Suchergebnisse

Converse contended that the ideological disorganization, attitudinal inconsistency, & limited information of American voters make them a politically disengaged mass, not a responsible electorate. I illustrate the shortcomings of Converse's line of reasoning by showing that he misread his two most prominent examples of the electoral consequences of his theory: voting on the Vietnam War in the 1968 New Hampshire primary, & public opinion about the 1948 Taft-Hartley Act. In both cases, voters were better able to sort candidates & policies than Converse reported, despite their lack of ideological sophistication or their knowledge of specific legislation. Converse's interpretive errors here stem from mistaken assumptions about information processing & recall, & from questionable normative standards about what constitute meaningful & competent political orientation. His criteria underestimate the public's ability to make responsible choices, & the effect of campaigns on the choosing process. Tables. Adapted from the source document.

The relevance of the article is due to the fact that not enough attention is being paid in the scientific and educational legal literature to the problems of administrative conviction, and therefore the questions about its main features and definition remain debatable. The purpose of the article is to find out the essence of administrative conviction. Systematic and historical approaches, methods of analysis and synthesis, comparative method, method of expert assessments were used in the process of realization of this goal. Informational basis of the article are literary sources, Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, the law "On the National Police". An analysis of the first in the post-Soviet legal literature serious attempt to find out about the features of administrative persuasion has been made. As part of this analysis: 1) it has been shown that the provisions under which: a) the application of an administrative conviction is a monopoly of public authorities; b) administrative conviction is not linked to individual influence; 2) the contradiction between the Ukrainian legislation and the allegations in the legal literature has been pointed out, and it has been confirmed that the factual basis of the administrative conviction is always absent and that its application does not have a regulatory framework; 3) it has been suggested that under the current conditions the primacy of persuasion over coercion should be regarded not as a feature of administrative persuasion but as a desirable tendency for the development of this institution; 4) it has been considered as appropriate to include in the range of features of administrative conviction that: a) it is a universal method of public administration; b) subordination of its influence is voluntary; c) it is a means of preventing and averting an offense Criticism of the view that administrative conviction includes encouragement has been supported. It has been concluded that the administrative conviction is a universal method of public administration, which ...

"List of experts and their qualifications": p. 173-174 ; At head of title: National labor relations board, Division of economic research ; Mode of access: Internet.

Claims of factuality are assertions that rest on effective performance. What constitutes a good performance may vary culturally and according to social context. A comparative perspective, moreover, shows that distinctions between fact and judgment may not be universally clear and may themselves be culturally determined, but that inserting our own claims to factual precision into that perspective strengthens rather than weakens them because it broadens the empirical basis of assessment.

As a government attorney defending economic legislation from a constitutional challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment—How would you rate your chances of success? Surely excellent. After all, hornbook constitutional law requires only the assembly of a flimsy underlying factual record for economic legislation to pass rational basis review. But the recent uptick in courts questioning the credibility of legislative records might give pause to your optimism. As a growing body of scholarship has identified, the Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals increasingly invalidate laws under rational basis review despite the presence of an otherwise constitutionally sufficient legislative record. Under this "credibility-questioning" rational basis review, courts both ignore post hoc rationales that would legitimate a government interest and scrutinize the fit between the challenged statute's means and ends. Nevertheless, recent scholarship has overlooked why courts have, and should, engage in credibility-questioning rational basis review, particularly of economic legislation. This Note proposes an answer: Courts should apply credibilityquestioning rational basis review to economic legislation that (1) impedes liberty interests central to personhood, (2) burdens politically unpopular minority groups, or (3) benefits concentrated interest groups at the expense of diffuse majorities.