Biennial Budgeting by the U.S. Congress

The president's budget is a political document, a prediction and an institution. As a political document, its version of the past and vision of the future are open to criticism. As a prediction, its projections arguable in the light of experience and professional judgment. As an institution, its contribution to the general capacity of government is subject to debate.     

Comparing Welfare Service Delivery Among Public,Nonprofit and For-Profit Work Agencies

Since passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996, there has been a proliferation of contracting for welfare services, specifically around Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and related benefits and services such as child care. The services most commonly contracted include those around the work or employment function, such as training, education, job placement, and support services to promote job entry or retention.

The purpose of this article is to examine differences in the quality of service provision among public, nonprofit, and for-profit auspices in the delivery of work-based welfare reform services. The findings show that there are some differences in welfare programs across the three sectors. The significance of this issue relates to the critical question of whether social needs can be best met through competitive outsourcing.     

Lesson-Drawing in Family Policy: Media Reports and Empirical Evidence about European Developments

Since 1980, the U.S. press has painted a vivid picture of widespread welfare state dismantling in Europe. Yet our analysis of social expenditures in 14 European countries from 1980–1995 finds a pattern of resilience and, with respect to family benefits, a pattern of expansion. Our review of qualitative research on policy reforms upholds the expenditure-based findings. We conclude that U.S. media misrepresentation of social welfare developments in Europe is likely to impede lesson-drawing from abroad by U.S. policymakers. This constitutes a lost opportunity, as the U.S. is now engaged in social policy reformulation, especially with respect to programs for families.     

Identification and quantitation of gamma-hydroxybutyrate (NaGHB) by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy

The most common means of identification of gamma-hydroxybutyrate (NaGHB) involves using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) or gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) of a suitable derivative. However, these methods may be complicated by possible shifts in chemical equilibrium between gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), GHB salts and the precursor lactone, gamma-butyrolactone (GBL). This paper addresses the technique of proton and carbon nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H and 13C NMR) for the direct and accurate identification of GHB and GBL. The application of 1H NMR for GHB quantitation is also discussed.     

Rights-based rights

Ronald Dworkin maintains that particular rights, like the right to free speech and the right to own personal property, can be derived from a foundational right, the right to equal concern and respect. This paper questions the tenability of this program for rights-based rights. A right is an individuated moral or political guarantee which confers a specified benefit on each right-holder and which resists conduct that would derogate it. For there to be rights-based rights, both the foundational right and the rights it implies must satisfy this definition. It is doubtful, however, that the right to equal concern and respect should count as a right since the benefits it confers are at best highly controversial and may not be assignable to individuals. But even if we grant that the content of the right to equal concern and respect can be satisfactorily specified, the status of the derived rights remains problematic. The trouble is that the relation between the right to equal concern and respect and the rights it implies parallels the relation between the principle of utility and the rights it may imply. Both of these foundational principles can extinguish derived rights. Consequently, rights dependent on either of these principles are not trumps, and their standing as rights is suspect. I conclude that Dworkin's method of defending rights is inappropriate for the most important of our rights though it may well serve for less critical ones.