scholarly journals The COVID States Project #20: Public opinion around federal and state reactions to COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lazer ◽  
Alexi Quintana ◽  
Jon Green ◽  
Katherine Ognyanova ◽  
Hanyu Chwe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Prefer State ◽  
Consistent Picture

In every month, April through October of 2020, we surveyed individuals in every state about how federal and state governments are reacting to the pandemic. We found a remarkably consistent picture of public opinion: respondents prefer state governments over the federal government when it comes to COVID-19. Out of 8 waves in 50 states & DC − a total of 408 surveys at the state level − in 402 state-level surveys more people in the state felt the state government was reacting “about right” to the COVID-19 outbreak as compared to the federal government; and only 6 times did people in a state choose the federal government over their state government.

scholarly journals Abolitionist John Brown's Treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia: A Lesson for State Governments about the Culpability of Non-Residents for Treason against the State

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
James A. Beckman
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Southern States ◽  
The North ◽  
John Brown ◽  
North And South

Abstract This article analyzes the specific issue of whether an individual could be tried for treason by a State government if that individual is not a resident or citizen of that State. This issue is analyzed through the prism of the landmark case of John Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia, a criminal prosecution which occurred in October 1859. Brown, a resident of New York, was convicted of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, insurrection, and murder after he attempted to overthrow the institution of slavery by force on October 16–18, 1859. After a prosecution and trial which occurred within a matter of weeks following Brown's crimes, Brown was executed on December 2, 1859. To this day, John Brown's trial and execution remains one of the leading examples of a State government exercising its power to enforce treason law on the State level and to execute an individual for that offense. Of course, the John Brown case had a major impact on American history, including being a significant factor in the presidential election of 1860 and an often-cited spark to the powder keg of tensions between the Northern and Southern States, which would erupt into a raging conflagration between the North and South in the American Civil War a short eighteen months later. However, in the legal realm, the Brown case is one of the leading and best-known examples of a state government exercising its authority to enforce its laws prohibiting treason against the State. The purpose of this article is not to discuss treason laws generally or even all the issues applicable to John Brown's trial in 1859. Rather, this article focuses only on the very specific issue of the culpability of a non-resident/non-citizen for treason against a State government. With the increased array of hostile actions against State governments in recent years, and criminal actors crossing state lines to commit these hostile acts, this article discusses an issue of importance to contemporary society, namely whether an individual can be prosecuted and convicted for treason by a State of which the defendant is not a citizen or resident.

The Legal and Empirical Case for Firearm Purchaser Licensing

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (S4) ◽  
pp. 17-24
Author(s):  
Hannah Abelow ◽  
Cassandra Crifasi ◽  
Daniel Webster
Keyword(s):  
Violence Prevention ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Gun Violence ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Legal Frameworks

This article argues that state government actors concerned about gun violence prevention should prioritize enactment of robust firearm purchaser regimes at the state level. First, the article outlines the empirical evidence base for purchaser licensing. Then, the article describes how state governments can design this policy. Next, the article assesses the likelihood that purchaser licensing legislation will continue to be upheld by federal courts. Finally, the article addresses the implications of this policy, aimed at curbing gun deaths, for equally important racial justice priorities. Taken together, these various considerations indicate that purchaser licensing policies are among the most effective firearm-focused laws state governments can enact to reduce gun deaths within the existing federal legislative and legal frameworks.

Neoliberal reformers: Economics as class warfare

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-262
Author(s):  
Braham Dabscheck
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Business Groups ◽  
Review Article ◽  
The State ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
State Governments ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Jel Codes ◽  
Federal Level

This review article discusses MacLean’s study of the ideas of a group of economists and their embracing by an oligarchy of business groups to implement a Neoliberal agenda and its implications for American democracy. It mainly focuses on the Nobel Prize winning economist James McGill Buchanan and the industrialist Charles Koch. Business groups provided funds to Buchanan and others to train right-minded people in the precepts of Neoliberalism, established think tanks and institutes to disseminate their views, and ‘directed’ and/or provided advice and draft legislation for Republican politicians at both the state and federal level. Inspiration for how to achieve this Neoliberal ‘revolution’ can be found in Lenin’s 1902 What is to be Done?. The Neoliberal attack on government and statism is consistent with Orwell’s notion of doublethink. It constitutes a weakening of those parts of the state which are inimical to the interests of a wealthy oligarchy, the federal government and agencies/government departments who are viewed as imposing costs (taxes) on and interfering with (regulating) the actions of the oligarchy, and strengthening other parts such as state governments, the judiciary, at both the state (especially) and federal level and police forces to protect and advance their interests. JEL codes: B10, B22

Providing a Base for Executive Development at the State Level

1993 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Montgomery Van Wart
Keyword(s):  
Special Needs ◽  
Human Resource Development ◽  
Human Resource ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
Resource Development ◽  
The State ◽  
Executive Development ◽  
Human Resource Systems ◽  
Four Levels

Executive development can only be properly conceptualized as a part of the state's overall human resource development (HRD) system. As a part of that system, the special needs and constraints of executive development can be addressed. Some of the best human resource development systems build level by level, with executive development as the logical and integrated conclusion, even though the programs may be housed in a variety of settings. As background, this article discusses the differences in the four levels of HRD, the three major skill areas that are identified with each of these levels, and the four features that characterize good human resource systems. It concentrates on the features that characterize good executive development systems and also includes a number of examples of good executive development systems in the federal and state government sectors.

Trends of centre–state relations in India under the neo-liberal regime

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prabhat Patnaik
Keyword(s):  
Interest Rates ◽  
State Government ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Economic Role ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Financial Strength

India had been envisioned as a federation by our Constitution makers, and so states were assigned some important subjects in which the centre could have no or only limited authority. Thus state governments run by opposition parties could pursue policies different from those of the Central Government in a number of ways. But since the onset of economic ‘liberalisation’ beginning with the late 1980s the financial strength and economic role of the state governments have been constantly undermined. This came, first, through the raising of interest rates to attract foreign finance capital, which created budgetary crises for the states since they fell under heavy debt simply to pay interest on existing debt. Neo-liberal policies were then imposed on them by Finance Commissions which made compliance with these compulsory for centre’s financial assistance. More recently the states’ powers have been further curtailed by the Goods and Services Tax, which has deprived the state government of the power to determine tax rates on goods produced within the states. Another means to the same end has been the centre’s trade agreements with foreign countries, with no reference made to states whose products thereby may be priced out of the market. The demonetisation of 2016, which impacted so destructively on employment and the cooperative sector in the states, was also undertaken by the centre without any reference to the states.

Coalition Governments Fiscal Implication for the Indian Economy

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mala Lalvani
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Capital Expenditures ◽  
Indian Economy ◽  
Coalition Governments ◽  
Form Of Government ◽  
Government Level

The Indian polity has been through 43 coalition governments at the state level between 1966/67 and 1998/99. In the present study we attempt to examine what this change in form of government from single party to coalitions has meant for the economy. The results of our study which examines the post 1980 period give us reason to be optimistic. Coalitions at the state government level appear to have, on an average, done well to increase capital expenditures particularly capital expenditures on social services and other developmental categories. They have, however, not succeeded in taking politically hard decisions of curbing revenue expenditures and revenue deficits. It is our contention that the weak majority of coalition governments is their major strength. The tenuous hold of coalitions on power gives them a license for undertaking reforms. If the opportunity is taken to undertake the more ‘politically difficult’ reforms to prune revenue expenditures then the ‘era of coalitions’ would turn out to be a blessing in disguise for the Indian economy

Inter-Governmental Relations in the Provision of Local E-Services

2011 ◽  
pp. 1120-1124
Author(s):  
R. Kelso
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Political Commentary ◽  
Commonwealth Government ◽  
State And Local

Australia is a nation of 20 million citizens occupying approximately the same land mass as the continental U.S. More than 80% of the population lives in the state capitals where the majority of state and federal government offices and employees are based. The heavily populated areas on the Eastern seaboard, including all of the six state capitals have advanced ICT capability and infrastructure and Australians readily adopt new technologies. However, there is recognition of a digital divide which corresponds with the “great dividing” mountain range separating the sparsely populated arid interior from the populated coastal regions (Trebeck, 2000). A common theme in political commentary is that Australians are “over-governed” with three levels of government, federal, state, and local. Many of the citizens living in isolated regions would say “over-governed” and “underserviced.” Most of the state and local governments, “… have experienced difficulties in managing the relative dis-economies of scale associated with their small and often scattered populations.” Rural and isolated regions are the first to suffer cutbacks in government services in periods of economic stringency. (O’Faircheallaigh, Wanna, & Weller, 1999, p. 98). Australia has, in addition to the Commonwealth government in Canberra, two territory governments, six state governments, and about 700 local governments. All three levels of government, federal, state, and local, have employed ICTs to address the “tyranny of distance” (Blainey, 1967), a term modified and used for nearly 40 years to describe the isolation and disadvantage experienced by residents in remote and regional Australia. While the three levels of Australian governments have been working co-operatively since federation in 1901 with the federal government progressively increasing its power over that time, their agencies and departments generally maintain high levels of separation; the Queensland Government Agent Program is the exception.

Urban poverty in India: Issues and perspectives in development

Social Change ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 30 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 8-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amitabh Kundu
Keyword(s):  
Credit Rating ◽  
Urban Poverty ◽  
Rural Poverty ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Rural And Urban ◽  
Urban Settlements ◽  
The Government

The present paper examines the trends in rural and urban poverty, analyses the interstate variations and explains these in terms of socio-economic factors. It shows that rural poverty declines smoothly with economic development, which unfortunately is not the case with urban poverty. The availability of water supply, toilets and electricity, that are not explicitly incorporated in the official definition of poverty, has also been analysed at the state level as also across size class of urban settlements. It is argued that the small and medium towns have a weak and unstable economic base. As a consequence, most of these are not in a position to generate funds to provide civic services to all sections of population. These towns, particularly those located in less developed states, should, therefore, be the major concern of government policy. Further, overviewing the changing system of governance, it argues that the seventy-fourth Constitutional Amendment, has not succeeded in genuine empowerment of civic bodies. The power now seems to have shifted from the state governments to the financial institutions, international donors and credit rating agencies. Finally, the capacity of the government to generate employment directly through anti-poverty programmes would remain limited. The paper, therefore, recommends that the anti-poverty programmes should primarily be focussed on provision of basic amenities.

Education in the Eighties

1980 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Keppel
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
State Government ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Federal Programs ◽  
State And Local ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The Right

In the 1980s individual states will probably continue to have the major responsibility for education in this country. While the federal government may increase the percentage it contributes to the total costs of education, it will continue to be the junior partner in the enterprise, though one with increasing influence. This junior partner today places more demands on state government than its financial contribution seems to warrant. Conventional wisdom acquired in the 1960s and 1970s suggests that the federal government has set the right agenda on such issues as civil rights, poverty, and policies for minority groups and the handicapped—issues which state governments have generally neglected. But, under the Constitution, the federal government has not had the power to carry out its wishes for education without state and local cooperation. In fact, we often forget that a state's willingness to administer programs effectively is the key to the success of federal programs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document