Appendix E Statement of Jeff Bezos to the US House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary

2021 ◽  
pp. 198-200
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The Us

Interaction of Ukrainian Diaspora and the USA Government Regarding Celebration of Ukrainian Independence Day on January 22

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (47) ◽  
pp. 136-145
Author(s):  
Halyna Shchyhelska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The United States ◽  
100Th Anniversary ◽  
Totalitarian Regime ◽  
The Public ◽  
Us Congress ◽  
The Us ◽  
Public Consciousness ◽  
The Usa

2018 marks the 100th anniversary of the proclamation of Ukrainian independence. OnJanuary 22, 1918, the Ukrainian People’s Republic proclaimed its independence by adopting the IV Universal of the Ukrainian Central Rada, although this significant event was «wiped out» from the public consciousness on the territory of Ukraine during the years of the Soviet totalitarian regime. At the same time, January 22 was a crucial event for the Ukrainian diaspora in the USA. This article examines how American Ukrainians interacted with the USA Government institutions regarding the celebration and recognition of the Ukrainian Independence day on January 22. The attention is focused on the activities of ethnic Ukrainians in the United States, directed at the organization of the special celebration of the Ukrainian Independence anniversaries in the US Congress and cities. Drawing from the diaspora press and Congressional Records, this article argues that many members of Congress participated in the observed celebration and expressed kind feelings to the Ukrainian people, recognised their fight for freedom, during the House of Representatives and Senate sessions. Several Congressmen submitted the resolutions in the US Congress urging the President of United States to designate January 22 as «Ukrainian lndependence Day». January 22 was proclaimed Ukrainian Day by the governors of fifteen States and mayors of many cities. Keywords: January 22, Ukrainian independence day, Ukrainian diaspora, USA, interaction, Congress

On enlarging the US House of Representatives

1998 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Leib ◽  
Gerald R. Webster
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The Us

scholarly journals The Career Length and Service of Female Policymakers in the US House of Representatives

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Praino ◽  
Daniel Stockemer
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Careers ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Representation Of Women ◽  
Career Length ◽  
The Us ◽  
Using Data

Various studies have outlined the institutional (e.g. the existence of quota laws and the electoral system type of a country) and non-institutional factors (e.g. the political culture of a country) that account for variation in women’s representation, in general, and, in more detail, the low representation of women in the US Congress. However, no study has, so far, compared the Congressional career paths of men and women in order to understand whether this gender gap in representation stems from a difference in terms of the duration and importance of the careers of male and female policymakers. Using data on all US House elections between 1972 and 2012, we provide such an analysis, evaluating whether or not the political careers of women in the US House of Representatives are different from the political careers of their male counterparts. Our findings indicate that the congressional careers of men and women are alike and, if anything, women may even have a small edge over their male colleagues.

scholarly journals Consensus on Graduate Medical Education Financing: An Analysis of Stakeholder Responses to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Open Letter

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 705-708
Author(s):  
Jared L. Harwood
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Open Letter ◽  
Online Search ◽  
Graduate Medical ◽  
Education Financing ◽  
The Us ◽  
Policy Deliberation ◽  
Significant Support

ABSTRACT Background In December 2014, the Energy and Commerce Committee of the US House of Representatives sent an open letter requesting interested parties to respond to 7 questions on graduate medical education (GME). More than 100 organizations and individuals responded. Methods An online search for responses yielded 27 organizations that had published their responses to the committee's open letter. Responses included answers to the 7 questions and additional recommendations. The 27 respondents proposed a total of 80 unique interventions. Each intervention was screened for concordance with those from other organizations, and then categorized as supportive, in opposition, or making no mention. Data were entered into a spreadsheet and rank ordered on the frequency of support. Results At the top of the rankings were several interventions with significant support from many respondents. Conclusions Given the broader GME constituency represented by the 27 stakeholders in this analysis, the 80 proposed interventions represent a comprehensive inventory of the extant ideas regarding the financing, governance, and oversight of GME. This objective analysis could help both spur productive discussions and form the foundation for a larger public policy deliberation of GME financing.

Antitrust Regulation of IT Giants` Activities: Main Trends of Foreign and Russian Legislation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.V. Shram ◽  
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Network Effects ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Economic Concentration ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Antitrust Regulation

The article is devoted to the antimonopoly regulation of IT giants` activities. The author presents an overview of the main trends in foreign and Russian legislation in this area. The problems the antimonopoly regulation of digital markets faces are the following: the complexity of determining the criteria for the dominant position of economic entities in the digital economy and the criteria for assessing the economic concentration in the commodity digital markets; the identification and suppression of cartels; the relationship between competition law and intellectual property rights in the digital age. Some aspects of these problems are considered through the prism of the main trends in the antimonopoly policy in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom and Russia. The investigation findings of the USA House of Representatives Antitrust Subcommittee against Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook are presented. The author justifies the need to separate them, which requires the adoption of appropriate amendments to the antimonopoly legislation. The article analyzes the draft law of the European Commission on the regulation of digital markets – Digital Markets Act, reveals the criteria for classifying IT companies as «gatekeepers», and notes the specific approaches to antimonopoly regulation in the UK and the US. The article describes the concepts «digital platform» and «network effects», presented in the «fifth antimonopoly package of amendments», developed in 2018 by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation, and gives an overview of the comments of the Ministry of Economic Development regarding these concepts wording in the text of the draft law, which formed the basis for the negative conclusion of the regulator. It is concluded that in the context of the digital markets’ globalization, there is a need for the international legal nature antitrust norms formation, since regional legislation obviously cannot cope with the monopolistic activities of IT giants.

scholarly journals Calling It Quits: Legislative Retirements in Comparative Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. 731-748
Author(s):  
Christopher D Raymond ◽  
L Marvin Overby
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Party Systems ◽  
Limited Government ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Us ◽  
Systemic Problems ◽  
The Right ◽  
Normative Implication

Although retirements are a major source of legislative turnover, research on the topic has been limited, especially outside of the US House of Representatives. In this article, we address this shortcoming by examining retirements in two countries with similar electoral systems yet different legislative environments and party systems: Canada and the United Kingdom. In particular, we extend analysis on the Congress that has consistently shown Republican members retire at higher rates than their Democratic counterparts to examine whether this finding is generalizable to legislators from other parties of the right and/or favouring devolution in other parliamentary settings. In presenting data that support many of these hypotheses, we explore an important normative implication: because their partisan predispositions make them less willing to serve, politicians from parties favouring limited government and/or devolution may be less able to translate their vision of politics into policy because they face systemic problems maintaining legislative seats.

The 2016 Election: Like 1888 but not 1876 or 2000

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrice Barthélémy ◽  
Mathieu Martin ◽  
Ashley Piggins
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Anomalous Behavior ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
The Us ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
House Size

ABSTRACTDonald J. Trump won the 2016 US presidential election with fewer popular votes than Hillary R. Clinton. This is the fourth time this has happened, the others being 1876, 1888, and 2000. In earlier work, we analyzed these elections (and others) and showed how the electoral winner can often depend on the size of the US House of Representatives. This work was inspired by Neubauer and Zeitlin (2003, 721–5) in their paper, “Outcomes of Presidential Elections and the House Size.” A sufficiently larger House would have given electoral victories to the popular vote winner in both 1876 and 2000. An exception is the election of 1888. We show that Trump’s victory in 2016 is like Harrison’s in 1888 and unlike Hayes’s in 1876 and Bush’s in 2000. This article updates our previous work to include the 2016 election. It also draws attention to some of the anomalous behavior that can arise under the Electoral College.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document