Executive budget proposal,executive veto,legislative override,and uncertainty: A comparative analysis of the budgetary process

This study examines the roles of the executive budgetary proposal, the executive veto, the legislative override, and legislative uncertainty about the executive's preferences in determining the outcome of a budgetary process. A sequential model of the budgetary process with three institutional agents — a legislature, an appropriations committee, and an executive — is presented. To focus attention on the executive proposal, the veto, the override provision, and uncertainty, simplifying assumptions are made: (1) the appropriations committee has monopoly agenda power, and (2) there is a closed amendment control rule. In order to characterize sequential equilibria of various combinations of veto rules and override provisions, we examine a particular arrangement of agents' preferences and a two item budget. The results demonstrate that the final budget depends critically on the executive proposal, the executive veto rule, the override provision, and the uncertainty. We achieve three striking results. First, the executive proposal may be effective in reducing the frequency of the exercised veto. Second, for a given override provision, a movement from the item veto to the item reduction veto leaves the executive worse off in some cases. Third, with the same change in institutions, the government budget may increase.     

Communication and connectedness in mother- and father-adolescent relationships

In Study 1, 605 adolescents estimated how well their parents knew them and said how much they cared what their parents thought about them. Sons and daughters judged that mothers knew them fairly well, but daughters judged that fathers did not know them so well. At the same time, statements of caring indicated high concern by sons and daughters for both parents. A supplemental result was that sons from white-collar families gave relatively low estimates of how much their mothers knew them and daughters from blue-collar families gave very low estimates of how much their fathers knew them. In Study 2, 52 adolescents from single-parent families and living with their mothers but not with their fathers also gave estimates for knowing and caring. Knowing followed the above pattern, with an expected lowering of estimates for fathers by sons and daughters. Further, estimates of caring declined especially for fathers by daughters. These results add to the growing literature that shows mother-adolescent and father-adolescent relationships contribute differentially to psychological development. The results seem especially relevant for adolescents' sex role development and constructed individuality as mediated through relationships with both parents.Received Ph.D. in experimental psychology from The Catholic University of America. Research interests are in social development, developmental theory, and the history of the concept of psychological development.Received Ph.D. in developmental psychology from The Catholic University of America. Research interests are in social development in adolescence and the effects of parental divorce on development.     

Dillon's Rule Under the Burger Court: The Municipal Liability Cases

Under the Burger Court, the constitutional relationship betweenstates and their municipalities has been examined primarilyin cases involving private suits initiated against municipalitiesunder federal antitrust and civil rights statutes. Since theCourt's 1943 Parker v. Brown decision, it had been presumedthat municipalities as political subdivisions of states wereas immune as their states from tort liability under the ShermanAntitrust Act. The Burger Court, however, ruled that municipalitiesare not automatically immunized from tort liability simply becauseof their status as political subdivisions unless they can demonstratethat their actions were undertaken pursuant to an expressedstate policy. After 1980, the Court continued to uphold thevulnerability of municipalities to private suits authorizedby federal statutes, but moved to narrow the types of remedyappropriate under common law. The Burger Court did not, therefore,address the more fundamental question of whether municipalitiesas public actors should be liable to private damages in thecourse of their public functions.     

The worthy and unworthy homeless

He has written thirteen books, including: The State of the Masses,with Richard Hamilton; Under the Gun,with Peter Rossi and Kathleen Daly; and, most recently, Homelessness and Health,with Dee Weber.     

The relative importance of identity status interview components

Eighty college males were given an expanded identity status interview which included two new interpersonal-sexual areas, “attitudes towards sexual expression” and “sex-role beliefs.” The relative contribution of the new content areas as well as of the standard three areas (occupation, religion, and politics) to overall identity status was assessed by noting the extent of correspondence. Identity status in each content area was also compared with performance on the dependent variable of cognitive complexity. Ideology contributed more than occupation both to overall status rating, as well as to discrimination on the dependent variable. Results on the two new areas supported the view that interpersonal-sexual concerns are important for men's identity development as well as for women's. The finding that all interview areas corresponded well with overall identity status and discriminated significantly on the dependent measure leads to the suggestion that the process variables of crisis and commitment may so overshadow a particular content area that any content of personal relevance for the late adolescent might be used in investigating ego identity development.     

Is organ procurement causing the death of patients?

This article offers a philosophical foundation for the Uniform Determination of Death Act as it first examines death per se, and then examines brain death and the non-heart beating donor criteria for determining death. The author suggests that many of the debates over death can be bypassed by changing the terms of the debate: what matters is not whether death is a process or an event, but death as a state. Understanding death as a state allows us to determine death in a functional manner that is compatible with the needs of law and medicine. The second part examines objections that arise from ignoring or rejecting the distinction between killing and letting die and the principle of double effect. By clarifying the lines between life and death, on the one hand, and between intentionally killing and unintentionally hastening death, on the other, the author hopes to restore a sense that the proposals to drop the dead donor rule are radical recommendations to cross lines we have never crossed before.     

Raising the "civilized minimum" of pain amelioration for prisoners to avoid cruel and unusual punishment

This Article addresses the problems with our nation's cultural and legal prohibitions against certain pain management treatments. The practice of pain management has not kept pace with the many medical advances that have made it possible for physicians to ameliorate most pain. The Author notes that some patients are denied access to certain forms of treatments due to the mistaken belief that addiction may ensue. Additionally, some individuals are under-treated for their pain to a greater degree than are others. This is especially the case for our nation's prisoners. The Author contends that prisoners are frequently denied effective pain amelioration. He notes, however, that there has been improvement in medical treatment in general for prisoners due to court challenges based on the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Yet, due to the protection of qualified immunity given to jailers and prison health care providers, prisoners cannot bring a claim for negligence or medical malpractice, they must allege a violation of their constitutional rights, a significantly higher legal standard. Prisoners must meet a subjective test showing that there was a deliberate indifference to their medical needs that violates the protection of the Eighth Amendment. The Author concludes that because medical advances have made it possible to alleviate most pain suffering, withholding pain treatment or providing a less effective treatment is tantamount to inflicting pain and should be viewed as a violation of the Eighth Amendment.