Dominion Disallowance of Provincial Legislation in Canada

1937 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-96
Author(s):  
Harlow J. Heneman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
State Legislation ◽  
Form Of Government ◽  
Executive Officers ◽  
Federal Form

Although there is a federal form of government in both the Dominion of Canada and the United States, there are striking differences in the two types of federalism. Some of these differences are to be found in fundamentals, such as the basis upon which the powers of government are divided in the two countries. Less striking, but nevertheless significant, are still other points of variance. Among these is the power which the dominion government has to disallow legislative acts of the provinces. Just why the fathers of the Canadian federation thought this power should be given to the central government is not clear. The fact remains, however, that in the years from 1867 to 1935, at least 114 provincial acts and territorial ordinances were set aside. It is important to note that these acts were disallowed by executive officers of the dominion government. Executive officers of the national government in the United States do not possess similar powers where state legislation is concerned.

Organization of the Executive Branch of the National Government of the United States: Changes between October 1, 1939, and April 11, 1940

1940 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 512-518
Author(s):  
L. F. Schmeckebier
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
National Government ◽  
Executive Order ◽  
Reorganization Plan

As in previous lists, mention is here confined generally to units specifically authorized by law or established by the President by executive order or Reorganization Plans under general authority vested in him. Changes in units created by heads of departments or independent establishments are excluded unless of major importance.A. Reorganization Plan No. III, under authority of the act of April 3, 1939 (53 Stat. L. 561), was transmitted to Congress on April 2, 1940; it will become effective 60 calendar days thereafter; a resolution disapproving the plan was adopted by the House of Representatives, but was rejected by the Senate. The changes made by this plan are as follows:Administrator of Civil Aëronautics. The designation of the Administrator of the Civil Aëronautics Authority is changed to Administrator of Civil Aëronautics.

Dimensions of Public Sector Pay Policies in the United States and Sweden

1988 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 61-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lois Recascino Wise
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Social Orientation ◽  
Social Equality ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Dimension

Three dimensions for analyzing public sector pay administration are used to examine central government pay administration in Sweden and the United States of America. On the first dimension, market posture, both countries are found to fall short of their espoused policy, comparability. Greater consistency is found on the second dimension, social orientation, where both countries have pursued the goal of social equality. The equilization of salary levels across society is far greater in Sweden in keeping with the socialist objectives of wage solidarity. The third dimension, reward structure, shows the greatest distance between the two countries with the struggle to implement performance-contingent pay underway in the U.S. while Swedes continue to rely on longevity for pay increases.

scholarly journals When Interbranch Norms Break Down: Of Arms-for-Hostages, "Orderly Shutdowns, "Presidential Impeachments, and Judicial Coups

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Shane
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
National System ◽  
Effective Operation ◽  
Political Conservatism ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The Government

The orderly and effective operation of our national system of government was intended to depend to an exceptional degree upon certain norms of cooperation among its competing branches. The strength of those norms is essential to securing the primary political asset that our government design was intended to help realize: an especially robust form of democratic legitimacy. From this standpoint, it is constitutionally worrisome that norms critical to inter-branch cooperation are coming under heedless assault. To illustrate the problem, this article revisits four critical episodes that have involved destabilizing and antidemocratic initiatives, each undertaken by a branch of the national government while in the control of the current, very conservative generation of Republican party leadership: the Iran-Contra affair, the government shutdown of 1995, the impeachment of President Clinton, and the Senate stonewalling of President Clinton's judicial nominations. The repeated willingness of the Republican Party's most conservative elements to engage in such initiatives is not rooted in political conservatism per se. It reflects rather the narrowing social and ideological base of the Republican Party, and is consistent with a contempt for democratic pluralism that characterizes the constitutional outlook of leading Republican legal theorists. Unless matters are improved, the United States may otherwise be headed towards a new political equilibrium that does considerable violence to America's modern practice of democratic legitimacy.

Organization of the Executive Branch of the National Government of the United States: Changes between August 1, 1936, and May 31, 1937

1937 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 699-702
Author(s):  
L. F. Schmeckebier
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Advisory Committee ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
National Government ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Executive Order

As in previous lists, mention is here made only of units specifically authorized by law or established by the President by executive order under general authority vested in him.Advisory Committee of the Coast Guard Academy. Created by Public No. 38, 75th Congress, approved April 16, 1937, to examine the course of instruction and to advise the Secretary of the Treasury in regard thereto. Committee will consist of five “persons of distinction in the field of education,” who shall be appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury and who shall serve without pay, but who shall be reimbursed for actual expenses of travel.

Credit as a Tool of Statecraft

2019 ◽  
pp. 69-87
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Quinn
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central Government ◽  
National Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Building ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Credit Allocation ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Farm Credit ◽  
Policy Arenas

This chapter shows how Progressives returned to the issue of farm credit distribution in the early 1900s and drew on European precedents to reframe credit allocation as a way for the central government to help people help themselves. American Progressives thus replaced their earlier, more radical farm credit politics with a more moderate vision of government-supported credit as an inexpensive way of supporting self-help. The chapter then considers the Federal Farm Loan Act (FFLA). Compared with other hallmarks of Progressive Era state building, the FFLA seems relatively unimportant. Nevertheless, it was a turning point in the use of selective credit as a tool of federal statecraft in the United States. The FFLA provided federal credit on a national level that was administered through public–private partnerships and bolstered by tax expenditures. By tracing the lead-up to this policy, one can see how Progressives forged a new array of cultural and organizational approaches to federal credit that would later proliferate across policy arenas.

Troubled City Schools

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
William W. Goldsmith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
School Policy ◽  
National Government ◽  
City School ◽  
Urban Affairs ◽  
City Life ◽  
Central Concern ◽  
School Problem ◽  
City Schools

This chapter focuses on city schools. City schools in the United States are failing. Evidently, school policy ought to be of central concern for those concerned with cities, since not only do nearly all children attend schools close to home, but in addition, the schools are for the most part governed and funded locally. Unless city schools are repaired, other aspects of city life will continue to slide downhill. This city-school problem, a crucial piece of urban affairs, will not be solved with city resources and city politics alone. The national government and the states need to do better budgeting, improve regulations, and provide open-minded support.

Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Denson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
National Council ◽  
Cherokee Nation ◽  
The West ◽  
Historic Site ◽  
History Of

This book began with tourism. In the summer of 1994, a friend and I drove from Bloomington, Indiana, where I attended graduate school, to Florida for a short vacation. As we sped along Interstate 75 through northern Georgia, I spotted a brown roadside sign announcing that, at the next exit, we would find New Echota, a state historic site interpreting the history of the Cherokee Nation. For a brief time in the early nineteenth century, New Echota was the Cherokee capital, the seat of the national government created by tribal leaders in the 1820s. The Cherokee National Council met at New Echota in the years prior to removal, and it was the site of the Cherokee Supreme Court. During a time when the United States and the state of Georgia pressured Cherokees to emigrate to the West, the new capital represented the Cherokees’ determination to remain in their homeland. It was also the place where, in late 1835, a small group of tribal leaders signed the treaty under which the United States forced the Cherokee Nation to remove. I had recently become interested in the history of Cherokee sovereignty and nationhood, and I concluded that I should prob ably know about this heritage attraction. We pulled off the highway and followed the signs to the site....

Other Prerogative Powers

2020 ◽  
pp. 213-232
Author(s):  
Michael W. McConnell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
The Church

This chapter focuses on the Convention and the Committee of Detail that addressed and allocated every prerogative power of the Crown to the president or to Congress or denied the power to the national government altogether. It looks at the significant categories of prerogative power and emphasizes that the framers' treatment of lesser powers is often interesting and revealing. It also mentions the Habeas Corpus Acts of 1640 and 1679 that effectively ended the practice of early monarchs asserting authority to imprison subjects without legal redress by guaranteeing judicial review. The chapter reviews the substantial prerogative powers of the king in his capacity as the supreme governor of the “Church by Law Established.” It identifies the prerogative powers that devolved upon the United States and eventually became nongovernmental.

Elites, Civil Society, and Inclusive Institution-Building in the Republic of France

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott M. Moore
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Water Resource Management ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Regional Governance ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Governance Institutions ◽  
Management Institutions

The Republic of France is in many ways the archetype of the centralized, unitary state, and its political institutions contrast sharply with those of the federations of India and the United States. Following the Revolution of 1789, the new republic undertook a series of political reforms intended to strip power from the landed nobility and vest it instead with a new set of egalitarian institutions, the basis of which was both centralization and uniformity. The revolutionaries believed that “justice requires the republic to be one and indivisible” (Berger 1974, 8). Inherent to this new model was a concentration of political authority, as well as political, legislative, and judicial powers, in the hands of the central government. In contrast to more decentralized and federal political systems, the French system is intended to tightly bind officials at both central and local levels and to minimize conflicts between them. Consequently, a defining feature of French political institutions is the relative cohesion of elite decision-making. According to one prominent observer, France “provides the prime example of a highly coherent administration, whereas the United States and Switzerland constitute the typical cases of lack of such coherence” (Kriesi 1995, 171). However, during the past thirty years even the French state has become more decentralized, and powers and responsibilities for some policy areas, including water resource management, have been devolved to regional governments. In comparative perspective, the outstanding feature of the French political system is in fact the presence of strong regional governance organizations, including several organized around river basin boundaries, that are among the world’s most successful interjurisdictional management institutions. France’s system of river basin governance organizations, called “water agencies” (agences de l’eau), is by many accounts the most collaborative and participatory in the world. A global survey of river basin governance institutions concludes, for example, that the French system “is remarkable for its longevity, in how it tries to formalize representation . . . and perhaps most important, how it has attempted local and decentralized water management within the centralist state tradition in France” (Delli Priscoli 2007, 17).

scholarly journals Why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership positions in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (9) ◽  
pp. 4590-4600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson G. Lu ◽  
Richard E. Nisbett ◽  
Michael W. Morris
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
South Asians ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
East Asians ◽  
Cultural Fit ◽  
Bamboo Ceiling ◽  
Executive Officers

Well-educated and prosperous, Asians are called the “model minority” in the United States. However, they appear disproportionately underrepresented in leadership positions, a problem known as the “bamboo ceiling.” It remains unclear why this problem exists and whether it applies to all Asians or only particular Asian subgroups. To investigate the mechanisms and scope of the problem, we compared the leadership attainment of the two largest Asian subgroups in the United States: East Asians (e.g., Chinese) and South Asians (e.g., Indians). Across nine studies (n= 11,030) using mixed methods (archival analyses of chief executive officers, field surveys in large US companies, student leader nominations and elections, and experiments), East Asians were less likely than South Asians and whites to attain leadership positions, whereas South Asians were more likely than whites to do so. To understand why the bamboo ceiling exists for East Asians but not South Asians, we examined three categories of mechanisms—prejudice (intergroup), motivation (intrapersonal), and assertiveness (interpersonal)—while controlling for demographics (e.g., birth country, English fluency, education, socioeconomic status). Analyses revealed that East Asians faced less prejudice than South Asians and were equally motivated by work and leadership as South Asians. However, East Asians were lower in assertiveness, which consistently mediated the leadership attainment gap between East Asians and South Asians. These results suggest that East Asians hit the bamboo ceiling because their low assertiveness is incongruent with American norms concerning how leaders should communicate. The bamboo ceiling is not an Asian issue, but an issue of cultural fit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document