Suchergebnisse

News of the insolvency of Overend, Gurney, & Company on 10 May 1866 generated a scramble for funds in the City of London and urgent appeals to the Bank of England. The banking panic triggered by the collapse of the prominent British discount house became one of the Bank's most tumultuous modern crises. This article investigates the politics of the Bank's liquidity provision during the 1866 crisis, and in the ensuing months of financial stringency. By assessing the correspondence, speeches, and publications of Governors, City figures, and financial journalists, the article finds that the Bank's evolving approach to crisis lending was decisively shaped by its commercial objectives and a prolonged struggle to preserve its autonomy. When confronted with the 1866 crisis, the Bank adopted a pragmatic stance towards the market, which accommodated the credit needs of the City without sacrificing either its privileged legal status or its shareholders' interests. Its Governors' rhetorical pursuit of 'constructive ambiguity' during the post-crisis months succeeded in both limiting moral hazard and consolidating the Bank's discretionary powers.

WELFARE REFORM DID NOT USHER IN COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAID REFORM, IF "REFORM" IS DEFINED AS DISMANTLING THE BASIC FRAMEWORK OR DESIGN OF THE NATION'S HEALTH-CARE SYSTEM FOR THE POOR. INSTEAD, IT LEFT MUCH OF THE PREVIOUS MEDICAID SYSTEM INTACT. HOWEVER, WELFARE REFORM HAS CONTRIBUTED TO CHANGES IN THE MEDICAID-ELIGIBLE POPULATIONS, GREATER VARIABILITY AND EXPERIMENTATION WITH STATE MEDICAID INITIATIVES, AND GREATER STATE CONTROL OVER MEDICAID PROGRAM DECISIONS. THUS, THE WELFARE-REFORM MOVEMENT CLARIFIED A MAJOR TREND IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN POLITICS--THE INCREASE IN STATE DISCRETION AND FLEXIBILITY IN SOCIAL WELFARE POLICYMAKING. THE STATES ARE NOW AT THE CENTER OF MEDICAID DECISIONMAKING, AND THEY ARE IN A KEY POSITION TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE DIRECTION OF HEALTH-CARE ASSISTANCE FOR THE POOR IN THE UNITED STATES.

Although the scientific community attests a "renaissance" (Bank 2009) of authoritarianism political science has no focus on the research field of gender and authoritarianism yet. The strengthening of authoritarianism research within political science is mostly located in comparative politics and regional studies. But most recent studies on authoritarian regimes do not focus on gender questions explicitly. This review gives a structured overview on recent literature on authoritarianism and gender and focusses on recent theoretical approaches to authoritarianism and authoritarian regimes. Furthermore interesting policies within a gender perspective and how they are looked upon in mainstream and feminist political science and in part recent historical research as well will be described: state formation and gender; political rights, suffrage rights and women's rights activism; women's representation; social hierarchies and social processes; family policy, the role of domestic violence and abortion rights as measuring degrees of women's autonomy and eventually the socio-economic gender orders.

Distinguishes between 'apparent' and 'actual' gubernatorial impact. It is very clear that governors are in a position today to affect the future direction of policy. Developments within the health care system itself have opened up unprecedented opportunities. (SJK)