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (237) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matheus Lucas Hebling ◽  
Flávio Contrera
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Party Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Politica Publica ◽  
Lower Chamber ◽  
Presidential Success ◽  
Presidential Systems

<p><strong>[Poder presidencial, vetos y política pública: Un estudio comparativo de Brasil y Estados Unidos]</strong></p><p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p>Much of the literature on Presidentialism focuses on the argument that bipartisan presidential systems are better able to avoid a conflictive Executive-Legislative relationship by facilitating the formation of coalitions in Congress and partisan ideological identification. From a comparative perspective, this study aims to identify and discuss the ability of the presidents of the United States and Brazil to promote public policy, and to examine the degree of conflict in the drafting of these policies by studying legislative vetoes. In addition, it analyzes the success rate of welfare bills voted in the lower chamber of the two countries and supported by their respective presidents. The period studied here covers 16 years (from 1995 to 2010 in Brazil and in the United States from 1993 to 2008), consisting of eight years of more liberal administrations and eight years of more conservative ones in each country. The presented hypothesis is that there is no significant difference between two-party or multi-party systems in terms of conflict, public policy drafting and presidential success rate. The data are analyzed using multivariate regressions and undergo qualitative treatment for a deeper understanding.</p><p><strong>RESUMEN</strong></p><p>Gran parte de la literatura sobre el presidencialismo se centra en el argumento de que los sistemas presidenciales bipartidistas son más capaces de evitar una relación conflictiva entre ejecutivo y legislativo al facilitar la formación de coaliciones en el Congreso y la identificación ideológica partidista. Desde una perspectiva comparativa, este estudio tiene como objetivo identificar y discutir los poderes de los presidentes de los Estados Unidos y Brasil para promover políticas públicas y verificar el grado de conflicto en la producción de dichas políticas mediante el control de los vetos legislativos. Analiza también la tasa de éxito de los proyectos de leyes de políticas de bienestar votadas en la cámara baja de los dos países y respaldados por sus respectivos presidentes. Abarca un período de 16 años (de 1995 a 2010 en Brasil y en los Estados Unidos de 1993 a 2008), con ocho años de administraciones más liberales y ocho años de gobiernos más conservadores en cada país. La hipótesis es que no hay una diferencia significativa con respecto al conflicto y la producción de políticas públicas en sistemas bipartidistas o multipartidistas y que las tasas de éxito son similares. Los datos se analizan mediante regresiones multivariables y se someten a un tratamiento cualitativo para una comprensión más profunda.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document