Legislation

About: Legislation is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 62664 publications have been published within this topic receiving 585188 citations. The topic is also known as: law & act.

Political Sources of Presidencialismo in Mexico

Abstract: INTRODUCTION Mexico has been characterized as having an exceptionally strong presidency. In no country in Latin America does the president appear to wield such wide-ranging powers. The president in Mexico dominates the legislative and judicial branches of the national government and directs a highly centralized federal system in which states and municipalities ultimately appear to be subject to rule from the center. There is no question that the president of Mexico exercises an extraordinary range of powers. He can reform the constitution by proposing amendments, which are frequently accepted by Congress with only cosmetic changes. He initiates virtually all legislation, which often is passed by Congress with dispatch. The president designates his own successor to the presidency and also nominates most of the congressional candidates of his party. He also often names the candidates of the official party for governor. He can have governors, mayors, and members of Congress removed from their posts. He designates members of his cabinet and can fire them at his leisure. The federal judicial branch is filled with his appointees, which leads to a compliant judiciary (see Garrido 1989:422–26). This image of a powerful presidency survives despite the fact that the Mexican constitution provides for an independent congress and judiciary and insists on separation of powers. Furthermore, the 1917 constitution is explicitly federal with regard to relations between the federal government and the states, and it provides for free municipal government. How in fact is the president of Mexico so powerful?

Cosponsoring Legislation in the U. S. Congress

Abstract: Since the mid-1930s in the Senate and the late-1.960s in the House, members of Congress have been permitted to cosponsor legislation. Many members have become very active in cosponsoring legislation, while others have shown some reluctance. This article investigates several possible reasons for differing levels of cosponsorship activity. The goals of securing re-election, gaining influence within the Congress, and producing good public policy, as well as the member's general level of legislative activity, are examined as influences on cosponsorship activity. The findings indicate that the representative's cosponsorship activity is influenced by ideology (the representative's measure of good public policy), by the representative's general level of legislative activity, and by the representative's re-election prospects if in the Senate and seniority if in the House.

The Social Contagion Model: Exploring the Role of Public Opinion on the Diffusion of Antismoking Legislation across the American States

Abstract: Scholars have offered two primary explanations for the influence that neighboring states have on policy diffusion: state officials learn by observing the outcomes of policies and states seek an economic advantage over other states. Both models contend that decision making occurs laterally as state officials learn from or react to the policy decisions of other elites; the public has a minor role. I offer an additional explanation, the social contagion model, which suggests that state residents react to neighboring policies by changing their aggregate opinions on that policy. If state opinion becomes supportive, state officials respond by enacting similar policies in the home state or risk being ousted from office. Using both individual and aggregate data on antismoking legislation, I find empirical support for the social contagion model. The results reorient theories of policy diffusion to the public and, consequently, open up new avenues for future research.

Lessons for the Future of Affirmative Action from the past of the Religion Clauses

Abstract: For both educational affirmative action and the use of race in districting, this essay pursues parallels with the Supreme Court's religion clause jurisprudence in aid of the argument that the approach mapped out by the Powell opinion in Bakke, the Michigan District Court in Gratz, and the Supreme Court dissenters in the Shaw v. Reno line of voting rights cases makes more sense as a part of our constitutional law than the sort of categorical opposition to the use of race in anything other than a strictly remedial context that is rapidly becoming its chief competition. My contention is that the Supreme Court's attitude toward race, at least in the two contexts of educational affirmative action and voting rights, should follow the same trajectory as its attitude toward religion already has. The trajectory I have in mind is the following: For a period of time, on Establishment Clause grounds, the exclusion of religion and the religious from otherwise generally available opportunities was endorsed, indeed was seen as constitutionally required. Then the Court came to realize that it worked a discrimination against those whose central organizing characteristic or salient trait was their religion to allow other such characteristics, but not religion, to form the basis for inclusion. Similarly, to allow every other basis for commonality or salience to count and not race may be seen to disadvantage those for whom race is a defining characteristic in a way that itself implicates the Equal Protection Clause. To put the argument in extremely compressed and referential form, if colorblindness is analogous to aggressive enforcement of the Establishment Clause, then, while the University of California's use of race in the plan struck down in Bakke may resemble the New York legislature's use of religion in the districting legislation struck down in Kiryas Joel, the inclusion of race in the Harvard admissions plan praised by Justice Powell more closely resembles the inclusion of religion mandated by the Supreme Court for the University of Virginia's funding scheme in Rosenberger. And, if the affirmative action claims of racial minorities are like the accommodation claims of religious minorities, then, while some voluntary pursuit of racial diversity by public educational institutions is like permissible accommodation, some majority minority districting under the Voting Rights Act is like required accommodation.

Understanding the social factors that contribute to diabetes: a means to informing health care and social policies for the chronically ill.

Abstract: Social determinants of health are the conditions in which individuals are born, grow, live, work, and age Increasingly, they are being recognized for their relationship to the soaring incidence of Type 2 diabetes in the US, as well as the opportunities they present for us to counter it Many current Type 2 diabetes interventions focus on biologic and behavioral factors, such as symptoms, diet, and physical activity However, it is equally important to address the influence of physical and social environments, which may include low income, employment insecurity, low educational attainment, and poor living conditions, on health outcomes Section 4302 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 offers an opportunity to improve data collection and policy development to more effectively identify populations at high risk for developing Type 2 diabetes and to proactively refer them to appropriate social support services that may ultimately support reduction of health disparities Expanding the scope of this legislation to include data that incorporate social determinants would improve the ability of clinicians and health systems to engage and to treat patients with chronic conditions, such as Type 2 diabetes, while expanding policymakers' ability to conform to the legislation's intent of shaping efforts to reduce chronic conditions nationwide