Assessing Consumer Gains from a Drug Price Control Policy in the United States

2006 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rexford E. Santerre ◽  
John A. Vernon
2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (04) ◽  
pp. 933-968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Hamlin

International law provides nations with a common definition of a refugee, yet the processes by which countries determine who should be granted refugee status look strikingly different, even across nations with many institutional, cultural, geographical, and political similarities. This article compares the refugee status determination regimes of three popular asylum seeker destinations—the United States, Canada, and Australia. Despite these nations' similar border control policies, asylum seekers crossing their borders access three very different systems. These differences have less to do with political debates over admission and border control policy than with the level of insulation the administrative decision-making agency enjoys from political interference and judicial review. Bureaucratic justice is conceptualized and organized differently in different states, and so states vary in how they draw the line between refugee and nonrefugee.


2020 ◽  
pp. 0094582X2097500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo José dos Reis Pereira

In the past two decades, the United States has experienced a rapid rise in the use of opioids by its population, a context that has come to be assessed by the U.S. government as a threat to national and international security that requires emergency measures. The strategies of the U.S. government and transnational pharmaceutical corporations for resolving the insecurity generated by capitalist accumulation constitute what a certain literature calls “pacification.” In addition, these corporations export to the “foreign” the contradictions inherent in the opioid control policy that underlies the capitalist logic of drugs. Thus Latin American populations have been instrumentalized in the “solution” of this crisis either as a focus of violence by the state or as a focus of consumption by the market. Nas últimas duas décadas, os Estados Unidos vivenciaram uma rápida ascensão do uso de opioides pela sua população, contexto que passou a ser avaliado pelo governo estadunidense como uma ameaça à segurança nacional e internacional que demanda medidas emergenciais. As estratégias do Estado estadunidense e das corporações farmacêuticas transnacionais para solucionar a insegurança gerada pela acumulação capitalista configuram o que certa literatura chama “pacificação” Ademais, elas exportam para o “estrangeiro” as contradições próprias da política de controle de opioides que fundamenta a lógica capitalista das drogas. Assim, populações latino-americanas têm sido instrumentalizadas para a “solução” dessa crise, seja como foco da violência pelo Estado, seja como foco do consumo pelo mercado.


1945 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 1089-1106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. O'Leary

Prior to Pearl Harbor, few Americans had given any serious and sustained thought to rationing as a form of wartime economic control. The United States was felt to be a land of chronic surplus in which rationing had no place. To be sure, certain industrial raw materials had become scarce under the impact of the defense program early in 1941, and had been subjected to priorities control by the Office of Production Management. But rationing of consumers' goods was not taken very seriously. Mr. Ickes' East Coast gasoline “shortage” of the late summer and early fall of 1941 had evaporated quickly. There were, of course, a few bright young men in the back rooms of Leon Henderson's O.P.A. who knew that strict wartime price control of consumers' goods would eventually necessitate rationing, price increases not being permitted to control distribution of relatively scarce goods. But even in the O.P.A. the immediate pressure of other duties, principally the control of prices of basic raw materials and the preparation of a price control act then being considered by Congress, prevented the creation of any real rationing organization. Pearl Harbor found the United States with no rationing plans, no rationing organization, and no real appreciation of the indispensability of rationing in a genuine all-out war effort.


2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qingyue Meng ◽  
Gang Cheng ◽  
Lynn Silver ◽  
Xiaojie Sun ◽  
Clas Rehnberg ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S156
Author(s):  
I. Hernandez ◽  
C.B. Good ◽  
W.F. Gellad ◽  
N. Parekh ◽  
M. He ◽  
...  

1921 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 650
Author(s):  
W. H. S. Stevens ◽  
Simon Litman

Children ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian P. Jenssen ◽  
Rachel Boykan

E-cigarettes have emerged and soared in popularity in the past ten years, making them the most common tobacco product used among youth in the United States (US). In this review, we discuss what the Surgeon General has called a public health “epidemic”—the precipitous increase in youth use of e-cigarettes and the health consequences of this behavior. Further, we review tobacco control policy efforts (e.g., Tobacco 21, banning flavors, advertising restrictions, and clean indoor air laws)—efforts proven to be critical in reducing cigarette smoking and smoking-related disease and death among US children and adults—including their potential and challenges regarding managing and mitigating the emergence of e-cigarettes. Finally, we close with a discussion of the efforts of transnational tobacco companies to rebrand themselves using e-cigarettes and other new products.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document