Reporting health care practitioners to state licensing boards--VA. Final rule

This document sets forth the policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for reporting physicians, dentists, and other health care professionals to State licensing boards under authority of the act captioned "Veterans' Administration Health-Care Amendments of 1985" (the Act) and other authority. The intended effect of this policy is to cooperate with State licensing boards for the purpose of promoting better health care.     

About the Impossibility of Absolute State Sovereignty

State sovereignty is often thought to be absolute, unlimited. This paper argues that there is no such a thing as absolute State sovereignty. Indeed, absolute sovereignty is impossible because all sovereignty is necessarily underpinned by its conditions of possibility—i.e. limited sovereignty is the norm, though the nature of the limitations varies. The article consists of two main sections: (a) the concept of sovereignty: this section is focused on some of the limitations the concept of sovereignty itself presents; and (b) a historical account of the notion of sovereignty as it was used in the Ancient Times. The particular focus on early notions of a modern concept such as sovereignty has to do with the fact that this early notion has been anthropomorphised with societal evolution. Therein, the current concept of State sovereignty embraces the same limitations it had in its ancient form as a non-fully developed conceptual idea. The implications of understanding State sovereignty as limited rather than absolute are several, both directly and indirectly. A main immediate consequence is that sovereign States can cooperate together, limit their sovereignty and still be considered sovereign.     

Legitimacy and Deterrence Effects in Counterterrorism Policing: A Study of Muslim Americans

This study considers the circumstances under which members of the Muslim American community voluntarily cooperate with police efforts to combat terrorism. Cooperation is defined to include both a general receptivity toward helping the police in antiterror work and the specific willingness to alert police to terror‐related risks in a community. We compare two perspectives on why people cooperate with law enforcement, both developed with reference to general policing, in the context of antiterror policing and specifically among members of the Muslim American community. The first is instrumental. It suggests that people cooperate because they see tangible benefits that outweigh any costs. The second perspective is normative. It posits that people respond to their belief that police are a legitimate authority. On this view we link legitimacy to the fairness and procedural justice of police behavior. Data from a study involving interviews with Muslim Americans in New York City between March and June 2009 strongly support the normative model by finding that the procedural justice of police activities is the primary factor shaping legitimacy and cooperation with the police.     

Medicaid program; exemption of poverty level pregnant women from the cooperation requirements of establishing paternity and obtaining medical support and payments as a condition of eligibility; technical correction--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

In general, as a condition of eligibility for Medicaid coverage, each legally able applicant and recipient is required by section 1912(a) of the Social Security Act (the Act) to cooperate with the State in establishing the paternity of any eligible child born out of wedlock and in obtaining medical support and payments. The condition is required to be met unless the individual establishes good cause of not cooperating. Section 4606 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, (OBRA '90), Public Law 101-508, provides an exemption to this requirement for certain pregnant women and women in the postpartum period, as described in section 1902(l)(1)(A) of the Act. We have identified this group as "poverty level pregnant women". This final rule with comment period modifies our regulations to incorporate and interpret this exemption.     

Medicare program; waiver requirements and solvency standards for provider-sponsored organizations--HCFA. Interim final rule with comment period

This interim final rule with a request for comments implements authority to waive, in the case of provider-sponsored organizations (PSOs) that meet certain criteria, the requirement that Medicare + Choice organizations be licensed by a State as risk-bearing entities. The waivers will be approved only under certain conditions where the State has denied or failed to act on an application for licensure. This rule also establishes solvency standards that certain entities must meet to contract as PSOs under the new Medicare + Choice program. These standards apply to PSOs that have received a waiver of the requirement that Medicare + Choice organizations be licensed by a State as risk-bearing entities.     

State Children's Health Insurance Program; eligibility for prenatal care and other health services for unborn children. Final rule

In order to provide prenatal care and other health services, this final rule revises the definition of "child" under the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to clarify that an unborn child may be considered a "targeted low-income child" by the State and therefore eligible for SCHIP if other applicable State eligibility requirements are met. Under this definition, the State may elect to extend eligibility to unborn children for health benefits coverage, including prenatal care and delivery, consistent with SCHIP requirements.     

Mapping the development of China's data protection law: Major actors,core values,and shifting power relations

This Article seeks to map the possible paths of the development of China's data protection law by examining the changing power relations among three major actors - the State, digital enterprises and the public in the context of China's booming data-driven economy. We argue that focusing on different core values, these three major actors are the key driving forces shaping China's data protection regime. Their dynamic and multidimensional power relations have been casting the development of China's data protection law with various uncertainties. When persuing different, yet not always conflicting values, these three major actors may both cooperate and compete with each other. Based on our careful analysis of the shifting power relations, we identify and assess three possible paths of the development of China's data protection law. We are much concerned that the proposed comprehensive data protection law might be a new attempt of the State to win legitimacy abroad, while actually trying to reinforce massive surveillance besides economic goals. We argue that a modest alternative may be that this law might show some genuine efforts for protecting data privacy, but still with poor enforcement. Last, we argue that the most desirable development would be that this law could provide basic but meaningful and effective protection for data privacy, and lay a good foundation for further development.     

Cooperation in USDA studies and evaluations, and full use of federal funds in nutrition assistance programs nondiscretionary provisions of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Public Law 111-296. Final Rule

This final rule incorporates into the regulations governing the Programs authorized under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (NSLA) and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (CNA) two nondiscretionary provisions of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFK Act). The HHFK Act requires State and local cooperation in Department of Agriculture studies and evaluations related to Programs authorized under the NSLA and the CNA. The HHFK Act also amends the NSLA to stipulate that Federal funds must not be subject to State budget restrictions or limitations, including hiring freezes, work furloughs, and travel restrictions. This final rule amends regulations for the National School Lunch Program; the Special Milk Program for Children; the School Breakfast Program; the Summer Food Service Program; the Child and Adult Care Food Program; State Administrative Expense Funds ; the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children; and the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program. These provisions will strengthen program integrity by ensuring that sufficient data is made available for studies and evaluations. Additionally, exempting Federal funds from State budgetary restrictions or limitations is intended to increase the ability of State agencies to administer USDA's nutrition assistance programs effectively.     

Child support enforcement program; extension of services to Medicaid recipients and to former AFDC recipients--Office of Child Support Enforcement, HHS. Final rule

These final rules implement sections 9141 and 9142 of Public Law 100-203, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, which amended title IV-D of the Social Security Act (the Act). Section 9141, effective December 22, 1987, amended section 457(c) of the Act to require State child support enforcement (IV-D) agencies to provide appropriate notice and to continue to provide IV-D services to persons no longer eligible for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) under title IV-A of the Act. The IV-D agency must continue to provide services and pay any amount of support collected to the family on the same basis and under the same conditions as pertain to other non-AFDC families, except that no application, other request to continue services or any application fee for services may be required. Section 9142, effective July 1, 1988, amended section 454 of the Act to require State IV-D agencies to provide IV-D services to families who receive Medicaid and have assigned to the State, under section 1912 of the Act, their rights to medical support and to payment of medical care from any third party, and to provide for distribution by the State of medical support collections under section 1912 of the Act.     

Medicare and Medicaid; eligibility for premium hospital insurance; state buy-in agreements--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

These rules-- 1. Set forth the requirements and procedures for certain individuals under age 65 to enroll and become entitled to Medicare Part A benefits through payment of monthly premiums; 2. Revise the rules on State buy-in for Medicare benefits to provide that-- After 1988, a State may, at any time, request a buy-in agreement or a modification of an existing agreement, including a modification under which the State may enroll a pay Part B premiums on behalf of a new buy-in coverage group--Qualified Medicare Beneficiaries (QMBs); and After 1989, a State may request and obtain a modification of an existing agreement, under which the State may also enroll QMB's in Part A and pay Part A premiums on their behalf. These amendments are necessary to conform HCFA rules to changes made by section 9010 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 (OBRA '87), section 301 of the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 (MCCA), and sections 6012 and 6013 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (OBRA '89). The purposes of the amendments are-- 1. To make it possible for certain disabled individuals to become entitled to Medicare Part A benefits that require payment of a monthly premium. The provisions apply to an individual under age 65 who loses entitlement to Medicare Part A without premiums because his or her earnings exceed the limit imposed for entitlement to social security disability benefits, on which Medicare Part A entitlement was based; and 2. To make available to States, for payment of premiums for QMBs, the administrative and cost efficiencies of the State buy-in procedures.     

Medicaid program; provider qualifications for audiologists. Final rule

This final rule will revise the requirements for audiologists furnishing services under the Medicaid program. As a result, the requirements will create consistency with the Medicare program's definition of a qualified audiologist by recognizing State licensure in determining provider qualifications. These revised standards will expand State flexibility in choosing qualified audiologists.     

State child health; State Children's Health Insurance Program allotments and payments to states. Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), HHS. Final rule

This rule sets forth the methodologies and procedures to determine the allotments of Federal funds for each Federal fiscal year (FY) available to individual States, Commonwealths and Territories under title XXI of the Social Security Act. This rule also specifies the allotment, payment, and grant award process that will be used for the States, the Commonwealths and Territories to claim and receive Federal financial participation (FFP) for expenditures under the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and related Medicaid program provisions. Established by section 4901 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33), amended by technical amendments (made by Public Law 105-100), and most recently amended by the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act (BBRA) of 1999 (Public Law 106-113, enacted November 29, 1999), the State Children's Health Insurance Program provides Federal matching funds to States to initiate and expand health insurance coverage to uninsured, low-income children. Aggregate Federal funding is limited to a fixed amount for each Federal fiscal year. This aggregate amount is divided into allotments for each State. State allotments are determined based on a statutory formula that divides the total available appropriation among all States with approved child health plans. Once determined, the amount of a State's allotment for a fiscal year is available for 3 years. We are publishing this final rule in accordance with the provisions of sections 2104 and 2105 of the Act that relate to allotments and payments to States under title XXI.     

International mutual legal assistance in criminal law made redundant: A comment on the Belgian Yahoo! case

This article offers a critical examination of the court judgements in a recent Belgian case against Yahoo!. It examines the challenges related to the establishment of jurisdiction for Internet-based services and the role that procedures of mutual legal assistance should play. Belgian law obliges providers of “electronic communications services/electronic communications networks” to cooperate with Belgian law-enforcement authorities and to handle over communication and personal data. Although the terms are derived from the EU Electronic Communications Regulatory Framework, a much broader interpretation to them was finally given by the Belgian Supreme Court. Seemingly this implies that, from now on, a US-based company such as Yahoo! is, at least under Belgian law, under a legal obligation to directly comply with an order issued by Belgian law-enforcement authorities.     

Grant application cycles; health systems agency grants and state health planning and development agency grants--HRSA

This Notice is issued in accordance with Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs as implemented by HHS in 45 CFR Part 100. The scheduled application due dates and funding dates for health systems agencies (HSAs) and State Health Planning and Development Agencies (SHPDAs) are provided below to assist States and other entities within a State in determining the comment period as required under 45 CFR Part 100.     

State child health; implementing regulations for the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), HHS. Final rule

Section 4901 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) amended the Social Security Act (the Act) by adding a new title XXI, the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Title XXI provides funds to States to enable them to initiate and expand the provision of child health assistance to uninsured, low-income children in an effective and efficient manner. To be eligible for funds under this program, States must submit a State plan, which must be approved by the Secretary. This final rule implements provisions related to SCHIP including State plan requirements and plan administration, coverage and benefits, eligibility and enrollment, enrollee financial responsibility, strategic planning, substitution of coverage, program integrity, certain allowable waivers, and applicant and enrollee protections. This final rule also implements the provisions of sections 4911 and 4912 of the BBA, which amended title XIX of the Act to expand State options for coverage of children under the Medicaid program. In addition, this final rule makes technical corrections to subparts B, and F of part 457.     

Disability determinations by state agency disability examiners. Final rules

We are revising our rules on a temporary basis to permit State agency disability examiners to make fully favorable determinations in certain claims for disability benefits under titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (Act) without the approval of a State agency medical or psychological consultant. These changes apply only to claims we consider under our rules for quick disability determinations (QDD) or under our compassionate allowance initiative.     

Consultations with state and local officials prior to awarding community health center grants--HRSA. Notice

Section 1923 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-2) requires that if a State does not apply for a Primary Care Block Grant under section 1924 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-3), or does not qualify for such a grant, a Secretary of Health and Human Services will use those funds not allotted to States participating in the block grant to make grants under section 330 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 254c) to individual community health centers (CHCs). Section 1923 also requires that the Secretary consult with the chief executive officer of the State and with appropriate local officials before making such grants for community health centers in a State. This notice describes the manner in which the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) will fulfill the requirement for consultation. In addition, it solicits comments from local officials regarding CHCs in their areas. A State may elect to supply comments under the system established in accordance with 45 CFR Part 100, "Intergovernmental Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Programs and Activities." (See 48 FR 29188, June 24, 1983.)     

Cross-border public care and adoption proceedings in the European Union

The free movement of persons within the EU has meant that children at risk of harm from family members may be living in a Member State of which they are not a national. The child may be made subject to legal measures under the national law of the host State for the protection of their welfare. This article explores the competence of the EU to protect children in these circumstances, and the scope of the Brussels IIa Regulation in governing jurisdiction over child protection proceedings. It discusses the difference between national child protection systems and the political controversy surrounding English law on adoption following care proceedings issued over a child who is a national of a different Member State. It suggests that further information sharing on national systems and cooperation between courts is necessary for the effectiveness of the law and to encourage understanding of legitimate variation in Member State national family law.     

自然资源国家所有权三层结构说

宪法上规定的自然资源国家所有权不是专属于公法的所有权概念。它包含三层结构：第一层结构是私法权能。在这一层面上,它与物权法上的所有权无异。第二层结构是公法权能。其主要包括国家对于自然资源的立法权、管理权和收益分配权。第三层结构是宪法义务。国家应当为全体人民的利益行使其私法权能和公法权能。公共信托理论是描述国家作为自然资源所有人的宪法义务的法律理论,应当引入中国,或者对中国宪法第9条作公共信托理论式的解释,确立国家与人民在自然资源国家所有权结构中的地位。在中国的现实中,自然资源国家所有权最为薄弱的层面是其宪法义务。 “自然资源人民基金”的模式和尝试对中国有借鉴意义。宪法规定的自然资源所有权具有“不完全规范”的特质,直接转化为物权法上的物权存在困难。在目前宪法控制制度尚不健全的情况下,民法解释学可以发挥控制自然资源国家所有权肆意扩张和扭曲的准宪法功能。     

Health systems agencies and state health planning and development agencies; certificate of need reviews: Health Resources Administration. Notice regarding adjustment of the expenditure minimum for capital expenditures and the expenditure minimum for annual operating costs

This notice provides necessary information for each State which chooses to adjust the capital expenditure and annual operating cost expenditure minimums that are used to determine whether proposals are subject to review under a State's certificate of need program. The notice also provides guidance to assist a State Health Planning and Development Agency (State Agency) in determining the exact minimum dollar figure it will use and in seeking further information.