Treaty Federalism in Northern Canada: Aboriginal-Government Land Claims Boards

Treaty federalism in North America encompasses not only governanceimplications of the historic treaties signed with Aboriginalpeoples, but also the modern-day treaties known as "comprehensiveland claim agreements." This article explores how treaty federalismis realized in Northern Canada through claims-mandated jointgovernment-Aboriginal boards dealing with wildlife management,land-use planning, and environmental protection. These boards,existing at the intersection of the three orders of government-national,federal/territorial, and Aboriginal—are found to be uniquegovernance institutions, with substantial independence fromgovernment. They have significantly enhanced Aboriginal peoples'influence over land, wildlife, and resource decisions, but theextent to which they bring Aboriginal culture and worldviewsto bear in decision-making remains an open question.     

Distributive and Procedural Justice in Seven Nations

The paper examines the impact of distributive justice and procedural justice variables on judgments in seven countries (Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Spain, and the United States). Subjects were presented with each of two experimental vignettes: one in which the actor unsuccessfully appeals being fired from his job and one in which the actor unsuccessfully goes to an employment agency to seek a job; they were asked to rate the justness of the outcome and how fairly the actor had been treated. The vignettes manipulated deservingness and need of the actor (distributive justice factors) and impartiality and voice in the hearing (procedural justice factors). Four hypotheses were tested: first, a distributive justice hypothesis that deservingness would be more important than need in these settings; second, a procedural justice hypothesis that the importance of voice and impartiality vary depending on the nature of the encounter and the forum in which it is resolved; third, because of their recent socialist experience, Central and Eastern European respondents make greater use of need information and less use of deservingness information than Western respondents; and fourth, that distributive justice and procedural justice factors interact. The distributive justice hypothesis is supported in both vignettes. The procedural justice hypothesis receives some support. Impartiality is more important in the first vignette and voice is more important in the second vignette. The interaction hypothesis was not supported in the first vignette, but does receive some support in the second vignette. The cultural hypothesis is not supported in either vignette. The implications for distributive and procedural justice research are discussed.     

An insurer's perspective on reform

Individual health insurance markets differ from state to state, and as a result approaches to individual market reforms need to be different. In evaluating approaches, policy makers need to remember that since the decision to purchase health insurance coverage is voluntary, the potential for adverse selection exists. In addition, rather than putting the focus of individual market reforms almost exclusively on access to health insurance for a small number of persons with high-cost health conditions, more attention needs to be put on how to decrease the number of uninsured persons. This includes making the premiums paid for individual health insurance 100 percent tax deductible, similar to those of employer-based health insurance. Finally, market reforms need to treat all types of coverage issued in the individual market the same, whether they are purchased direct for the insurer or through an out-of-state association.     

Private thoughts of public representatives: assisted death, voluntary euthanasia and politicians

Assisted death and voluntary euthanasia have received significant and sustained media attention in recent years. High-profile cases of people seeking assistance to end their lives have raised, at least in the popular press, debate about whether individuals should be able to seek such assistance at a time when they consider their suffering to be unbearable or their quality of life unsatisfactory. Other recent developments include a number of attempts to legislate on the issue by the minor parties in Australia and the successful enactment of legislation in a few overseas jurisdictions. However, despite all of the recent attention that has focused on assisted death and voluntary euthanasia, a discussion of the adequacy of existing laws has not made it onto the political agenda of any of the Australian State or Territory governments. This is in spite of the fact that the private views of the majority of our elected Members of Parliament may be supportive of reform. This article explores the role of politicians' views and, as a case study, considers the opinions expressed by a number of Queensland Members of Parliament. In light of the views of these politicians and those of members of the public, as well as considerations arising from current medical practice, the article argues that there is a need for open political debate on assisted death and voluntary euthanasia. The article also suggests ways that such a debate may be achieved while minimising any political impact on governments that are prepared at least to consider this issue.     

Why Medical Child Support is Important—and Complex

Courts resolving child support cases involving separated, divorced, and non‐marital children are charged with defining responsibility for health care coverage for the children under that order. This article explores historical and current medical child support requirements under Title IV‐D of the Social Security Act—the national child support enforcement (“IV‐D”) program. It analyzes legal requirements and policy recommendations, and provides a practical tool judges may use to determine whether health care coverage available to either or both parents is appropriate—that is, comprehensive, accessible, and affordable.