US Court fight will start longer-term policy battle

Significance This would mean a 6-3 conservative majority on the Court, and considerable controversy because Republican Senate leadership refused to consider a Court nominee ahead of the 2016 election. The candidate Trump chooses, and when confirmation is undertaken, will affect the November 3 presidential and Senate elections. Impacts The nomination battle will play into the election, including Trump’s pro-gun and anti-abortion positions. Confirming a new justice, pre-election, would assure a full nine-member Supreme Court to handle any election disputes. House Democrats may seek to slow the confirmation by impeachment proceedings or stalling federal appropriations. If the Democrats win the White House, pressure from progressives to expand the Supreme Court will grow.

Political Entrepreneurs and Pork-Barrel Spending

Pork-barrel spending is the use of federal money for localized projects that yield only a narrow geographic benefit. It is a commonly held belief that politicians use this spending to improve their chances of re-election. One way that an incumbent can increase their chances of re-election is through increased fundraising. Political entrepreneurs see this opportunity and attempt to benefit from these projects in exchange for campaign contributions. This paper investigates whether incumbents are able to use their position to bolster their campaign contributions. I find pork-barrel spending and political contributions to be positively related, but this effect is only present when the incumbent properly times the project. I also find that general federal appropriations do not have the same impact. This supports the claim that pork-barrel spending can be used as a currency in the marketplace for political capital.

Diseases Chasing Money and Power: Breast Cancer and Aids Activism Challenging Authority

Through the 1980s and early 1990s, the course of American health research was increasingly shaped by politically-aggressive activism for two particular diseases, breast cancer and AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome). Even as national stakes rose, both in dollars spent and growing demands on the medical system, breast cancer and AIDS advocates made government policy-making for research ever more public and controversial. Through skillful cultivation of political strength, interest groups transformed individual health problems into collective demands, winning notable policy influence in federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Activists directly challenged fundamental principles of both government and medical systems, fighting to affect distribution of research funds and questioning well-established scientific methods and professional values. In the contest for decision-making power, those players achieved remarkable success in influencing and infiltrating (some critics said, undermining) both the politics and science of medical research. Between 1990 and 1995, federal appropriations for breast cancer study rose from $90 million to $465 million, while in that same period, NIH AIDS research rose from $743.53 million to $1,338 billion.

Michigan Court Enjoins Statute Limiting Abortions Covered by Medicaid

In Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan v. Engler (73 F.3d 634 (6th Cir. 1996)), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that § 400.109(a) of the Social Welfare Act of Michigan (Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 400.109(a) (1994)) impermissibly conflicts with the Medicaid Act (Social Security Act tit. XIX, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1396 et seq. (1988)) as modified by the 1994 Hyde Amendment (Pub. L. No. 103-112, § 509, 107 Stat. 1082-1113 (1994)), insofar as the § 400.109(a) only provides state funding for abortions necessary to save the life of a mother, and not for abortions resulting from rape or incest. The court held that the Hyde Amendment defines medically necessary abortions that must be funded by states participating in the federal Medicaid program, and that the amendment is not merely a federal appropriations bill.