The Good and Bad Times of Clinton Office Essay Example for Free

The Good and Bad Times of Clinton Office Essay Every presidency left people with significant events, both good and bad. This holds true to the American setting where each administration is sure to impart both legacy or prominence and most notably, controversy. In fact, it is ironic that people are keener in discussing the intrigues and flaws committed by a former President rather than acknowledge his concrete accomplishments and contributions to the country. Despite however this glaring life reality and human nature, it is still essential that a previous American leader be recognize for his efforts in unifying American people under a common stand which is for the nation to be stable, progressive and remains to be one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world. Such condition is what happened to the regime of the 42nd commander-in-chief of the United States, President William Jefferson â€Å"Bill† Clinton. Foremost his achievements and deeds, which are all supposedly aimed at empowering and uplifting the plight of American people; Clinton is best remembered through his controversial decisions and activities. In fact, beyond the apparent economic growth that his office attained, people are unfortunately reminded of Clinton’s dishonorable ethical blunder which was highlighted by the reported Monica Lewinsky sexual scandal. In an effort, therefore, to best understand and realize both the good and bad times of the Clinton office, it is empirically fair to present the nice and unpleasant things and events that happened during this presidential term. This is because in doing so, people will have the opportunity to realize the benefits of Clinton’s triumphs and most importantly, learn from his leadership mistakes. In his memoir â€Å"My Life,† Clinton made a poignant effort for the American people to understand him beyond his presidency. Regardless however of his charismatic and celebrated personality, Clinton struggled to rectify his dwindled and scandal-ridden administration. It became an inevitably difficult task for Clinton to fulfill his promises, while still campaigning for presidency, as well as adhere to his platform during his two-term office. This is primarily due to the reality that his feats were marred by his own faults. It is first worthy to take into consideration that Clinton’s political era has manifested goodness even before he became the initial Democratic president after Franklin D. Roosevelt to prevail over a two-term White House office. When his time came to lead the nation, Clinton made Americans benefit from further peace and order as well as economic advantages (â€Å"Bill Clinton† 1). Additionally, the good times of the Clinton office are further illustrated with the country reflecting the ever lowest unemployment rate, a feat which previous presidents have not achieved. The economic benefits made by the Clinton office were also depicted by the lowest inflation in a span of three decades, the soaring housing ownership in the entire history of U. S. , significant fall of crime rates in a number of states, and lessened welfare turn-over. These fiscal triumphs were more highlighted with the Clinton office’s proposal of the first fair national budget which eventually ended in a budget surplus (â€Å"Bill Clinton† 1). Clinton time in office was likewise marked by an end of the period of the so-called big government. This is when significant measures were made that improved the educational system, protected and assured people with jobs, curbed firearms trade and reinforced environmental policies. The economic prosperity of Clinton office was corroborated by Kelly who stated that it is in his time that the stock market climbed radically. Aside from this, Kelly added that it is in Clinton’s regime that the Family and Medical Leave Act and North American Free Trade Agreement were passed and ratified, respectively. Lastly it was during Clinton office that international hostilities were put to an end including the reign of Saddam Hussein (Kelly 1). While the bad time of Clinton office significantly resulted from the failure of his proposal to undertake a system for national health care, it was in the second term that his presidency started to fall off. In fact, it is the period when Clinton earned more fame due to controversies that included the Gennifer Flowers, Whitewater Travelgate, the FBI file controversy as well as the emergence of Paula Jones and eventually the Lewinsky alleged intimate affair. Relatively, Gertz alarmingly noted that beyond Clinton’s dreadful confession, over a national television, that he â€Å"misled† the American people concerning the Lewinsky scandal, he is more accountable for further upsetting cover-up. According to Gertz, the Clinton office was definitely blemished by a bad leadership decision that concerned guidelines which, in turn, affected and eventually harmed the nation’s security (Gertz 3). Gertz further revealed how Clinton betrayed the American people through his office’s determined failure and disobedience to â€Å"provide for the common defense† which the American constitution requires. The author added that Clinton’s reckless guidelines, as regard key military and intelligence measures, affected the country’s protection. Clinton’s apparent inconsiderate cover-up of this apparent wrongdoing betrayed and left the country with weaker and susceptible military. This is unfortunate especially during a period that its rival countries have strengthened and a more unsafe world exists (Gertz 3). Judging from the cited good and bad times of Clinton office, the historical importance of his regime became evident. In a time of a mounting divided politics and instability, Clinton succeeded in moving his plan to a core which led to mainstream America. Despite however of the bad times and even the aborted impeachment, Clinton is still and ultimately considered to be a very popular president. Works Cited â€Å"Bill Clinton. † The White House. n. d. 17 March 2009 http://www. whitehouse. gov/about/presidents/williamjClinton/. Gertz, Bill. Betrayal: How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2001. Kelly, Martin. â€Å"Bill Clinton – Forty-second President of the United States. † n. d. About. com: American History. 17 March 2009 http://americanhistory. about. com/od/williamjclinton/p/pclinton. htm.

Health Care Communication Paper Essay Example for Free

Health Care Communication Paper Essay Our facility is going to be changing a lot in the weeks and months to come. As the administration of the nursing home, I am going to make sure that this transition happens as smoothly as possible. The patients that have decided to stay must try their hardest to adhere to the new policies that have been set. The patients that have decided to go somewhere else will very greatly missed. The patients who cannot communicate their decision for one reason or another will be placed where the staff and I see fit, whether it be in our facility or somewhere else. This facility wants to ensure all patients and residents that we want to make these changes as painless as possible. Thank all of you for the time you have given the staff and me these last ten years, and for the time you will give in the future. There are three different types of communication in the medical field: traditional communication, electronic communication, communication through social media. There are advantages and disadvantages to each different type of communication. Traditional communication includes speaking face to face and mail (letters). Electronic modes of communication are email phone (home or cell phone), texting, and chatting. Social media involves communicating with several people or just one person at a time using public forums or private messaging through such websites facebook and twitter. Each and every type of communication is equally as important as the other but they all have their own advantages and disadvantages. Traditional forms of communication as simple as can be but they can confuse anyone if every step is not done correctly. You would think that speaking to someone face to face would be the best way to communicate but this is not always the case. Anyone can miscommunicate what they are trying to say. There can be other barriers like language barriers and also emotional barriers. If someone speaks a different language it can be hard to understand them unless there is an interpreter available, which isn’t always possible. Emotional barriers are hard because when health care is involved things can go wrong and people then become angry, sad, and/or tired. When this happens they may not want to listen to or respond to their doctors. Face to face communication is good too because you can ask questions then and there, and receive advice from your physician without having to wait too long. Mail can be very annoying because it can take days or weeks to reach its destination and more days or weeks to receive a response. The only good thing about mail would be that you will have documentation of your physician’s opinions and test results. Traditional communication methods have been around for a long time but times are changing and these types of communication are becoming few and far between. Electronic communication seems to be where most people end up communication, even to our doctors and other health care officials. We call, email, and even text to tell doctors and nurses our health care problems before we even consider actually going to a doctor’s office and speaking to the doctor in person. These communication techniques are good because we can receive answers to our questions also instantly if the health care official isn’t busy. One disadvantage is that someone may not get back to you as soon as you would like; which will leave you at home, wondering what you should do. Electronic communication isn’t exactly the best form of health care because if the doctor cannot actually see the patient and test their symptoms they cannot defiantly tell a patient what is wrong with them. Social media is becoming more and more popular every day because it is a way to keep in touch with people we don’t see every day. It has also become home for all kinds of new and old information, including health care information. This can be a great way to communicate about health care because people can learn new things about health care and medicine every day. People can also communicate with organizations full of doctors and nurses who can teach patients about any news in the health care world and advise patients on how to take care of themselves. This may sound great but there are terrible disadvantages to this type of health care communication. You never know who you are actually speaking to on the internet. What could appear to be an organization of doctors and nurses who want to offer free health care advice could be someone who knows absolutely nothing about medicine. Social media websites are not the best place to look for any sort of medical advice because patients want real help.

The Distributional And Encompassing Coalitions Politics Essay

The Distributional And Encompassing Coalitions Politics Essay Introduction In our term paper we would like to analyze some well-known theories and also combine them with real life examples to have a comprehensive overview of whether the theories are applicable to real life and how accurate they are. For the theme of our paper we decided for the topic interest groups. Based on this topic, we further decided to use Mancur Olsons theory of special interest groups, which he precisely described in his famous book The Rise and Decline of Nations. In the first part of our paper we will mainly focus on providing general information and insights into the Olsons theory and we will also take a general look at the framework of the car lobby itself. In the following part of our paper we will discuss the ex-ante predictions regarding the success or failure when it comes to specifically selected lobby groups, based on Olsons theory as well. The final part offers a brief introduction to the particular car lobby group ACEA and also analyses the actions and influence of the lobby group. The question whether the theory is consistent with our real life example is broadly discussed and advocated as well. 1. Introduction to the Theory In this chapter we will present the theory we will use in order to conduct our case study on the influence and impact of special interest groups on government decisions. We define special interest groups as a coalition of individuals or representatives trying to gain influence on the political environment. In order to have a collective impact on a particular matter they develop access strategies to reach the decisive officials and legislators. Precisely, we will set a framework of a social coalition theory based on Mancur Olsons theory of special interest groups and their collective action in pursuing a common goal, published in his book The Rise and Decline of Nations. We will then apply this framework on the car lobby. The car lobby is considered to have strong internal connections to political officials as they are equipped with a vast number of resources and backed by the politically crucial automotive industry. We will focus on the European Automobile Manufacturers association (ACEA), which is one of the most important car lobbies in the European Union. ACEA is a representative association of the automotive industry with great impact on decisions made in Brussels. It reflects the interest of the car industry in most European Countries. We will analyze its access and impact strategies on EU institutions and their influence on democratic decision procedures. Furthermore we examine how their actions affect the total soci ety. In order to introduce Olsons theory of special interest groups, it is essential to know the underlying assumptions and problems Olson describes. Given Olsons assumption of rationality of individual behaviour, a social group may fail to achieve collective action. That is, that the group may fail to achieve its common goal. In our case it would mean the group is not able to have an influence on political decisions. To some extent it is individually rational to not take part and contribute in the groups action as it involves personal costs. It is rather rational and self-interest maximizing to withdraw from the action but to benefit from the groups outcome. Clearly, if every individual in that group is assumed to be rational the groups goal would not be achieved. Especially groups with increasing size are likely to face problems of collective action (free-riding) as group members can hardly be monitored in their individual contribution and not be excluded from group benefits. Small groups in contrast, consisting of individuals with homogenous preferences are likely to achieve a common interest. According to Olson, the presence of selective incentives, i.e. frequent interactions within the group, the ability to monitor, punish and reward individual behaviour increases the likelihood of collaboration and overcoming the collective action problem. Therefore, groups with relatively smaller size are privileged to groups larger in size. Although not a particular problem under examination in this case study it is important to mention the collective action problem. It is the underlying obstacle of a groups formation and has to be overcome in order to have an influence on decisions. However, besides overcoming the collective action problem, it is of special interest for us to examine and analyze how interest groups, here applied to the ACEA, gain access and increase impact on political decision procedures and the societies welfare as a whole. 2. Types of Coalitions 2.1. Distributional and Encompassing Coalitions According to Olson, the degree of influence of interest groups and as a result the impact on the societies welfare depends on the type of coalition in existence. He introduces the concept of coalitions called distributional coalitions and encompassing coalitions. Both types of coalition try to gain access to the political environment. In the valuation part of a real life example of an ACEA action we will evaluate to which coalition the ACEA may belong to in order to conduct a proper analysis of their influence and especially about their impact on the society. Distributional coalitions are special interest groups that only represent interests of a small number of firms. The representatives of these groups try to maintain and strengthen the companies market position by supporting protectionist and even monopolistic legislation procedures. Such protectionist measures could be tariffs, taxes or non tariff barriers imposed on market competitors which negatively affect an efficient allocation of recourses and may support inefficient economic segments. This type of interest group will heavily oppose technological progress as it might be harmful to its own position. Thus, the outcome of such penetration of political decisions is disadvantageous from a societies point of view. Successfully influenced legislation will be heavy in favour of a small number of individuals that only make a fraction of the society. But the society as a whole will face a decrease in economic output due to a lack of technological progress and even stagnate over a longer period of time. Distributional coalitions occur especially in the presence of politically stable democracies. They will form in huge numbers all across the society and will grow in size over time. Therefore, they will accumulate power and increase their degree of influence and access on political decision making. With an increasing number of distributional coalitions the political environment will be distorted and a social welfare maximizing outcome of political decisions is highly unlikely. Clearly, these coalitions try to redistribute wealth and income within the interest group leaving the society worse off, as the total welfare decreases. On the other hand, the counterpart of distributional coalitions is encompassing coalitions. The nature of encompassing coalitions is that they do not restrict their actions to the interests of a small number of individuals or firms but rather reflect the interests of the broader society. According to Olson, encompassing coalitions influence political decisions in a way that is beneficial to the society. Since their interests correspond with the broader interests of the society, comprehensive bargaining about legislation will lead to efficient political outcomes (Rosser, 2007). In contrast to distributional coalitions, encompassing coalitions foster technological progress and economic growth. Thus, their actions and impact on political decisions increase the welfare of the whole society. In conclusion of the theory part, based on Olsons special interest group theory, we defined two types of coalitions. Both coalitions, distributional and encompassing, try to gain access and impact on legislation procedures. Distributional coalitions represent the interest of a small number of individuals and rather oppose technological progress, hence, slow down economic growth. Encompassing coalitions reflect the interest of the broader society, hence; rather increase the welfare of the society. 3. Ex-ante predictions 3.1. Olsons framework on EU car lobby Considering the previous definitions and analysis on Olsons developed theory about the influence of interest groups on different realities and its impact in governmental decisions, as well as, the defined framework of the EU car lobbying which is mainly led by ACEA. It is now the purpose of this section to predict the outcome of ACEA actions in the EU political environment based on the theory. In order to achieve our purpose we might first set up some considerations on our previous analysis. First of all, we have to bear in mind that it was never Olsons goal to study the impact of particular organizations or a group. It was, instead, an attempt to highlight the role played by several interest groups in the economic development of a country as a whole. Therefore he did not trail a specific framework which would be possible to apply to a particular organization or group, although his work is accurate enough to study the outcome of any lobbying activity in its broader sense. Focusing now on the car lobbying role, we might also underline some important features of this organization regarding its history, experience, resources and internal decision-making process, some of them already described before. These features might influence the outcome of its actions under the analysis of Olsons model. When referring to automobile industry we immediately link it with a high level of complexity and regulation. Here we might wonder if that is the result of political and social evolution itself or if it may be connected with some kind of external force (interest group coalition) which influences the market outcome. It is our aim now to understand whether or not there are conditions in the car industry to the establishment of a coalition which is strong enough to influence political decisions on related matters. 3.2. Car industry and interest groups coalitions Olson identified a main requirement, to the appearance of successful interest groups: the maturity level of a certain industry. When considering this point we easily realize that automobile manufactures and all its stakeholders have been interacting for long enough to derive some successful coalition actions. Olson supported this direct relation between industry maturity and the success of interest groups action with some empirical evidence on US market. For that reason we are lead to undertake the US market as a benchmark (due to several similarities with EU system) and then conclude that it might also be the case that car industry is in a well-developed position to set off some thriving coalitions. Apart from industry maturity, so far we dont have enough information which leads us to conclude if ACEA is a distributional coalition or an encompassing one. In order to do so, we have to analyse some of the car industry background. As any other market operating industry, companies withi n the car industry can be considered rational. Therefore they will be profit-maximizers. If so, an association like ACEA, which is willing to increase companies benefits, might above all care about the impact of certain decisions for companies and not really be concerned about the outcome for society as a whole. Unless we argue that an increase in society surplus due to certain decisions will increase companies benefits. We have found the first reason why we should look at ACEA as a distributional coalition as defined in the previous section. It is also true that there are better conditions for an interest group coalition to arise and to be successful in a stable economy. Despite that, it works even better in a democracy where the de facto political power is closer to a centrist orientation rather than the extremes of laissez-faire or a socialist command. It is actually the case of the European Union. Another argument which may be crucial in our approach is that it is more likely that some groups goals prevail when the opposition, even if it exists, is not sufficiently strong to offset others damage, which will make them suffer in silence. Altogether it would lead us to conclude that ACEA, as the major car lobbying player, is closer to be a distributional coalition rather than an encompassing one. Even though it is not our main focus here, we might also refer the adoption of this framework is not consensual in the field. Some experts would be against what we are arguing here, mostly because it is not guaranteed that car lobbying activities have only negative effects in societys view. At this point it is fair to mention that some might consider lobbying activities as a way to undertake more openness and competitiveness in the political system which would lead to more transparency in EU (Schendelen, 2002). We could also support this idea in the sense that lobbyists bring out facts about political matters mainly through the media. The reason to mention this argument here, is to ensure that we do not exclude the possibility of some positive effects in further analysis of the actual ACEA activity. Bringing together our reasoning we might be in a position to set up some predicted impact ACEA may have towards political decisions in EU. This is our goal for the next subsection. 3.3. Expected ACEA impact In pursuing our attempt to apply Olsons framework to car lobbying in the EU, it seems logical to argue that car lobbying actions might be strong enough to influence political decisions on this field. Every coalition which may arise within this market segment (e.g.: ACEA) will then be the reason for time-consuming political decisions throughout crowded agendas and bargaining tables. It is expected that ACEA will achieve that by finding some means of communicating directly with EU representatives. That kind of action is also likely to involve high amounts of money due to the necessity of qualified people who work with complex regulation and try to persuade politics. For that reason ACEA will only be successful if it is able to aggregate high amounts of contributions from the biggest companies in the industry. If it happens to be so, this pressure would somehow be able to slow down societys ability to move towards more efficient technologies and to reallocate resources (e.g.: alternatives to oil market or more efficient energy-using technologies, however we will have some deeper analysis into these results in the next section). Once big enough, this distributional coalition could have its well-noticeable impact in the rate of economic growth. Thus, we could also mention that the build up of this distributional coalition would increase the complexity of regulation in areas related with car industry. In its extreme upshot it would by some means influence the course of social evolution. 4. Analysis and empirical evidence We will focus our analysis in the field where the ACEA plays its higher stakes: the negotiations for the reduction of CO2 emissions by automobile vehicles. Particularly, we intend to highlight ACEA evolution and its impact on the quality of policy making by the European Commission in the last two decades. Then, we intend to figure out if there is a link between this groups actions regarding the topic and the European Union performance in technological development, more specifically the move towards a greener and more fuel-efficient society. But first, its important to provide a brief characteristics description of this particular interest group. 4.1. ACEA a heavyweight special interest group The European Automotive Manufacturers Association ACEA, is well-known and highly respected Economic interest Grouping within the Europe. ACEA was established in 1991 with Brussels headquarters, Secretariat and Secretary General. Later ACEA also opened two other offices in Beijing and Tokyo even though the main purpose was to advocate the car manufacturers rights and interests on the highest European level possible. Today ACEA has significant importance and voice because it is gather 18 big and powerful car, truck and bus manufacturers such as BMW Group, GM Europe, Volkswagen, IVECO, Renault, Jaguarà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ The automotive industry itself is a vital part of European Union economy, the ACEA members alone contribute every year roughly 20 billion euros into research and development, claim 42.8 billion on net exports and deliver taxes on approximately 3.5% of the European Union GDP. Surprisingly for such a significant lobby group, the organization of the ACEA is quite simple. The main organ is the Board of directors. Each member of the directors board is also a CEO in a company, which is a member of ACEA. The board of directors is the decision-making organ and selects a President on an annual basis. Decisions are taken into force by the Joint Committee, which is represented by senior executives of the member companies. In the case of particular issues, there is also available a specialized Committee to discuss and help on the issues. Apart from these organs, there are also more than twenty specialized working groups working for the ACEA, who are responsible for technical expertise and advisory. Every member of the specialized working group is an expert in his field and works for the member company. The general and main purpose of ACEA is to be included in these activities with European Union: 1.To have a constant dialogue with European Union and all the other organizations influencing the automotive industry; 2.Cooperation with all the responsible and decision-making organs in order to offer the industry knowledge and expertise, which ACEA has. To provide relevant opinions and suggestions to the policy makers; 3.To provide valuable partnership within the whole organization as well as to offer partnership to other interdependent industries, in order to achieve the mutual beneficial policies; 4.To provide strategic reflection on the current and future completion within the industry and on corporate responsibility; 5.To communicate the importance and activities of the industry, also to communicate the acquired data, information and expertise. 6.To monitor all the activities and threats which might influence the industry and afterwards properly respond to them or cooperate with the stakeholders. 4.2. Analysis of real-life outcomes 4.2.1. The growing size of the group Taking a closer look at this groups evolution along the last decades, we conclude that its rate of growth in terms of size and influence has been staggering. Having as a predecessor the old CMCC (Comità © des Constructeurs du Marchà © Commun), founded in 1972 and consisting of seven members, the ACEAs number of members in 2005 was two times bigger. In September 2012, the organization comprised 18 different automobile manufacturers. What can explain this phenomenon? Since the CMCC times we can perceive this interest group as an umbrella association. This kind of groups provides resources and often an identity to the smaller organizations that are part of it. In this kind of arrangement, the umbrella organization is to some degree responsible for the groups under its care. Economies of scale, a better pool of experts and experience, shared apprenticeship and exchange of know-how are some factors that theoretically attract more groups, enhancing the ability for smaller organizations and companies to influence the politic-process in a legislation negotiation context. An important point is that it is harder for a single organization and also smaller lobby groups operating outside large established lobby groups to get their voice through in this matter. In practice, it is more often the ACEA that stands for the press-releases and statements in the media, but what the ACEA does do and say is a product of the discussions within the organization by smaller organizations within them; so, in that way the smaller companies grow in strength and enhance their ability to influence and compete in Brussels over this issue. By gathering and discussing the issue under one organization like ACEA, the organizations and companies get greater power in Brussels than if they would split up into 10-15 smaller organizations, so this means that representation is a mean for these organizations and companies to permeate the EU. We can almost consider this to be a kind of natural monopoly, in terms of the rights of representing the industries interests. This phenomenon confirms Olsons hypothesis of increasing size, influence and access to policy making, in respect to this special interest group. 4.2.2. The official position of the ACEA regarding CO2 emissions reduction Officially, according to its own institutional information, the ACEA agrees with the Commission that something has to be done about the CO2 emissions and they fully support the EU objective of reducing car emissions. But the ACEA believes that most of the burden within this situation has been placed on the car manufacturers. The ACEA calls for an integrated approach, which means that everybody has to do their part in order to reach the goals. The association wants the other elements (fuel industry, policy makers and car users) to take a larger part in lowering CO2 emissions. The integrated approach to lower CO2 emissions that the ACEA presents contains five components. The first one is vehicle technology which they themselves are responsible for. Then we have alternative fuels which need to be developed further with help from the fuel industry. The third component is consumer behavior, that we as consumers/drivers need to be educated in so-called Eco-driving, which in the long run saves 5-7% save in fuel consumption and therefore also in emissions. The fourth component is infrastructural measures concerning for instance traffic lights and the planning of roads in larger cities which often causes traffic jams. If steps could be taken to solve these infrastructural problems a lot of emissions would never occur. The last component concerns CO2-related taxation, which would stimulate buyers to choose fuel-efficient cars, if they cost less in taxes; and in this area the ACEA believes that the Commission has failed on their part of the agreement. To steer free from stricter car safety and emissions regulations, lobbyists have been stating and defending before the EU decision-makers that driving behavior, trees next to roads and other infrastructure are also very important factors. Important as they may be, these are matters which the European Parliament and other EU institutions have no power over as they are controlled at member state level. Therefore, bringing these topics to discussion at a EU level is fallacious and distorting the reality of the fact and, as we later expose, may contribute to the preservation of a certain status quo in the industry. Its important to bear in mind that the cars that yield the biggest profit to carmakers are the biggest ones in size SUVs and 44. Precisely the ones raising more concerns, due to their higher rates of CO2 emissions. 4.2.3. The 1998 ACEA-EC agreement In 1995 the European Council approved a community strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars to an average of 120gkm for newly registered cars by 2005, and at the latest by 2010. The ACEA agreement represented the first VA explicitly aimed at climate protection. Theoretically, this represented an ideal context for the use of this new policy instrument, as the basic conditions were in place: a strong euro car industry association a large share of the market, a level of trust between government and industry, and concern for the economic effects and competitiveness implications of regulations. The strategy was based in 3 policies: 1. A voluntary fuel economic agreement 2. A fiscal framework for member states 3. A fuel economy labeling scheme In 1998 a Voluntary agreement was reached between EC and ACEA under the terms of which the industry is committed to reduce average CO2 emissions figures from all cars to 140g/ by 2008. An intermediate target was set for 2003 at 170g/km. The negotiation was marked by an important democratic deficit: the process bypassed the EP, the only directly elected EU institution, and failed to ensure public participation NGO have only be consulted once during the years of negotiations. Because negotiations have been carried out behind closed doors, the danger of regulatory capture has been always present during the negotiations. This agreement also lacked monitoring, as until 2002 the only source of statistical data regarding ACEA progress concerning the goals was coming from car association sources, and an enforcement mechanism. Actually, the agreement didnt contain any enforcement mechanism it did not contain sanctions for non-compliance or measures to address the issue of internal free riders. The industry would effectively be its own watchdog. Given the highly competitive characteristics of the car industry, conditions for failure where perfectly reunited. Another interesting fact is the length of negotiations: the time span for conclusion was four years, in comparison to an average of two years, regarding the European voluntary agreements normal standards. The lack of a high level of technical capacity of the EC, in comparison with all the expertise from the ACEA side, adding to the lack of credible threats for the industry, left the EC negotiators at the mercy of the pure political bargaining. In this situation, the strength of such a strong interest group dictated the final outcome (figure 1). The content of the agreement was clearly outdated. The target of 140g/km was meant to bring about cars that would drive at 5 liters for 100km. However , recent OECD studies prove that a 50-80% improvement in fuel economy would be possible using existing technology at little extra cost over 10-15 years. In contrast , its impact would not even likely stabilize CO2 emissions from passenger cars at 1999 levels by 2010. Furthermore, the objective was not sufficiently ambitious to support a technological shift from the internal combustion engine towards lower emissions technologies such as electric or hybrid engines, not to mention hydrogen based fuel cells. Although these technologies were more or less close to commercial production, barriers of higher costs and lack of supportive infrastructure delayed their large scale development. The terms of the ACEA agreement were clearly not designed to support the introduction of much needed zero emission technologies, but to assist the continuation of the conventional car design. 4.2.4. The 21st century negotiations The voluntary agreement signed in 1998 set the deadline for the main goals accomplishment for the year 2008. However, that deal proved not to be the final one. The ACEA worked successfully to delay the date first until 2010 then until 2012. The association argued that the dates were not reasonable and its consequences, in times of economic crisis, would seriously harm the industry, with direct consequences on the employment level. Yet time has shown that most of their alarmist claims were not borne out in reality. In fact, many companies will meet the legal requirements even earlier than they have to According to European Commission official data, CO2 emissions from road transport increased by nearly 23% between 1990 and 2010, and without the economic downturn growth could have been even bigger. Transport was the only major sector in the EU where greenhouse gas emissions are still rising, being light-duty vehicles a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, producing around 15% of the EUs emissions of CO2. Since then, the EU has been putting in place a comprehensive legal framework to reduce CO2 emissions from new light duty vehicles as part of efforts to ensure it meets its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol and beyond. The legislation sets binding emission targets for new car and van fleets. For cars, manufacturers are obliged to ensure that their new car fleet does not emit more than an average of 130 grams of CO2 per kilometre (g CO2/Km) by 2015 and 95g by 2020.This compares with an average of almost 160g in 2007 and 135.7g in 2011. In fact, the new goal for 2015 was actually the original EC goal for 2012. Due to lobbying regarding the first voluntary agreement, the 120g of CO2 for 2012 turned into 130g by 2015. Recent studies prove that carmakers will reach these values well ahead of time. In July 2012, the Commission proposed legislation setting out the modalities for implementing the 2020 targets. The ACEA was a major player during this round of negotiations. Volkswagen, nowadays the most relevant member of the European automobile industry and the one that invests the most in lobbying (figure 2) has described the 95g legislative target as not based on sound impact assessment nor on a realistic appreciation of the costs and technical progress necessary to meet the goal within the timescale. A new loophole, inserted following lobbying by the ACEA, would undermine the overall fleet target. Instead of calculating average fleet emissions by adding up the emissions of every car and dividing by the number of cars, carmakers will be allowed to offset the most polluting cars against a smaller number of their cleanest cars. If this accounting trick makes it into the final law, carmakers will be able to sell more polluting cars, resulting in real average fleet emissions in excess of 95g CO2/km. At the same time, Greenpeace and several other pro-environment groups and parties call on the European Parliament and EU governments to lower the 2020 cars target to 80g CO2/km and to back a 2025 target of 60g CO2/km. Its a clear fact that efficiency standards reduce Europes need for expensive crude oil imports and drive down fuel bills for drivers. European drivers currently pay between à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬1,235 and à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬2,143 to fill their tanks every year. A 95g CO2/km target without loopholes would cut costs to between à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬962 and à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬1,665 by 2020, according to independent calculations. If EU governments decide to set a target of 60g CO2/km by 2025, fuel costs will drop further to between à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬494 and à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬863 by 2030. The new proposal must go through a long negotiation process between EU governments and the European Parliament before it can become law. Lobbying is likely to continue, with increasingly new arguments and strategies. For example, in 20th September 2012, VDA, a German automobile industry lobby controlled by the ACEA, proposed the possibility of getting bonus points for electric cars they have not actually sold, but to also allow car companies to bank CO2 credits. If the companies reduce their CO2 emissions more than required by 2015 they should receive a credit for this performance which should be used for underperformance in following years. After all, the Commission failed to propose any efficiency targets for 2025. Without this milestone, the rate of technological innovation could slow down in Europe, threatening the competitiveness of European cars on the global market. Europe is currently the global leader on vehicle efficiency, but the United States and China are catching up. The US has recently proposed its own 2025 target for carmakers embraced by thirteen global carmakers including BMW, Toyota and Hyundai curiously, not VW. 5. Conclusion According the Olsons theory, there are several types of interest groups, which we can basically divide into small and big interest groups. Generally sma

My magical visit :: essays research papers

My Magical Visit I remember the visit like it was yesterday. The year was 1990, and it was the month of June. I hadn’t been off for more than two weeks, and I was bored out of my mind. It really takes a lot to keep a seven year old busy. That’s when it happened. My dad told me that tomorrow we would be going to visit somewhere special. He told me that he also visited this place when he was a kid. I remember the night before we left, I couldn’t sleep at all.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  That somewhere special was his family’s summer home, which was located in Attica, New York. He said it was a real treat to go there, because he had lived in the city. His mother, who is my grandma, used to take the children there for weeks on end during the summer months. Now it was my turn. I finally got the opportunity to see why going out there was so special.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  To this day, I can still picture the car ride up there quite well. At that time my dad was driving in a white Ford Taurus. We were staying the weekend, so we each packed a bag with a couple of changes of clothes. We also packed some good food, because my dad and I love to eat. I can still remember my dad cranking up the radio, which was blasting out the tunes on Oldies 104. I also remember the warm summer breeze that was hitting my face as we rolled down the long country roads. Although it only took forty-five minutes to get there, I must have asked, â€Å"Are we there yet?† about five times. Finally my dad said that we would be there in a little less than five minutes. We turned right on Nesbit, which is the road where the house is located. The road was made of stones. I can still hear the stones shooting up against the wheel wells as the car roared down the road. Finally, we arrived at the summer home and pulled into the driveway.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The white house with red shutters that was set back about five acres. The house included two bathrooms, four bedrooms, a kitchen, and a dining room. There were also two giant pole barns that were located to the left of the house. Pine trees outlined the massive plot of land.

Edward II of England :: Essays Papers

Edward II of England Edward II was born in April 25, 1284 to the great King Edward I and Eleanor of Castille in Caernaven Caste in Wales. Edward II did not have a particularly happy childhood as he grew up under his overbearing father and in the absence of his mother. Edward II had three older brothers, two of which died in infancy and the third unexpectantly in adolescence. Thus, in 1307 Edward gained the throne of England and then married Isabella, daughter of Philip IV of France, in 1308 as a matter of convenience. Edward is said to be as much of a failure as king as his father was a success. Edward II’s contemporaries thought him to be an incompetent ruler. They claimed that the king had been led and ruled by others, who had advised him badly to his own dishonor, and to the destruction of the Church and of all his people. He and neither made any effort to see of find out what was good or bad, nor taken any steps to remedy the situation when requested to do so by the great and wise men of the kingdom. They also said that during all his reign, the king had been unwilling to take of believe good advice, and, instead of devoting his efforts to good government, he had spent all his time in unseemly pursuits, neglecting the affairs of the kingdom. Edward II possessed none of the chivalric qualities attributed to great men of his time. Edward had no interest in knightly exercises such as joust and tourney. Instead of spending time with nobility, he preferred to consort with singers, actors, oarsmen, diggers, etc., who shared his tastes. This failure to understand the importance of patronage lost him the trust of nobility as he turned to unsuitable favourites such as Piers Gaveston and the Despensers whom he had homosexual relations with. Because Edward did not care about his responsibilities as King, he appointed these men to handle his affairs. Gaveston assumed this position and behaved like a second king who was above everyone, and had no equal. He was accused of treason and executed. When the younger Despenser was later appointed, he too was accused of the same crimes, namely accroaching royal power and dignity and counseling the king badly.

How to Treat Prion Diseases Essay -- Medical Disease

How to Treat Prion Diseases Abstract Scientists are stumped as to the development and nature of proteinaceous infectious particles. Neither virus nor bacteria, these prions, are believed to cause transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE), rare diseases said to be 100% fatal, without possessing nucleic acids. Their unhindered growth is thought to be the cause for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or Mad Cow Disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob (CJD), scrapie and other TSE, diseases characterized by the brain microscopically turning into sponge-like matter. There are no cures or effective treatments available today because drawbacks constantly prevent the development of efficient therapy. Studies continue to slowly progress, hoping to find methods to immunize against more prion diseases. Problem No one presently has a solid understanding as to why TSE, or prion diseases, occur. The simple explanation is that PrP(c), the normal isoform of the prion protein, is forced to fold into PrPSc, the other pathological isoform, causing the misfolded PrP(c) to acquire protease-resistance. As to a physical presentation, a clumped protein consisting primarily of alpha-helices (spirals) is converted into one consisting primarily of beta-sheets (sets of pleated hairpins). In an essence, alpha-helical content decreases while beta-sheet content increases. The newly converted protein then possesses the same characteristics as those of the native PrPSc (Korth, Streit, & Oesch, 1999). PrPSc acquires partial protease resistance upon the transformation and passes this resistance along to the naturally protease-sensitive PrP(c). Protease is an enzyme that breaks down proteins or peptides, deeming the protease-sensitive proteins soluble; so during ... ...r to the fatal TSE. 8 b10 References Bainbridge, J., Jones, N., & Walker, B. (2004, May 12). Multiple antigenic peptides facilitate generation of anti-prion antibodies. Retrieved July 26, 2008, from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1809119# Graham, S. (2002, July 30). Common Antibiotic Saps Prions' Strength. Retrieved July 24, 2008, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=common-antibiotic-saps-pr Korth, C., Streit, P., & Oesch, B. (1999). Monoclonal Antibodies Specific for the Native, Disease-Associated Isoform of the Prion Protein. Methods in ENZYMOLOGY: , 309, 106-122 . Soto, C. (2006). Prions: The New Biology of Proteins. Taylor & Francis Group: CRC Press. Wong, K. (2001, August 14). Old Drugs Show New Promise in Combating Prion Diseases. Retrieved July 24, 2008, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=old-drugs-show-new-promis

Mmc 4200 Exam 2

MMC 4200-Spring 2012 Review Sheet for Second Exam Copyright ©2012 Prof. Sandra Chance Chapter 5- Privacy 1. Where did the right to privacy come from?Development of the 20th century and often traced back to an 1890 article in the Harvard Law Review written by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis who argued that advances in technology and the voyeurism of urban newspapers necessitated new legal protections for privacy.The right to privacy is protected by the U. S. Constitution. (The right to be let alone and free from unwarranted governmental intrusion.because â€Å"gossip had become a business,† argues that it was rooted in the individual's dignity in the law of copyright and trespassRight to privacy isn't in the Constitution, new added on expressed right2. What are the four torts of privacy?Private factsIntrusion: a physical or technological invasion of a person's privacyFalse light: public portrayal of someone in a distorted or fictionalized †¢ Appropriation: unauthorized commercial exploitation of someone's identity3. What are the elements for a private fact case?Publication o f a private matter that is: (1) highly offensive to a reasonable person, AND (2)is not of legitimate concern to the public. -TRUTH is not a defense. -Must be widely published. -publication of information that is â€Å"so intimate† and the publication of which is â€Å"so unwarranted† as to shock or â€Å"outrage the community's notions of decency†4. What are the defenses to a private fact case?†¢ First Amendment – Protects most truthful information lawfully acquired IF not highly offensive to a reasonable person and of legitimate concern to the public.†¢ Newsworthiness Public Records and Occurrences – Strange and Unusual? – Newsworthiness over Time†¢ Consent5. What are the elements of intrusion? – Reasonable expectation to privacy – Intentional invasion of a person's physical seclusion or private affairs – Highly offensive to a reasonable person – Physical, electronically or mechanical – Does not require publication, only information gathering a single person can be sued6. What is the general rule about filming, photographing and recording? – If it is in public there is am implied consent, if not in a public place consent is needed.Media personnel can photograph, film, and record what they easily see/hear in public places provided they do not harass, trespass or otherwise intrude – Public: street, parks – Quasi-public: prison, restaurant or a mall7. When is intrusive behavior typically found not to be highly offensive? – Expectation of privacy that you are in, in a place with high -more likely to be offensive (bedroom or hospital), lower- not typically highly offensive- applies to public figures as well – Obama's bedroom is as private as mine 8. What are the rules about secret recording (hidden cameras)?See Dietemann v. Time, Inc. – Hidden devices are indispensable tools of newsgathering (newsgathering) – In Florida it is unlawful to record without other parties, you have to obtain permission – Cannot audiotape without consent if they have a reasonable expectation of privacy in Florida9. What are the elements of a trespass? – Physical invasion of someone's property without the consent of the owner (physical) – Only defense is consent – Ex: Food Lion, went past where public is let in, weird meats being sold sued for the act of trespass but not the information required10.What is the defense of custom and usage? See Florida Publishing Co. v. Fletcher. -Custom and Usage, Florida one of the few. It is a defense for intrusion and trespass, public officials gave you implied consent – Firefighter letting photographer follow him11. What are the elements of a false light tort? See Cantrell v. Forest City Publishing Co. – Person Not identified – Portrayed in a false light – Harmed – Distortion: deleting elements, fictionalization: adding new elemen ts12. When must a plaintiff prove â€Å"actual malice† in a false light case? See Time, Inc. v. Hill. – Involved in a newsworthy13.What are the defenses for a false light case? What’s happening in Florida? Remember the Anderson case from our class discussion. – Truth, individual was not identified, privileged source, actual malice proof required by plaintiff, consent, not offensive to a reasonable person – Florida does not recognize false light only defamation14. What are the elements of appropriation? What’s happening in Florida? One who appropriates to his/her own use or benefit the name or likeness of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of privacy.Unauthorized commercial use of another's name or likeness.Protects a person’s property rightRight of publicity – Advertisements – Look Alikes and Sound AlikesDefenses – Newsworthiness? Zacchini v. Scripps? Howard Broadcasting Co. – Consent In Florida:Lawsuit over â€Å"Perfect Storm† filed by family members of William Tyne, captain of the Andrea Gail.Florida Supreme Court rules in favor of Warner Brothers.Florida Statute 540. 08 prevents the use of a person’s name or likeness to directly promote a product or service. Does not apply to publications, including motion pictures, which do not promote a product or service.15.What are your defenses if you get sued for appropriation? See Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard – Newsworthiness – Consent – Individual not identified – The First Amendment16. What are the elements for an emotional distress lawsuit? †¢ [pic]Conduct that atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized community, outrageous conduct by the media is thought to cause extreme anxiety (usually unsuccessful)17. What’s the difference between private figures and public official/figures suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress? See Hustler Magazine v. Fa lwell – Public figures have to prove actual malice18. What is participant monitoring? What is the law in Florida? How is this different from the federal law? – law permits one party to a conversation to record or transmit a conversation without telling the other party, law is less tolerant of third party members recording conversations than – must have consent – federal law and most states permit participant monitoring if not conducted for criminal purposes 19. Do reporters trespass when they misrepresent themselves to acquire information from public businesses? – FL no because of custom and usage, other states might be different20. When is the media responsible for physical harm, which results from incitement, negligence or lack of duty not to publish material due to foreseeable harm? – Only held liable for foreseeable harm and incitement (when programs or stories appear to cause physical harm- Bradenburg v. Ohio-Hitman Manual Chapter 7 â⠂¬â€œ Political Speech21. How do the speech rights of corporations differ from individuals? Do corporations have First Amendment rights to free speech? When can these rights be limited or restricted? See First National Bank of Boston v. Belotti and Pacific Gas & Electric v. Public Utilities Comm. – Corporations can be required to testify against themselves and have no right of privacy – Provide commercial information to consumers – Allowed to lobby government – Not required to carry messages they oppose22. What are the rules about corporations/individuals contributing to political campaigns? How did these change after Citizens United v. FEC? – Corporations can give unregulated expenditures to promote a candidate. They cannot give contributions because it is direct to the campaign.23. Are governmental regulations on corporate speech constitutional? See Buckley v. Valeo. Yes24. What is the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act? The Bipartisan Campaign Refor m Act of 2002 (BCRA) includes several provisions designed to end the use of nonfederal, or â€Å"soft money† (money raised outside the limits and prohibitions of federal campaign finance law) for activity affecting federal elections. These include: †¢ Prohibiting national parties from raising or spending nonfederal funds †¢ Requiring state, district and local party committees to fund certain â€Å"federal election activities† with federal funds (i. e. ard money) and, in some cases, with money raised according to new limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements (i. e. Levin funds), or with a combination of such funds. †¢ Limiting fundraising by federal and nonfederal candidates and officeholders on behalf of party committees, other candidates, and nonprofit organizations. Campaign reform act 1974 defined what corporate expenditures were and placed limitations on them. Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act put even more limiations on corporate expenditur es and when they could use money to pay for ads and limited whther they25.What is a PAC? -Political Action Committee26. What are the differences between expenditures and contributions, and why are these distinctions significant? – Contributions are gifts of money or services given directly to a candidate or campaign committee. The Supreme Court in Buckley, felt that limiting contributions helps prevent quid pro quo – Expenditures is money spent independently of candidates to advocate a company's position. This speech is considered â€Å"pure speech† and therefore is not restricted and limits on them are a direct restraint on political speech27. What are â€Å"electioneering† communications?28. What is express advocacy? – Express advocacy is directly promoting a candidate by using buzz words such as â€Å"Vote for__† or â€Å"Elect __†29. What provisions of the BCRA were upheld as constitutional by the U. S. Supreme Court in its Citize ns United v. FEC decision? – Preventing corporate and federal campaigns from making contributions directly to candidates was upheld as constitutional 10. What are the concerns raised by the Citizens United holding? What are the benefits of this decision? Concerns include â€Å"quid pro quo† or the idea that donating or supporting a candidate will require that candidate to help the supporter in the future. Dollars in exchange for votes – Instead of giving money to candidate, spending money on candidate Chapter 8 – Commercial Speech 1. How did the First Amendment protections for commercial speech evolve? See Valentine v. Chrestensen and New York Times v. Sullivan. – In Valentine v. Chrestensen, the supreme court ruled that commercial speech/advertisement feel outside of first amendment protected speech.The Valentine ruling was known as the â€Å"Commercial Speech Doctrine† In NYT v. Sullivan, the Supreme court said political advertisements, ev en if purchased, were still protected speech 2. What is the extent of First Amendment protection for commercial speech? Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council. The First Amendment protects 3. What â€Å"test† does a judge use in determining whether a regulation of advertising is an unconstitutional regulation because it violates the First Amendment? – The Four Part Test was created by Hudson Gas v.Public Service Commission – Is the speech commercial expression eligible for first amendment protection – Does the government have a substantial interest in regulating the expression – Does the regulation directly advance the governmental interest – Is the regulation narrow 4. Does the First Amendment protect false advertising? No 5. When are regulations (also known as â€Å"prior restraint†) permissible when it comes to advertising? What are some other differences between commercial and political speech? 6. W hat is the Central Hudson test and when is it used? The central Hudson test is the narrowly tailored requirement of the Four Part test. It is used to ensure that regulations on speech are the least restrictive possible. 7. What is the FTC? What does it regulate? Where does its authority come from? What powers does it have? – The Federal Trade Commission which operates and receives authority from the Federal Trade Commision Act of 1914. Its primary mission is to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive market practices and to promote competition. It has the power to hold investigations, require advertisers to verify the accuracy of advertising claims. 8. What is an unfair practice? Unfair practice, as described by Congress, is one that causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers which is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition. This is more likely to occur in customer treatmen t than advertisements 9. What is a deceptive ad – The FTC defines deceptive as one that is likely to mislead a reasonable consumer with a material statement or omission. Advertisements don’t necessarily have to deceive someone to be deceptive, they just must have a â€Å"tendency† â€Å"capacity† or be â€Å"likely† to mislead 0. What are express and implied falsehoods? – Express falsehoods are ones that that make a direct representation using the direct meanings of words. They directly state something that is untrue, such as â€Å"caffeine free† coffee that contains caffeine. Implied falsehoods are statements of omission in advertisements that create a false impression 11. What authorities can regulate advertising? – States can enact legislation that prohibits unfair acts or deceptive advertising. Federal government can regulate advertising 12. What is the FTC’s complaint process? Citizens or competitors can make compla ints.Citizens cannot sue through federal courts. Can only complain to FTC and hope the FTC takes action. 13. What is the Lanham Act and when is it used? – The Lanaham Act prevents people from advertising false or misleading information 14. What is RICO and when is it useful to stop misleading or deceptive advertising? – RICO is the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act which curbed organized crime's infiltration of businesses, preventing uses of interstate enterprise, and fraudulent use of telephones or mail to promote illegal practices 15. What’s happening with personal data collection?Websites, businesses, social media, like Facebook? – Personal data is being used for idenity theft 15. When are corporations required to report financial information? See SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. 16. What is the SEC? Where does it get its authority? What does it have authority over? – The SEC is the Securities and Exchanges Commision and it has authority over publicly traded corporations in the New York Stock Exchange, and the availability to the public of its information 17. What is Rule 10(b)? What does it prohibit? How does it define fraud? See SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. Rule 10b-5 prevents insider trading, or making decisions to sell or buy stock based on information that is not available to the public 18. What is â€Å"insider trading† and what are the penalties for insider trading? See SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. – Insider training is buying or selling securities based on nonpublic corporate information 19. What does â€Å"tipping,† â€Å"tipper† and â€Å"tippee† mean? See SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. – Tipping- passing non public material onto friends or brokers so they can trade – Tipper- A person who passes on the nonpublic material Tippee: a person who receives an insider tip and makes a securities trade based on the information Important Cases: Chap. 5-Priv acy Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn Court established nearly complete First Amendment protection for the media to report information from official records available in open court when a Georgia father couldn't bring a privacy suit against a TV station for naming his daughter violating a Georgia statute (broadcast of a rape victim a misdemeanor) Supreme Court said â€Å"the First Amendment does not permit a privacy suit against the media for disseminating private information contained in public records† Florida Star v.BJF. Court said the First Amendment protects publication of lawfully acquired truthful information about a matter of public importance unless prohibiting publication will further a state interest â€Å"of highest order† -weighed individually, after Court reversed a judgment of Jacksonville newspaper publishing the full name of BJF rape victim, Florida Star acquired it from a gov. news release. S. Court reversed because it was a violent crime of paramount im portance Florida v.Globe Communications, Inc. Florida law was unconstitutional â€Å"that it was unconstitutional to publish the name of a victim of a sexual offense† because it was overly broad Cape Publishing, Inc. v. Bridges public exposure in an event involving a suicide, threatened murder, and police was of legitimate public interest, the court said, just as other crimes, arrests, police raids, accidents, and fires are of public interest Dietemann v. Time, Inc.US Court of Appeals ruled Dietman, a quack doctor, could collect damages from Time, Inc. for invasion of his privacy by two Life magazine employees who secretly photographed the doctor at his house as he waved a wand over bottles of body tissue and rubbed what he said was the cancerous breast of the other journalist, transmitter in journalist's purse went to a police car, awarded Dietman because it was in a private place Hustler Magazine v. FalwellFalwell sued for libel, invasion of privacy, and intentional inflict ion of emotional distress. Supreme Court reversed because an outrageous standard of liability is constitutional because it is too subjective and would punish the publishers’ motives, ad did not contain actual facts, or actual events therefore it was so outrageous it could be true, lost defamation, won emotional distress in court of appeals, then supreme court reversed it. Zacchini v. Scripps Howard Broadcasting Co.Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not bar a human cannonball from pursuing a publicity suit under Ohio law against a television station that broadcast his entire act during a news program, Supreme Court called it â€Å"professional property† media lost Cantrell v. Forest City Publishing Co. Margret Cantrell sued for invasion of privacy because she was in false light due to a story by a reporter's deliberate falsifications that implied she was interviewed, claiming he had an interview with her, Supreme Court ruled there was NYT actual malice whe n the reporter falsified the information Fla. Publishing Co. v. Fletcher tate supreme court ruled that a Florida Times Union photographer didn't trespass when he accompanied firefighters into a private home after a major fire that killed a 17-yr old, Cindy Fletcher and published a picture of her body outline, but Court said the photographer was invited in by fire officials so there was an implied consent—legal influence is limited to Florida cases involving catastrophes Time, Inc. v. Hill family sued saying they had been portrayed in false light during a play that was recreated of their hostage situation, won lower court, Supreme Court said if it's a newsworthy issue must prove actual malice Anderson v.Pensacola News Journal (class discussion) Anderson was a political figure, him and wife going through divorce and went on a hunting trip, accidentally killed her. Portrayed in false light by the newspaper made him look like murder, won in lower courts, Florida supreme court doe s not recognize false light â€Å"it duplicates existing torts without the attendant protections of the first amendment, instead they do defamation† can't claim false light in Florida. Braun v.Soldier of Fortune Soldier of Fortune negligently published an advertisement that resulted in the death of Richard Braun, killer hired after he placed an ad â€Å"Gun for Hire† Court ruled that Fortune violated a public duty not to publish a clearly identifiable unreasonable risk of harm, ruling did not violate first amendment because publisher did not check danger and legality of advertisement-foreseeable harms? media responsible Chap. 7 – Political Speech Buckley v.Valeo Court said the concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment† upheld the federal law that sets limits on campaign contributions but ruled that spending money to influence elec tions is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, made distinction on contribution limits from expenditure limits, BUT part of the law was struck down.First National Bank of Boston v. Belotti bank wanted to buy ads opposing an income tax, law said that they couldn't publish it because it hadn't nothing to with the bank's business, Supreme Court created an almost unlimited First Amendment freedom for non-media corporations to spend money to support social issues—founded on the right of citizens to receive political speech by corporations Pacific Gas & Electric v. Public Utilities Comm.Supreme Court ruled that Pacific Gas could not be forced to include a newsletter from a consumer group in the company's billing envelope, unconstitutional for the commission to force them to publish messages they don't agree with Citizens United v. FEC overturned 100 years of laws and regulations, rejected quid pro quo (corruption) the distortion (level playing field-wealthy skewing mark etplace of ideas) case based on Hilary movie made by non-profit Citizens United, filed an injunction to stop Election Committee from applying BCRA, injuction denied, Supreme Court overturned sayingChap. 8 – Commercial Speech Valentine v. Chrestensen passing out handbills, statute in NY prohibiting passing out handbills , city arrested him, Supreme Court ruled NY could stop distribution because it was purely commercial advertising that fell outside first amendment protection, 1976 Virginia Pharmacy established protection for purely commercial advertisers Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v.Virginia Citizens Consumer Council law against publishing prices, citizens have first amendment right to receive and publish information Central Hudson Gas & Electric v. Public Service Court upheld utility's right to promote the use of electricity Kasky v. Nike Nike accused of sweatshops, sent out a press release, sued, Nike lost because they sent out misleading information not protected by t he First Amendment SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. ompany issued press release to damper fears about large copper deposits, 12 days later hit huge deposit, insiders bought and sold stock Exam Review Know implied falsehood vs expressed falsehood. Expressed-written or said Implied-the ad itself implies that the product can do something it really can’t do. When can RICO be applied? When there is overwhelming corruption. People are being swindled In Florida no false lighthood because it’s so similar to defamation. False light DOES NOT exist.