Federal court outcomes in asylum-related appeals 1980–1987: A highly ‘politicized’ process

Federal court outcomes (both district courts and courts of appeal) in asylum-related appeals during the period 1980–1987 are significantly related to three political variables: the political party affiliation of the President who appointed the judge or judges involved in an appeal, the nature of judicial constituencies, and the involvement of interest groups in the appeals. Court outcomes are not, on the other hand, significantly related to two contextual factors: geopgraphic region of the decisionmakers and the unemployment rate. The federal courts did not exhibit the bias of the immigration bureaucracy in favor of hostile-country aliens (aliens from communist, socialist, or leftist countries); nor did these courts favor aliens from European countries.     

The impacts of public interventions: An examination of the forestry sector

This article measures welfare and distributive effects of public market interventions in forestry. These interventions represent both the demand (Jones Act shipping restrictions and minimum wage restrictions) and supply (state forest practice acts, forest incentives payments, taxes and public land management) sides of the market. The authors evaluate how well these programs promote the three standard economic justifications for market intervention: market failure, distributive justice, and stabilization. Their results indicate that, with the single exception of Timber Mart South (a government-sponsored price-reporting service), all market interventions fail to accomplish their efficiency and distributive objectives. Furthermore, the authors find that targeted regulatory programs (such as State Forest Practice Acts) have small impacts when compared to effects of taxation and public ownership.     

Cashing out food stamps: Impacts on food expenditures and diet quality

On July 1, 1982, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico implemented a cash food assistance program, known as the Nutrition Assistance Program, as a replacement for the existing Food Stamp Program. The Nutrition Assistance Program differs from the former Puerto Rico Food Stamp Program in two important respects: cash replaced coupons as the form of issuance and eligibility standards and benefits were reduced to bring program costs into line with a reduced funding level. Based on household food use survey data collected before and after the introduction of the Nutrition Assistance Program, this paper examines the program's impacts on household food expenditures and diet quality. The results of the analysis indicate that the cashing out of food stamp benefits in Puerto Rico had virtually no impact on food expenditures and diet quality, while restrictions on eligibility and benefits under the Nutrition Assistance Program caused a decline in the money value of food used at home of about 2 percent and reductions in the availability of food energy and five specific nutrients ranging from 1.8 to 3.2 percent of the adult male Recommended Dietary Allowances.