scholarly journals Institutional Framework for Assessing Water Availability and Allocation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Wurbs
Keyword(s):  
Water Management ◽  
Water Availability ◽  
Water Allocation ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Interstate Compacts

Effective water resources management requires assessments of water availability within a framework of complex institutions and infrastructure employed to manage extremely variable stream flow shared by numerous often competing water users and diverse types of use. The Water Rights Analysis Package (WRAP) modeling system is fundamental to water allocation and planning in the state of Texas in the United States. Integration of environmental flow standards into both the modeling system and comprehensive statewide water management is a high priority for continuing research and development. The public domain WRAP software and documentation are generalized for application any place in the world. Lessons learned in developing and implementing the modeling system in Texas are relevant worldwide. The modeling system combines: (1) detailed simulation of water right systems, interstate compacts, international treaties, federal/state/local agreements, and operations of storage and conveyance facilities; (2) simulation of river system hydrology; and (3) statistical frequency and reliability analyses. The continually evolving modeling system has been implemented in Texas by a water management community that includes the state legislature, planning and regulatory agencies, river authorities, water districts, cities, industries, engineering consulting firms, and university researchers. The shared modeling system contributes significantly to integration of water allocation, planning, system operations, and research.

scholarly journals Institutional Framework for Modeling Water Availability and Allocation

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2767 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph A. Wurbs
Keyword(s):  
Water Management ◽  
Water Availability ◽  
Water Allocation ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Interstate Compacts

Effective water resources management requires assessments of water availability within a framework of complex institutions and infrastructure employed to manage extremely variable stream flow shared by numerous, often competing, water users and diverse types of use. The Water Rights Analysis Package (WRAP) modeling system is fundamental to water allocation and planning in the state of Texas in the United States. Integration of environmental flow standards into both the modeling system and comprehensive statewide water management is a high priority for continuing research and development. The public domain WRAP software and documentation are generalized for application any place in the world. Lessons learned in developing and implementing the modeling system in Texas are relevant worldwide. The modeling system combines: (1) detailed simulation of water right systems, interstate compacts, international treaties, federal/state/local agreements, and operations of storage and conveyance facilities, (2) simulation of river system hydrology, and (3) statistical frequency and reliability analyses. The continually evolving modeling system has been implemented in Texas by a water management community that includes the state legislature, planning and regulatory agencies, river authorities, water districts, cities, industries, engineering consulting firms, and university researchers. The shared modeling system contributes significantly to integration of water allocation, planning, system operations, and research.

Is This the Care We Need?: An Examination of Childcare Policy in Pennsylvania

Commonwealth ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennie Sweet-Cushman ◽  
Ashley Harden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Child Care ◽  
Current System ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Women And Politics ◽  
Richard Nixon ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Childcare Policy

For many families across Pennsylvania, child care is an ever-present concern. Since the 1970s, when Richard Nixon vetoed a national childcare program, child care has received little time in the policy spotlight. Instead, funding for child care in the United States now comes from a mixture of federal, state, and local programs that do not help all families. This article explores childcare options available to families in the state of Pennsylvania and highlights gaps in the current system. Specifically, we examine the state of child care available to families in the Commonwealth in terms of quality, accessibility, flexibility, and affordability. We also incorporate survey data from a nonrepresentative sample of registered Pennsylvania voters conducted by the Pennsylvania Center for Women and Politics. As these results support the need for improvements in the current childcare system, we discuss recommendations for the future.

scholarly journals Teori Hukum Pidana Minimalis dari Douglas Husak: Urgensi dan Relevansi

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-279
Author(s):  
Mahrus Ali ◽  
M. Arif Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Risk Prevention ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Minimalist Theory ◽  
Severity Of Punishment ◽  
Douglas Husak

Douglas Husak has been widely known, especially in the United States and Europe, as a leading theorist who combines the disciplines of legal philosophy and criminal law. Most of his writings were directed at the use of the coercive means of the state through criminal law as minimum as possible. The minimalist theory of criminal law that he coined was motivated by the phenomenon of the increasing number of acts criminalized in the United States Federal State Law in which the majority related to offenses of risk prevention causing overcriminalization. To prevent this, criminal law must be placed as a last resort. The state’s decision to criminalize an act must pay attention to internal and external constraints. The first includes the nontrivial harm or evil constraint, the culpability of the actor, and the proportionality of punishment, while the second is related to the substantiality of the state’s authority to punish. The thought is relevant to be adopted in the criminalization policy in Indonesia, especially regarding the principle of the blameworthiness of conduct, the severity of punishment must weigh the dangerousness of the (actor) offenses, and criminalization should not be taken if other means are equally effective or even more effective to achieve the goal. Abstrak Douglas Husak dikenal luas terutama di Amerika Serikat dan Eropa sebagai teoretisi terkemuka yang menggabungkan antara disiplin filsafat hukum dan hukum pidana. Tulisan-tulisan Husak kebanyakan diarahkan pada penggunaan sarana koersif negara melalui hukum pidana seminimal mungkin. Teori hukum pidana minimalis yang dicetuskannya dilatarbelakangi fenomena semakin banyaknya perbuatan-perbuatan yang dikriminalisasi dalam undang-undang Negara Federal Amerika dan mayoritas terkait offenses of risk prevention sehingga menimbulkan kelebihan kriminalisasi. Untuk mencegahnya, hukum pidana harus ditempatkan sebagai sarana terakhir. Keputusan negara untuk mengkriminalisasi suatu perbuatan harus memperhatikan pembatas internal dan pembatas eksternal. Yang pertama meliputi sifat jahat dan dampak kerugian/kerusakan yang begitu serius dari dilakukannya suatu tindak pidana, kesalahan pembuat, dan proporsionalitas pidana; sedangkan yang kedua terkait substansialitas kewenangan negara untuk memidana. Pemikiran Husak relevan untuk diadopsi dalam kebijakan kriminalisasi di Indonesia terutama menyangkut prinsip ketercelaan suatu perbuatan, penetapan beratnya ancaman pidana mengacu pada seriusitas delik dan kesalahan pembuat, dan kriminalisasi tidak boleh ditempuh jika cara-cara lain sama efektif atau bahkan lebih efektif untuk mencapai tujuan.

Governance models of public utility commissions in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Howe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Action ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Utility ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Special Interest Groups ◽  
Governance Model

Regulation of utilities at the state level in the United States is undertaken by a commission on which anywhere from three to seven commissioners sit and must vote on virtually all significant utility actions, including rate requests, resource plans, acquisitions and mergers, and financing mechanisms. Public utility commissions (PUCs) are, in a very real sense, courts with adjudicatory responsibility over the area of state utility laws. In hearing a utility case, they must follow the state’s statutes and court rules. The commissioners function as judges in this court of public utility law. In a majority of states, commissioners are appointed by the state’s governor with the advice and consent of the state legislature. In a significant minority of states, commissioners are elected by popular vote. However, recent changes in US election law have made it easier for corporations and special interest groups, called political action committees, to influence elections through donations targeting direct voter outreach on behalf of specific candidates. This chapter examines what the entry of political spending in PUC elections means, and whether elected commissioners can adjudicate in the public interest, or will adjudicate for special interests. The chapter concludes that while both the appointment and election governance model can produce both “good” and “bad” commissioners, it is the elected commission that is most at risk of selecting commissioners that will not be truly independent and objective arbiters of the law.

scholarly journals The Tennessee Men’s Health Report Card: A Model for Men’s Health Policy Advocacy and Education

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 155798831988258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek M. Griffith ◽  
Andrea R. Semlow ◽  
Mike Leventhal ◽  
Clare Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Men’S Health ◽  
Report Card ◽  
The State ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Men's Health ◽  
Health Report ◽  
Vanderbilt University

Tennessee is the only state in the United States that has regularly published a document monitoring men’s health and assessing men’s health disparities. Vanderbilt University, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, the Tennessee Department of Health, Meharry Medical College, Tennessee Men’s Health Network, and health providers and advocates across the state have come together to publish a set of indicators as the Tennessee Men’s Health Report Card (TMHRC). This article describes the origins, structure, development, and lessons learned from publishing report cards in 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2017. The report card highlights statistically significant changes in trends over time, identifies racial, ethnic, age, and geographic differences among men, highlights connections to regional and statewide public health initiatives, and suggests priorities for improving men’s health in Tennessee. State data were compared to Healthy People 2020 Objectives and graded based on the degree of discrepancy between the goal and the current reality for Tennessee men. Over the four iterations of the report card, the TMHRC team has made significant adjustments to the ways they analyze and present the data, utilize grades and graphics, consider the implications of the data for the economic well-being of the state, and disseminate the findings across the state to different stakeholders. It is important to go beyond creating a summary of information; rather, data should be shared in ways that are easily understood, actionable, and applicable to different audiences. It is also critical to highlight promising policy and programmatic initiatives to improve men’s health in the state.

State Law on the Nomination, Election, and Instruction of Presidential Electors

1948 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth C. Silva
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Vice President ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Southern States ◽  
Legal Fiction ◽  
Fair Employment

The Constitution of the United States provides that each state shall appoint, in such manner as its legislature may direct, a number of presidential electors equal to the number of Senators and Representatives to which the state is entitled in the Congress. The Supreme Court has ruled that this clause gives the state legislature exclusive power to decide the manner of choosing electors. Before 1832, several legislatures themselves selected the members of the state's electoral college, a practice followed by South Carolina until the Civil War. As every student of American government knows, in the period from 1788 to 1832, the popular selection of electors was established and real discretion on the part of electors in choosing a President and Vice President became a legal fiction. For a century, the practice has been for the electorate to choose a set of electors, who, it is understood, will legally confirm the decision already made at the polls.The automatic operation of the electoral college as a device for translating popular votes into electoral votes is now challenged, however, with the projection of the possibility of eighty “unpledged electors.” The governors of seven Southern states recently agreed that if the Democratic national convention nominates a presidential candidate advocating anti-segregation, anti-lynching, anti-poll tax, and fair employment practices legislation, they will attempt to keep the Democratic electoral votes of their states from being cast for such nominee. This possibility makes state laws regulating the nomination, election, and instruction of presidential electors of utmost interest and importance.

The Modern Republican Party in Florida

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Dunbar ◽  
Mike Haridopolos
Keyword(s):  
School Choice ◽  
State Government ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Florida Everglades ◽  
Prison Reform ◽  
Party Affiliation ◽  
The One

The Modern Republican Party in Florida chronicles the emergence of the modern Republican Party in Florida. It provides the historic political foundation for the modern political era in Florida; it identifies the key elements of Republican Party organizations and structures that became the foundation for the current Republican network; and it contrasts the current political environment to the one-party era of the Democratic Pork Chop Gang. The narrative of the book describes the successes in the state-wide campaigns for governor and for positions on the Florida Cabinet. It provides an overview of the role of both Florida Republicans in national, presidential politics and Floridians serving in the United States House and Senate. It describes the decennial redistricting struggles and other obstacles that Republicans overcame as they became the majority in both Houses of the state Legislature, and it discusses the opportunities for women and minorities that accompanied this Republican emergence. Within the narrative are descriptions of the changes in state government made by Republicans or with their bipartisan cooperation. The book also provides an overview of the Republican influence on the state policies for public education and school choice; criminal justice and prison reform; taxation and business incentives; and consumer protection and environment preservation, including the protection of the Florida Everglades. The book identifies the officeholders, volunteers, and party officials who contributed to, and became part of, the Republican network. It also discusses the ever-changing elements of the Florida political arena, which includes voters with no party affiliation, soft money committees, and independent campaign consultants.

GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH IN THE UNITED STATES

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (197) ◽  
pp. 9-16
Author(s):  
V.N. Minat ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Government Funding ◽  
Agricultural Science ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
State Financing ◽  
Effective Development

The innovation-oriented effective development of US agriculture is determined by the quantity and quality of the implemented results of agricultural research, funded by the main funds holder – the state. The purpose of the study is to identify trends in government funding of agricultural science in the United States. The rationale for these trends is considered in the unity of the dynamics and structure of state financing of agricultural research in 1889–2019 and the system characteristics of this process as an economic phenomenon. Using the techniques of statistical-economic and abstract- logical methods of research, combined with a historical approach to the subject of study, the author obtained empirical results reflecting the dynamics of structural changes in the state financing of agricultural research in the United States in different time periods. The trends towards regionalization of agricultural science subsidies within the federal state are also identified.

Politics in a Bottle: BPA, Children’s Health, and the Fight for Toxics Reform

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jody A. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Health Hazard ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Grassroots Activism ◽  
Local Municipalities ◽  
Federal Food ◽  
Baby Bottles ◽  
Health Studies

The nationwide legal uprising against the chemical bisphenol A (more popularly known as BPA) began in Minnesota in 2009 when the state legislature there voted to ban the substance from children’s products—including sippy cups and baby bottles. Grassroots activism aimed at insti­tuting local and state-level legislation banning BPA in children’s products has since escalated as new players in the world of toxics activism have emerged with demands to remove the controversial chemical from products designed for use by children. Frustrated with inaction at the federal level following scores of health studies, a slew of ambiguous regulatory reviews, and staunch efforts by lobby organizations, these new groups have taken their fight about BPA and health to states, counties, cities, and local municipalities. As of this writing, eleven U.S. states now have legislation banning or restricting the use of BPA in products for kids. These actions in the United States followed actions taken by Canada to first identify BPA as a minimal health hazard to children (in 2008) and then to later officially recognized BPA as toxic (in 2010), a declaration that requires government action. Indeed, all of this action at the state level is having the intended effect: The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced in July of 2012 that BPA could no longer be used in baby bottles and children’s drinking cups. But that pronouncement has done little to quell the debate. As the president of the National Research Center for Women and Families noted about the July 2012 decision: “[The FDA is] instituting a ban that is already in effect voluntarily.” The sentiment is congruent with the statements made by the American Chemistry Council (the nation’s largest lobby group for the chemical industry) following the announcement. According to the statement, the American Chemistry Council requested that the FDA take action because of the patchwork of legislation taking shape at the state level and that had already encouraged most manufacturers to simply stop using BPA in these products (Tavernise 2012).

Introduction

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas R. Seabrook
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
State Government ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The State ◽  
Electoral Support ◽  
First Time ◽  
Considerable Pressure

As the results of the 2002 election flashed across their television screens, Texas’s congressional Republicans could be forgiven for feeling a certain amount of dissatisfaction with the redistricting process in the United States. Their party had seen its share of the statewide vote in U.S. House elections increase from 49.8 percent in 1992 to 54.9 percent in 2002. Yet, even with this latest ten-point victory over the Democrats in the popular vote, they had once again failed to convert their increasingly dominant electoral support into a Republican majority in the state’s congressional delegation. A partisan gerrymander, passed in the wake of the 1990 Census and left largely intact by the district boundaries implemented by the federal courts following the 2000 Census, had allowed the Democratic Party to maintain its overall majority in the Texas delegation for more than a decade. The Democrats won twenty-one of Texas’s thirty seats in Congress in 1992, and managed to retain control of nineteen in 1994 and seventeen from 1996 to 2000, despite averaging just 45.8 percent of the two-party vote in these elections. In 2003, the Texas Republicans, armed for the first time with control of both houses of the state legislature and the governorship, undertook an unprecedented mid-decade redrawing of the state’s congressional boundaries. Though many Republicans in the state government were opposed to the idea of redrawing the district boundaries mid-decade, the effort was initiated under considerable pressure from Republicans in Congress, most notably House majority leader Tom DeLay (...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document