Intended Consequences: Jurisdictional Reform and Issue Control In the U.S. House of Representatives

The power of congressional committees rests in large part on their ability to set the legislative agenda in particular issue areas. But how do committees acquire their issue jurisdictions? Existing research points to informal committee turf wars— not collective reforms—as the roots of jurisdictional allocations (King 1994, 1997). Yet the House of Representatives has made nearly 150 formal changes to its committees' jurisdictions since 1973. We investigated the effects of one prominent instance of extensive jurisdictional changes, the Bolling‐Hansen reforms of 1975, and found that this body of reforms advanced collective goals of improved policy coordination and enhanced information sharing.     

Was Inclusive Legal Positivism Founded on a Mistake?

In this paper, I present a new argument against inclusive legal positivism. As I show, any theory which permits morality to be a condition on legality cannot account for a core feature of legal activity, namely, that it is an activity of social planning. If the aim of a legal institution is to guide the conduct of the community through plans, it would be self-defeating if the existence of these plans could only be determined through deliberation on the merits. I also argue that, insofar as inclusive legal positivism was developed as a response to Ronald Dworkin's critique of H. L. A. Hart's theory of law, it was founded on a mistake. For once we appreciate the role that planning plays in legal regulation, we will see that Dworkin's objection is based on a flawed conception of legal obligations and rights and hence does not present an objection that inclusive legal positivists were required to answer.     

Egypt

The well-known radio personality gave an address in April, fromwhich this article has been extracted.     

THE INEXORABLE RISE IN THE UK NHS DRUGS BILL: RECENT POLICIES, FUTURE PROSPECTS

The UK National Health Service drugs bill has been the subject of controversy since the inception of the nhs . This article identifies the growth in the drugs bill and explores some of the factors driving the bill upward. The conclusions of this article are: that the drugs bill will continue to remain high on the political agenda; the government has only a limited amount of control on the drugs bill; various policies may counteract rather than complement each other; some of the policies may actually increase the drugs bill; however, many of the effects of the policies are unknown and there has been no rigorous assessment of the effects of any of the policies since 1948; and finally there is no robust evidence to suggest the drugs bill either does or does not represent good value for money.