У статті аналізується сутність поняття «політична партія» в філософському, юридичному і політологічному контекстах. Розглядаються історичні умови і механізм виникнення та розвитку політичних партій. Проаналізовано основні типи регенерації політичних партій. Особливу увагу приділено дослідженню функціональ- ної системи політичних партій. ; Problem setting. In societies with diverse structured interests, there is a need for stable communication channels between civil society and government institutions. These channels are formed through the activities of pressure groups, lobbyists, and especially political parties.Recent research and publications analysis. The scientific literature discusses widely the problems of political parties. They are at the center of attention of well-known scholars (L. I. Adachis, O. Yu. Boyko, L. M. Dunaev, J.-F. Dupré, B. Farrer, A. Gauja, J. Green,K. Jacobs, R. Jahan, W. Jennings, B. A. Isaev, R. Madinier, N. Miragliotta, A. I. Pashuk,M. V. Primush, O. I. Semkiv, V. M. Skrypinyuk, R. Smith, N. Spierings, O. S. Statsenko,G. M. Svita, etc.).Paper objective. The article analyzes the essence of a political party in a philosophical, legal and political context. The article aims to provide a theoretical and methodological analysis of the concept of «political party», to consider the historical conditions and mechanism of the emergence and development of political parties, to analyze their func- tional system.Paper main body. What is a political party in the modern sense? Lawyers believe that«a political party is an active and organized part of a society that is united by common interests, goals or ideals and tries to seize state power or significantly influence its imple- mentation». Philosophers see in political parties «the main organizational forms of the associative political life of society, which represent interests, views, cultural accounting, the social situation of various layers and social groups of the social whole». Often, po- litical scientists find out the party as a «specialized, organizationally organized group that combines the most active adherents of those or other purposes (ideologies, leaders) and serves to fight for the seizure and use of political power». For this, the party must become a ruling, that is, to take a position in the political system that enables to determine the policy of the state.In the scientific literature, the first regeneration of parties is usually called «created from the inside». This means that they were formed within the parliament by factions formed on the basis of common interests. The classic examples of such formations are the conser- vative parties of Scandinavia and Great Britain. Historically, such parties performed the representation of traditional elites – the court nobility, the aristocracy. Initially created on an informal basis, they felt the need to expand the electoral base when the transition to universal suffrage began to take place. This was implemented, and in the period from 1900 to 1990, the Conservative Party of Great Britain, for example, ruled the country (either one or coalition) altogether for 60 years. The second regeneration of parties is called «created from the outside». They arose due to the demands of parliamentary rep- resentation by those social groups, which were firstly excluded or insufficiently repre- sented in parliament. The most striking example of this kind of parties is the workers' and socialist parties, which were everywhere created on the verge of the XIX–XX centuries. Later, outside the walls of parliaments, communist and nationalist parties were created, which demanded no reforms, but the complete destruction of the socio-political system that existed. In our time, the «green» party, which is immensely popular among young people and well-educated people, also arises without the participation of parliaments.Functions of political parties – the essence of the main aspects or directions of theiractivities, which are determined by the goals and tasks that face them. Among these func- tions, the following are usually singled out: 1) the initial function of the party, which characterizes its connection with certain social strata and classes, is the function of rep- resentation of interests; 2) the central point of the activities of any political party – the development of a policy course aimed at solving problems existing in society; 3) the func- tion of recruiting new members, educating activists, mobilizing voters in support of partycandidates; in the literature it is indicated that political parties are, for the most part, objects of strong emotional attachment or rejection; 4) the function of the party's partici- pation in the formation and control of the activities of state authorities; parties serve as the main mechanism through which candidates for public office at all levels are trained and selected; 5) the presence of political parties, their participation in elections of state bodies allows peaceful resolution of social conflicts; 6) in the conditions of formation or strengthening of statehood, political parties often perform the function of national integra- tion; 7) almost all aspects of the activities of any party permeate the ideological and edu- cational function; 8) political parties realize the communicative function necessary for the democratic exercise of state power.Conclusions of the research. Political parties are one of the main institutions of the political system. As subjects of the formation of power relations, they largely determine the nature and direction of the political process, strategy and tactics of the struggle for power, political stability of society. ; В статье анализируется сущность понятия «политическая партия» в фило- софском, юридическом и политологическом контексте. Рассматриваются исто- рические условия и механизм возникновения и развития политических партий. Про- анализированы основные типы регенерации политических партий. Особое внимание уделено исследованию функциональной системы политических партий.
By their very nature, constitutions are intergenerational documents. With rare exceptions, they are meant to endure for many generations. They establish the basic institutions of government, enshrine the fundamental values of a people, and place certain questions beyond the reach of simple majorities. Constitutions, especially written ones, are often intentionally made difficult to modify.Inevitably, constitutions raise important questions of intergenerational justice. When one generation enshrines its values in a constitution, and makes it difficult to amend the constitution, does it deprive future generations of the sovereignty each generation should be able to exercise? It might well not make a difference if those future generations share the values of their ancestors, but what if they do not? What if future generations see some important provisions of the constitution as not merely inconvenient, but as morally wrong, or even as a threat to their well-being? Of course, if enough people share this view, the constitution can be changed – but what if the division falls short of the supermajority needed to amend the constitution?This is the dilemma created by constitutions, particularly written constitutions which require supermajorities to alter their provisions. In our judgment there is no perfect solution to this dilemma. Rather, every solution represents a balancing of interests and risks.On the one hand, constitutions are valuable precisely because they remove some questions from the hands of electoral majorities. The institutions of government and the basic rights of individuals and communities are among the matters commonly protected by constitutions against the impact of day-to-day politics. Future generations benefit to the extent that constitutions establish just and stable institutions which can adapt and change peacefully to changing needs and circumstances.On the other hand, constitutions, like people, can age poorly. The values enshrined in a nation's constitution can be ethically wrong when adopted (for example, the protection of the slave trade written into the U.S. Constitution). Time can also demonstrate that some provisions of a constitution are unwise. Technological change may also alter the effects of some provisions. (Consider the difference between the right to bear a 1790 firearm, and the right to bear an automatic weapon in 2010.) And the values of a people can change, too. To some extent, all of these sources of discontent with a nation's constitution may be inevitable. The framers of a nation's constitution are not all-wise and all-seeing, and even if they were, the constitution that fits a nation in its youth may be quite different from that which fits it two centuries later. The question, then, is how future generations can adapt to their constitution, and how they can adapt their constitution to their needs.This, in essence, is the problem we posed to the authors who submitted articles for this issue of the Intergenerational Justice Review. How do you balance the importance of placing some questions beyond the control of a simple majority in a written constitution, with the need to preserve for future generations the ability to adapt it to their changing needs? The answers our authors give in this issue of the IGJR vary. Two of them take as their starting point the disagreement between Thomas Jefferson and James Madison concerning the desirability of revising the U.S. Constitution every generation; and another addresses those concerns in the concluding section.Iñigo González-Ricoy's opening article focuses on the legitimacy of constitutional provisions aimed at advancing future generations' interests. He argues that the dilemma of future generations being constrained by the choices of their ancestors can be reduced considerably, at least with respect to those constitutional provisions that seek to advance the needs and interests of future generations. Legitimacy concerns may be addressed further through the use of sunset clauses and regular constitutional conventions.Our second article, by Shai Agmon, argues that Jefferson's proposal that a constitution be re-authorised every 19 years is unsatisfactory because it fails to fulfil its own normative aspirations. It produces two groups of people who will end up living under laws to which they did not give their consent: (a) citizens who reach the voting age after the re-enactment process; (b) citizens who did not assent to being obliged by the majority vote's results. In Agmon's view, the existence of significant numbers of citizens who have not consented to the laws undermines any consent-based rationale for adopting a Jeffersonian approach.In our closing article, Michael Rose rejects the Jeffersonian argument that the self-determination of future generations is impeded by lasting constitutions. Rather, he argues that a demand for future generations' full self-determination is both self-contradictory, and impossible to achieve. Instead, we should employ an attitude of "reflective paternalism" towards future generations by introducing their interests into today's decision-making process, and by ensuring that the constitution itself provides for democratic self-determination.No doubt, more research is needed on the best ways to incorporate protections for the rights and interests of future generations into constitutions. Future research should also examine how the lessons we have learned from trying to protect the environment can be applied to the circumstances of future generations. The goal is a very practical one: to discover what constitutional provisions can best protect the rights of future generations.Bruce Auerbach (Albright College)Antony Mason (IF)Markus Rutsche (University of St. Gallen)Jörg Tremmel (University of Tübingen)
The article is devoted to researching of the book, which wittily called "Nomenclature Kamasutra: office romancein Brezhnev period". This is the memories, written by S.D.Bezclubenko – the former minister of culture in Soviet Ukraine.S.B.Rudenko analyzed views of Bezclubenko on such qualities of politicians in Soviet Union as the professionalism, their intellectual level, moral values. Under review were also struggle for power between partocrats, patterns of development career of bosses of nomenclatura, features of these processes in Ukraine. Rudenko compares the research results S.D.Bezklubenko and other researchers nomenclatura: M.S.Voslenski and M.Đilas. For all, who interesting in soviet political culture.Scientific study of political culture of the Soviet era is of practical importance because modern Ukrainian politicscarries a lot of genetic traits that time. Research interest primarily is political culture of USSR rulers – nomenclatura.There are insufficient number of lack of papers devoted to this topic. The system of government in the Soviet Union was a very closed. That is why an important role among sources of research plays memoirs of representatives ofnomenclatura. One of these sources of research is "Nomenclature Kamasutra." written by Bezclubenko.The central concept of the study is the "nomenclature". The author of "Nomenclature Kamasutra." gives the following definition of this term: selection of personnel for executive positions among party bosses, what based oncompiling a list of the names of certain positions and names of people who were considered as candidates for their filling.Each party organ had a level of "nomenclature", which in turn also divided into "main nomenclature" (the nomenclature of the party organ, which took the decision to appoint) and "accounting and control nomenclature" (the nomenclature of the higher party organ, who has consented to the appointment).Based on the concept of M.Đilas, developed in the works M.S.Voslenski [3], the nomenclature is the ruling classin the countries of "real socialism", which in essence was industrial and corporative feudalism (non state capitalism).Nomenclature is not the same bureaucracy. This is a social class such as medieval nobility. It penetrated all spheres of public life and delegates powers exclusively own representatives. The nomenclature as social class can not be equated with almost 18 million members of the Communist Party in the early 80's of the twentieth century.Dramaturgy memoir built around the opposition between Bezclubenko, the head of the ministry of Culture of Soviet Ukraine, and his curator from Central committee of Communist party of Ukraine Kapto. This conflict displaysarsenal of methods of political struggle, characterizing nomenclature environment. Kapto was a zealous defender ofpolitical culture of the nomenclature. Bezklubenko many decisions was taken at its sole discretion (within the powers of minister), without coordination with his immediate boss party Kapto, in violation of unshakable hierarchy of soviet power.Note the following realities of the political culture of the Soviet rulers. Because personnel decisions are the prerogative of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, in the apparatus of the Ministry of Culture were introduced people who worked against the minister and performed the orders of Kapto. Important role in the struggle between the Minister and partocrat played the Soviet secret police – the KGB. Herewith relations with the KGB used as one, and the other party to the conflict.Bezklubenko with undisguised contempt belonged to his boss Kapto. In his opinion Kapto was uncultured, ignorant and not clever person. At the same time, among soviet "nobility" considered the norm to zealous attitude to theguidance, despite its moral, intellectual and professional qualities, always shew him respect. Bezklubenko thought that business skills are fundamental to the effective management. But for political culture of the nomenclature most important quality was loyalty to their social class. The permanent struggle for power was the essence of its existence.Minister Bezklubenko had very strong position at the highest level of the Communist Party of Ukraine. This isevidenced by the inclusion of the Minister to the honorary electoral nomenclature – Central Committee and Parliament of Ukraine. Political friends of Bezklubenko were, in particular, Prodan and Vrublevski assistants of the first Secretary Shcherbytsky , second Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine Sokolov. Loyal to the minister was, credibly, Shcherbytsky. Perhaps, the first Secretary was impressed professionalism and fought of rebellious Bezclubenko. But, conflict between veiws on the political culture of Bezklubenko, and version of political culture of the nomenclature as social class , was obvious. Therefore, when Vrublevsky had lost confidence in the Minister of Culture, discrepancy political culture of nomenclature was the reason for dismissal from the post of Bezklubenko.Тhе book of Bezclubenko "Nomenclature Kamasutra. Office Romance in Brezhnev period " is a valuable sourcefor the study of political culture in Soviet Ukraine in 60-80 years of XX century. Despite the fact that the author notconsidering the nomenclature as class, however, clearly reveals specificity of political management of soviet chiefs.Using specific examples, he shows the parasitic nature of nomenclature, disdain of professionalism in their environment of professionalism, trampling of rule of Law, mimicry of democracy, obsession own career interests, communication like in the mafia among the nomenclature bosses. ; Исследование номенклатуры как советского правящего класса имеет практическое значение, так как современная власть в бывших советских республиках имеет выраженный номенклатурный субстрат. Освещена теневая сторона политической культуры советских партийных боссов сквозь призму мемуаров С.Д. Безклубенко. В соответствии с результатами исследования раскрыта паразитическая сущность номенклатуры, выявлены её скрытые корпоративные черты, в частности приоритет карьеризма и подхалимства над профессионализмом, пренебрежение законами, профанация демократии, мафиозный характер коммуникаций в среде партийных бонз. ; Стаття присвячена мемуарам колишнього міністра культури УРСР С.Д. Безклубенка, в яких, зокрема, йдеться про політичну культуру радянської номенклатури. Здійснено аналіз поглядів автора на професійні, інтелектуальні, моральні якості радянських політиків, особливості перебігу боротьби між ними за владу, закономірності розвитку номенклатурної кар'єри. Для всіх, хто цікавиться історією політичної культури в Україні.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
One reason the nearly-now-concluded 2024 First Extraordinary Session of the Louisiana Legislature failed was Republican Gov. Jeff Landry and the GOP-supermajority in each legislative chamber scored an own goal in congressional reapportionment that, instead of ending litigation, only will increase it with them in a weaker position.
The main reason for the session Landry stated as congressional reapportionment, in response to a Middle District of Louisiana court case where, at present, the presiding judge said that unless the state acted to change its current distribution of one-out-of-six majority-minority districts, in a state where the population is about a third identifying as black, a trial on the merits of the existing map would occur and likely end with the judge voiding it and imposing her own plan. That configuration likely would have followed closely the preferred plan of the special interest plaintiffs which would have created districts more in violation of traditional principles of reapportionment than any from the past 30 years which almost certainly would see GOP Rep. Julia Letlow ousted in favor of a black Democrat.
Landry and his two main water carriers for his plan SB 8, its author Republican state Sen. Glen Womack and House and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Beau Beaullieu, surrendered to this viewpoint of judicial inevitability. Braying over and over that it would be better to pick their own poison, SB 8 capitulated to the two M/M scheme but instead reconfigured districts to put Republican Rep. Garret Graves at risk, who is on the outs with Landry by working behind the scenes to put up an opponent against him in last year's election and with other members of the state's GOP congressional delegation because he worked against the eventual process that brought on a Louisiana Speaker of the House.
They and the GOP majorities that passed SB 8 didn't need to do any of this: with at least two contestable avenues that could have had higher courts overturn the extant ruling – that the basis of that decision was ripe for reversal because of the Kavanaugh concurrence, which the state actually is employing to defend itself in a similar suit concerning the state's legislative districts, and because of circuit court disagreements, one of which came from the Fifth Circuit's handling of the case about the use of a private right of action. Indeed, there wasn't even an imperative under law, despite the assertions of Landry, Womack, and Beaullieu as well as legislative Democrats and the plaintiffs, to create two M/M districts, as not only does Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act instruct that it does not require the proportion of M/M seats to match roughly the racial distribution of the population, but also as no court in the country has ruled that a plan that didn't create roughly equal proportions had to do that, with the operative language from a panel of Alabama-based circuit and district judges used to date as the judicial guidepost for cases like Louisiana's reading "any remedial plan will need to include two districts in which Black[sic] voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it" (emphasis added).
But they did it. This leaves the ball in the court of the plaintiffs, who can decide to accept the plan and dismiss the case, or if they don't then the court likely steams ahead by bringing into effect by fiat their desired plan anyway and neuters the entire effort by the majority of Republicans.
However, if the plaintiffs do accept, then the 2024 boundaries become that plan, and the GOP gives away a seat to Democrats, even if contested by a private party, for the same reason the current boundaries otherwise would have stayed in place if left unchanged: the judiciary is reluctant to alter electoral boundaries through litigation too close to an election. Basically, by this action Landry et al. gave away a congressional seat for Democrats in 2024, as opposed to if they had they passed a plan with a single M/M district and another opportunity district – one that has a plurality-minority population distribution which is the "something quite close to it" – or with two opportunity districts, as HB 14 by Republican state Rep. Mike Echols offered. In that instance, Republicans could have had a shot at winning one or both districts.
Of course, the plaintiffs would have turned that one down. But that then would have led to the state challenging the subsequent imposed map, and on the basis of the Kavanaugh concurrence and no private right of action where the former stands a decent chance of prevailing, that would have overturned the plaintiffs' victory. And this likely would have happened in 2025, keeping the additional Republican district. Yet Landry and most of the members of the GOP legislative party stubbornly asserted that the district court's ruling was sacrosanct, set in stone, and had to be followed.
And, not only did the GOP throw away this possibility of an eventual ruling on the merits preserving the current map, the SB 8 map created itself likely is unconstitutional. That was drilled home in testimony to members of H&GA by Paul Hurd, the lawyer who actually was involved in early 1990s legal actions that ended up twice invalidating Louisiana plans where race unconstitutionally played too large of a role in mapping. He estimated that the new M/M district was about 90 percent similar to the one struck down, and similarly infirm.
Expect if the plaintiffs accept the new map for a challenge to it to come on the same basis – don't be surprised if allies of Graves are involved – and succeed, although it likely would mean a 2024 cycle under SB 8. If by then another challenge from somewhere else springs successfully the Kavanaugh concurrence, that would invite the GOP Legislature to remap again back to a single M/M – although this possibility itself is a little uncertain because of the evolving jurisprudence around the concept of "retrogression," or drawing fewer M/M districts than existed before and whether that is constitutionally permissible.
Keep in mind, however, that the state has handcuffed itself in restoring a single M/M map because of the result of the session, and in fact put itself in the absurd position of a GOP governor, attorney general, and Legislature defending a map putting their party at a disadvantage. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs have a decision to make: take a two M/M map even if not their preferred and much like one previously declared unconstitutional for at least one cycle but hope it survives, or turn it down to suffer a one M/M map in 2024 but roll the dice that the Kavanaugh concurrence doesn't flip the previous decision and they get their preferred two M/M map in 2026.
In summary, absent a desire to ensure Graves rather than Letlow was put at risk even as either being put at risk was far from certain under the current plan or HB 14, there was no good reason for the GOP governor and legislative majorities to give away a congressional district to Democrats as early as 2024. Forcing a court's two M/M plan imposition in fact would have increased the chances that map would be overturned eventually, compared to forging ahead with a constitutionally-questionable volunteered two M/M plan that may get rejected anyway.
Unless the plot all along was to offer up an infirmed plan ripe for ruin as a way to buy time to the jurisprudential landscape to shift, but that gives away 2024 and is riskier than outright resistance. If so, it was a reckless brinksmanship with a result at present that should discourage conservatives' hopes for propagation of their agenda in Louisiana that they thought was a slam dunk to come into fruition over the next four years.
"So isser, der Ossi" titelte Der Spiegel am 25.8.2019. Nur vier Tage später erschien in der New York Times ein Artikel von Anna Sauerbrey mit dem Titel "30 Years After Reunification, Germany Is Still Two Countries". Hierdurch wird beispielhaft dargestellt, dass im dreißigsten Jahr nach dem Mauerfall deutsche BürgerInnen weiterhin in Ossis und Wessis unterteilt werden und die anscheinend mangelhafte deutsche Einheit internationale Beachtung erfährt. Doch ist Deutschland wirklich noch so gespalten? Zahlreiche Studien zeigen, dass sich der Graben zwischen Ost und West verringert. Beispielsweise nähern sich die Arbeitslosenquoten einander immer weiter an und es herrscht eine positive Grundstimmung im Land. Nach wie vor scheinen sich die beiden Teile jedoch voneinander zu unterscheiden; weiterhin ist die Rede von einer "Mauer in den Köpfen". Bei Wahlumfragen wird herausgestellt, dass Ost- und Westdeutsche ein unterschiedliches Wahlverhalten zeigen und auch die Differenz der Löhne zwischen den neuen und alten Bundesländern ist weiterhin Grundlage der Debatte, wenn es um die Frage der deutschen Einigkeit geht. Die Frage, ob Divergenzen auch medial existieren, ist Grundlage des vorliegenden Forschungsprojekts. Hierbei wird versucht eine Forschungslücke in der Kommunikationswissenschaft zu schließen. Zwar wurden bereits zahlreiche Untersuchungen zur deutschen Medienlandschaft durgeführt, diese fokussieren sich jedoch meist auf die 1990er Jahre oder liegen bereits zehn Jahre oder länger zurück. Ziel ist es die deutsche Presselandschaft auf Konvergenzen und Divergenzen hin zu untersuchen, wobei einerseits betrachtet wird welche Themen behandelt und andererseits, wie diese dargestellt werden. Mit der Annahme der Existenz medialer Teilöffentlichkeiten und strukturgleich abgebildeter heterogener Kommunikationsräume in Deutschland, wurde der Medienraum auf Grundlage des arenatheoretischen Modells der Öffentlichkeit von Tobler (2010) in drei Teilöffentlichkeiten geteilt um festzustellen, wie sehr sich diese thematisch ähneln. So wurde unterschieden zwischen der medialen Teilöffentlichkeit West, bestehend aus Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, der Rheinischen Post und der Neuen Westfälischen, der medialen Teilöffentlichkeit Ost, bestehend aus der Thüringer Allgemeinen, der Sächsischen Zeitung und der Mitteldeutschen Zeitung und der medialen Teilöffentlichkeit national, aus der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung und der Süddeutschen Zeitung. Diese acht Tageszeitungen wurden mittels eines Zwei-Methoden-Designs empirisch untersucht. Zuerst wurde eine quantitative Themenfrequenzanalyse durchgeführt, im Anschluss eine qualitative Analyse von Frames. Durch das Prinzip der künstlichen Woche ist eine Cluster-Stichprobe gezogen worden. Es ergab sich ein Sample von N = 3.934 Artikeln. Die Ergebnisse wurden hypothesengeleitet ausgewertet, nach welchen davon ausgegangen wurde, dass Divergenzen zwischen den medialen Teilöffentlichkeiten messbar sind. Zwischen den drei Medienagenden konnte jedoch eine Themenkonvergenz von 71,9% festgestellt werden. Die Rangkorrelationskoeffizienten der behandelten Themen in den drei Teilöffentlichkeiten bestätigen eine Angleichung: Ost und West rs=.744 (p < .001), National und Ost rs=.603 (p < .001), National und West rs=.658 (p < .001). Es liegt demnach eine sehr ähnliche Themensetzung und Presseberichterstattung zwischen den medialen Teilöffentlichkeiten vor. Auch wurde darauf eingegangen, ob sich die Medienagenda- West der nationalen Medienagenda eher angleicht als Letztere der Medienagenda- Ost. Diese Hypothesen lassen sich nicht bestätigen, da sich die Ränge der Teilöffentlichkeiten West und National zwar eher gleichen, Ost und National sich jedoch in Hinblick auf die Häufigkeiten der behandelten Themen ähnlicher sind. In einer zweiten vertiefenden Inhaltsanalyse wurden exemplarisch ein wirtschaftliches und ein politisches Thema (der Diesel-Skandal und Rechtsextremismus, anhand des NSU-Prozesses und der Ereignisse in Chemnitz) herangezogen und auf Medienframes hin untersucht. Die Ergebnisse der Frame-Analyse weisen darauf hin, dass Aussagen zu Divergenzen und Konvergenzen in der Darstellung nur themenabhängig möglich sind und sich nicht verallgemeinern lassen. So wird deutlich, dass in Bezug auf den Dieselskandal starke Divergenzen zwischen den erhobenen Deutungsmustern zu erkennen sind. Zwischen den Teilöffentlichkeiten liegen hierbei überwiegend unterschiedliche Medienframes vor. Entgegen der Annahmen verhalten sich die Medienframes zwischen nationaler und Ost-Ebene eher konvergent, während die zwischen nationaler und West-Ebene eher divergieren. Im Gegensatz dazu kann, bei den Fallbeispielen zum Rechtsextremismus, von größtenteils konvergent existierenden Medienframes zwischen den Ebenen gesprochen werden. Insgesamt kann eine positive Bilanz zur deutschen Presseberichterstattung gezogen werden. Es können zwar einige Divergenzen zwischen den konvergent verlaufenden Medienagenden festgemacht werden, jedoch sind diese weitestgehend regional und strukturell zu begründen. Durch eine hohe inhaltliche Konvergenz zwischen den Teilöffentlichkeiten liegt eine einheitliche Presseberichterstattung in Deutschland vor und es kann nicht von ost- beziehungsweise westspezifischen Medien gesprochen werden. ; "So isser, der Ossi" was the title of the German magazine Der Spiegel on the 25th of August, meaning "So he is, the East German". Only four days later, the New York Times published an article by Anna Sauerbrey titled "30 Years After Reunification, Germany Is Still Two Countries". This example shows that in the thirtieth year after the fall of the Berlin Wall, German citizens are still divided based on whether they come from Eastern or Western Germany, and the seemingly inadequate German unity is receiving international attention. But is Germany still that divided? Various studies show, that both parts of Germany are converging constantly. For instance, the unemployment rates in both are nearly identical, and there is an optimistic mood present within the country. Nevertheless, there seem to be differences; there still is talk of an existing wall within the heads. Citizens of Eastern and Western Germany often show different electoral behaviour in the voting booths and polls. Similarly, the wage gap between the new and old states is often referred to when talking about the question of the German unification. In addition, this research project questions whether such divergences also exist in the media. In this way, the study aims to fill a gap within the literature in this field which has previously been underresearched. Although the German media has been looked at several times in previous investigations, these works are almost all more than a decade old. The ambition of the project is to find out how the German press system is shaped by convergences and divergences nowadays. On the one hand, it tries expose which issues are discussed and on the other how they are referred to. Predicated on the assumption that there are differing communication spaces in Germany that are incongruently made up of public arenas portrayed by the mass media, the study differed between three public spheres using the Arenatheoretical Model of Public Sphere by Tobler (2010). The aim was to find out to what point they resemble each other. This study distinguishes the media-agenda-west, made up of the newspapers Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, Rheinische Post and Neue Westfälische, the media-agenda-east, including the Thüringer Allgemeine, Sächsische Zeitung and Mitteldeutsche Zeitung and the national media-agenda, containing the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and the Süddeutsche Zeitung. These eight daily newspapers have been examined through the use of a multiple- method design. First a quantitative issue-frequency-analysis was conducted. Secondly, two inner-German issues were selected to analyse existing convergent and divergent media-frames in a qualitative matter. Following the principle of an artificial week a cluster-sample of N=3.934 was drawn. The results were evaluated through several hypotheses to be able to interpret the media agendas. Between all three of them a convergence of issues of 71.9% was determined. Using a rank correlation coefficient by Spearman, the issues were compared by their order of ranks, showing that they are rather similar: media agendas East and West rs=.704 (p < .001), media agendas National and East rs=.603 (p < .001), media agendas National and West rs=.658 (p < .001), the perfect convergence being one. Thus, the data indicate that there is a unified news coverage within the German press system. It has also been surveyed if the western media agenda is more similar to the national media agenda than the eastern one. This could not be confirmed since the rankings of issues between media agendas in the west and national in Germany equal one another, but a comparison of issues between east and national media agendas show that they are more similar. Following a more deepened content analysis, the framing of two topics were specifically analysed, one concerning the economy and the other politics (on the one hand far-right extremism, represented by the court case of the NSU and the incidents in Chemnitz of summer 2018, and on the other the emissions scandal). The results of the frame-analysis suggest that generalizing statements about divergences and convergences within the portrayal of issues are only possible separately. Furthermore, it is apparent that in terms of the emissions scandal, there are many clearly recognizable divergences between the interpretive patterns. As a whole, there appears to be largely juxta positional content in the media from different public spheres. Unexpectedly, the media frames of the eastern public sphere are more convergent to the national one, while the western public sphere is more divergent to it. Contrastively, the two case examples on far-right extremism show mostly convergent media frames. In conclusion, a positive picture of the German press system seems apparent. While there are some divergences within the convergent media agendas, these can to a great extend be explained through regional and structural differences. Due to a high media convergence between the three separate public spheres analysed in this project, a unified reporting within the German press system appears to exist. To differ between specifically Eastern or Western German media is not possible.
The current global economic crisis is exposing a concomitant yet deeper governability crisis in the developed world. As anti-incumbent sentiment sweeps Europe, Americans are recovering from a relentlessly destructive Republican primary season is over and bracing themselves for the upcoming election season, which may arguably be the most important in our lifetime. The federal government is paralyzed by deep and irreconcilable views on how to solve the problems of huge sovereign debt, a gaping budget deficit, the cost of health care and immigration reform, to name some of the most salient issues. Controversial federal and state legislation aimed at solving these problems is increasingly being challenged at the Supreme Court, where nine unelected judges will determine their constitutionality. Globalization has produced a special set of challenges: an open world economy has forced governments to maintain fiscal stability over the long term in order to maintain the value of their currencies and stock markets, as well as access to credit. At the same time, advanced democracies are facing the limits of the welfare state, as well as demographic pressures as baby boomers retire; and immigrants (who could provide part of the solution to some of those problems) are less welcome today than ever. Trust in politicians, elected officials and major institutions, has declined steadily over the last twenty-five years; it is not by coincidence that this spreading disillusionment with the democratic order affects not only Europe but also the United States. The recent turnover of governments in Europe, and the polarization of American politics reveal an alarming lack of confidence in democracy and its institutions. This cynicism is growing: indeed, the question is no longer whether the government is sufficiently responsive to the demands and interests of citizens, but whether, in a context of global pressures, it is in fact capable of effectively solving the current problems. In the United States, widespread skepticism now extends to all formal institutions of governance, not only elected ones but even unelected ones. This sentiment is especially problematic and indicative of a very entrenched distrust that will not be easily dispelled. Only ten years ago, political scientists found that in spite of disenchantment with politicians and elected officials, Americans still had a strong respect for the Armed Forces, the Federal Reserve Bank and the Supreme Court. They had concluded that this was due to the fact that these bodies were insulated from populist pressures and the omnipresent poll. More recently, however, studies by Ronald Inglehart and others have found a severe decrease in public confidence in the Armed Services, the Judiciary, police, civil service and state legislatures. It is one thing for people to blame the current government for economic crisis; it is quite different if this skepticism extends beyond incumbents to the formal institutions of governance. Today, Americans are challenging the very constitutional premises on which the country was founded, namely, diffusion of power and checks and balances. The perceived (and factual) decline in capacity of political agents to act on behalf of citizens' interests and demands is due mostly to the forces of globalization and interdependence which have led to reduced effectiveness in public policy. Incongruence between the diktat of international markets and domestic needs has put constraints on political agents' actions. But there are other factors that need to be considered as well, namely, failure in political leadership, bad judgment on the part of voters and elected officials, the deterioration of social capital and a media that provokes rather than informs. How are politicians and political parties responding to this rising trend of dissatisfaction and anger? By following every poll, seeking lobbyists' approval and changing their positions daily to adapt them to the latest voters' opinions. This is weakening representative democracy and distorting the democratic process. Congressional inability to compromise and solve the problems results in the judicialization of politics as the two ideological camps increasingly rely on judicial review as the alternative. This is turn leads inevitably to the politicization of the Judiciary. The whole Constitutional architecture that was built around diffusion of power, checks and balances and fear of accumulation of power in any one branch of government is now being challenged by the protections given to individual interest groups and by ceding too much power to unelected, nominally non-ideological Supreme Court judges. Unfortunately, the current Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts has made its mark on politics early on by its Citizens United v. Federal Electoral Commission decision, which has allowed indirect, unlimited political contributions by corporations and unions, thereby further entrenching corporate power into the political system. Another good example of the judicialization of politics is the bitter debate surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed by Congress in 2010, before the legislative election deprived Democrats of the ability to pass any other significant piece of legislation. In a cumbersome process that involved hundreds of lobbies from the grassroots as well as health insurance companies, hospitals and doctors, the administration was able to hammer out a compromise that met some of the basic requirements of patients and consumer groups, as well as the market-based method preferred by the rest o the coalition. The result was a law that was passed in spite of the negative vote of all Republicans in both Houses. It is based on a central pillar to reduce national health care costs: every citizen not covered by an employer or government plan must buy health insurance (so as to avoid the free rider problem of consuming without paying). The constitutionality of this law, main parts of which have not yet entered into force, was immediately challenged by 27 states as well as other organizations and individuals, and is now under Supreme Court review. The complexity of the issue and the polarized atmosphere surrounding it may well sway judges to exert their (ideological) "will" rather than their (objective) "judgment", to paraphrase Hamilton's warning, thus delivering an important political victory for Republicans this summer, at the height of the presidential campaign season. Conversely, a virulent anti-immigrant law passed by the state of Arizona is also being challenged before the Supreme Court. In this case it was the other side, the Justice Department, which sued over the right of states to pass immigration legislation, which is generally construed as a federal policy. Immigration will be a central issue in the coming presidential election, so the Court's ruling will again inevitably have political ramifications.In the XIX and XX centuries, The Leviathan state managed the process of modernization and industrialization and represented a shift from culturally- based decentralized institutions, whose legitimacy emanated from tradition, to state institutions deriving their authority from rational-legal instruments. Today we are experiencing a decline of state authority in a new context of globalization and open societies, and the trend is again toward decentralization of authority, focus on individual rights and less hierarchical, more market-oriented societal practices, that have yet to produce a new political order. Unfortunately, the "intermediary associations" of civil society that Alexis de Tocqueville identified as the main repository of democracy in America, are becoming less active, due to the increased post-modern individualism, itself reinforced by the technological revolution and by a cultural anarchy that demands the "democratization of everything"(think Wiki leaks, hacking, intellectual property piracy). An authority system linked to a stable culture which in turn is anchored on a moral code, breeds trust and generates internalized support. The current economic crisis, in the context of the highest income inequality in the history of the United States, has led to a revival of ideological rhetoric and endless partisan conflict, which erodes faith in the system as a whole. It is in moments like this that civil society becomes most relevant. Extreme capitalism has led to extreme individualism and lack of societal solidarity. Abundant resources allowed the social balance to tilt in favor of individual rights and entitlements and away from social responsibility. The present crisis may help restore that balance as individuals realize that the state has exhausted its capability for further entitlements and that society will have to rebuild its social capital to fill the void.
"This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning…I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal…"And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true."Martin Luther King Jr." I have a dream speech" (March on Washington, August 28, 1963)On Wednesday August 27th, at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado, before a crowd of 20,000, Barack Obama became the first biracial man to be officially nominated as presidential candidate by a major party. When the turn came for the delegates from the state of New York to vote, Obama had received 1,549 and Hillary Rodham-Clinton 231. Hillary then made a motion to suspend the roll call vote and select him by acclamation:"With eyes firmly fixed on the future in the spirit of unity, with the goal of victory, with faith in our party and country, let's declare together in one voice, right here and right now, that Barack Obama is our candidate and he will be our president."The night before, Hillary had made a gracious and persuasive speech in support of Obama, calling on her supporters to vote for the man that would bring health care to all Americans and restore the country's standing in the world, thus tacitly acknowledging that their platforms are one and the same. She had also reminded the audience that the (presidential) "glass ceiling now had 18 million cracks", a reference at the number of votes she received and a reminder of how close women had come this time around to win the Presidency, a white male domain until now. That was her way to give comfort to her female supporters, some of which have avowed to vote for McCain in the Fall. Then on Wednesday night it came up to Bill Clinton to put the proverbial final nail in the coffin of the bitter conflict that had bitterly divided the party up to then. He did it with a masterful, authoritative speech, in which he reassured the audience that Obama was just as ready for the Presidency as he himself had been in 1992. The clarity of his ideas and the perfect delivery reminded us all of why he will go down as one of the greatest Presidents in this country's History.Already by Wednesday night there was a sense of fulfillment and relief, since the unification of the Democratic Party was perceived by most Democrats as the Convention's main objective. The party had been divided since the 1970s, when the moderate, blue collar workers and Southerners became disgruntled with McGovern's socially liberal platform and voted for Nixon. Ten years later they would become known as the Reagan democrats, and the label would stick. Bill Clinton was able to bring them all back to the fold by focused policies and his ability to connect both with white and black blue-collar workers. But in the last eight years the divisions have reappeared, as it became plain during the primary: Obama appeals strongly to the black community and to white college educated youth but has been unable to extend that appeal to older women and white workers. That is why Hillary got 18 million votes. That is also why Obama's choice of Vice President is a solid one. Senator Joseph Biden, with his Catholic, blue-collar background, his toughness and his 30 years of experience in the Senate, and his wisdom and knowledge of foreign affairs, has added weight and credibility to the ticket. The expectation is that this formula will reunite the fractured party once again.This has been a historic Convention in more ways than one: the first African-American to win the nomination, the first woman to come so close to winning it, the passing of the torch to a new generation of Americans by Ted Kennedy, the brilliant speech by Bill Clinton which by all measures restores his stature within the party. But more than anything else, this Convention is historic because, as Clinton said, Barack Obama is "the twenty first century incarnation of the American Dream", and a reaffirmation of Ted Kennedy's proclamation on the first day of the Convention, that "the Dream Lives on" in Obama.The climax came on Thursday night with Obama's long awaited acceptance speech at the closing of the Convention. It was a carefully choreographed affair, overlaid with symbolism. Delivered before a crowd of 75,000 at the INVESCO open-air stadium at Mile High, against a background evoking the pillars of the Lincoln Memorial, it was watched by a TV audience of around 40 million and ended with fireworks across the Colorado sky. Barack Obama is also the first candidate since John F Kennedy to choose an open-to-the public venue to deliver his acceptance speech. There were some risks to this venue, from security to climactic. But more than anything else, his greatest challenge on this historic night was to communicate to his huge audience and the American nation at large, that he is not just a great orator but that he understands their woes and has the fortitude to fight for them; that he is ready to battle ahead and bring about the change he so brilliantly articulates in his speeches, and that this young man standing before them, half preacher, half professor, is also a practical politician, able to back his ideas with concrete and feasible plans. As Richard Haas says in his latest article on the Foreign Affairs Journal, the next president must confront "the reality of the country's expectations" and he must do so by "identifying meaningful yet achievable goals and lay them out before the nation…and then achieve them through leadership skills that will be tested by pressures unimaginable to anyone who has not held he job." Obama passed this difficult test on the first two requirements. The third is awaiting him, if elected in November.By most accounts, the speech was an overwhelming success. Obama presented a complete blueprint on how he will govern if elected. He first listed all the issues Americans are dissatisfied with, starting with the economy and ending with Iraq. He then outlined his specific policies to solve these problems. He subsequently gave examples of how McCain is closely aligned with George W. Bush's failed policies, thus demolishing his opponent's claims of independence from the incumbent. Finally, he presented himself as open-minded and pragmatic, willing to find middle ground on the so-called culture wars issues (gays, guns, abortion) that are frequently framed as false choices to elicit emotions, not rationality, from the part of the voters. He re-introduced himself to the public as a common man, with personal accounts of his childhood as son of a single mother, who raised him with the help of her parents and at times had to use food stamps to take care of him; of his admiration for his grandfather, a WWII veteran who went to college on the GI bill and taught him hard work, pride and love of country. Looking straight into the cameras, he humanized his message and connected with people. He was able to turn the tables on John McCain, who he presented as elitist, out of touch and thus, less trustworthy. His move to the middle ground on cultural issues ("We can withhold the Second Amendment and still get AK 47s out of the hands of criminals") and his calls for greater civic and parental responsibility ("Government cannot replace parents in educating their children…") gave consistency to his claim of post-partisanship.By asserting that America is the best hope for the world, he rejected the notion that only Republicans are patriotic ("Democrats can own that, too."). He also defied the fallacy that Democrats are weak on foreign policy ("We are the party of FDR and JFK, so don't tell us Democrats that we cannot defend the country…and restore the moral standing for all who fight for freedom."). And he did all this not so much with the soaring rhetoric of his earlier speeches, but with a tone of strength and defiance. He took the fight to John Mc Cain, promising to debate him not on petty issues but on who has the "judgment and the temperament" to be Commander-in-Chief. He thereby injected the question of McCain's short temper into the Fall campaign. The speech ended with an evocation of Martin Luther King's I have a dream speech delivered on this same day forty-five years ago at the Lincoln Memorial, and a pledge to once more "March forward together."Memories of the Democratic National Conventions and the momentum created by this brilliant speech were not, however, destined to linger for long in the American psyche. They were shattered by two events, one man-made, one natural. On Friday, August 29th, John McCain made an announcement that caused quite a stir in the media and public alike. He chose as his Vice president Mrs. Sarah Palin, the little-known first-term female governor of Alaska, a no exceptions pro-lifer who believes that Creationism should be taught in the schools alongside Evolution, and whose thin political résumé is startling to most observers. After they recovered from the initial shock, some pundits were able to articulate the intriguing yet-to be-answered question: was this the brilliant decision of a crafty tactician or the insane choice of an impulsive, overly ambitious politician? Is this a masterful stroke or a risky gamble? Only time will tell.That same day, Mrs. Palin had to share the limelight with Gustav, an impervious hurricane that was making its way toward the Gulf Coast at vertiginous speed and strength. Plans for the Republican National Convention to start on Monday had to be scrapped, while McCain and Palin made their way to Mississippi, turning this into an opportunity to distance themselves early on from Bush's fiasco during hurricane Katrina two years ago. Most Convention events were suspended for Monday and Tuesday and replaced by a bare-bones schedule of committee meetings, while the crucial events (vice-presidential speech and nomination vote) start this Wednesday and culminate Thursday with McCain's acceptance speech. This could turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Republicans. Courtesy of Gustav, now downgraded to a grade one hurricane, speeches by Bush and Cheney were cancelled. The President, who hastily made his way to New Orleans, may still speak for a short time via satellite on Wednesday, which will give him an opportunity to amend the terrible legacy of Katrina by replacing those images in the minds of the public with a much improved disaster relief response to Gustav.Palin is expected to give a good speech at the Convention. As a young political reformer who has fought corruption in her home state, she has energized the campaign. As a social conservative with deep convictions against abortion she has galvanized the conservative Evangelical base of the party. She is attractive and warm, and connects easily with the public, one of the few advantages of her political experience in Alaska, a sparsely populated state that requires extensive face-to-face contact with voters. An active hunter and life-long member of the NRA, she may be able to connect with the kind of independent blue-collar and rural voters that Obama has not been able to appeal to. But Palin has never been under the extreme national scrutiny that the next few months will bring, nor has she had to answer any unscripted questions about a wide variety of topics from the often vicious national press. Mc Cain picked her over men with extensive experience in economic matters (Mitt Romney) and in homeland security (Tom Ridge), both of whom had been extensively vetted. His choice of Palin as running mate is even more surprising if we consider that his main campaign theme against Obama was the latter's lack of executive experience. In contrast with Palin, Obama has had his trial-by-fire in the primary debates and through 18 months of campaigning. He has run against formidable candidates in the Primary, has been repeatedly tested by the media, and has emerged as the choice of Democratic voters. Palin, on the other hand, has one year of executive experience and a gaping lack of foreign policy knowledge. She is the choice of one man, John McCain, who has only met her twice. What will be the public's perception of Palin's credibility and readiness to step in as President should something happen to McCain? Did McCain, always the maverick, abdicate in his duty to the people by not choosing someone manifestly ready for the presidency? We may have some answers to these questions in a week or two.For those that expect Hillary's women to flock to the Republican side just because of McCain's Vice-presidential pick, think again. If there is one principle those women activists care about is the protection of the Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision, so they would be loath to vote for a strongly anti-abortion candidate such as Palin. Nevertheless, Obama does need to worry about the white blue-collar workers' vote. He has been consistently ahead in the polls but the margin has narrowed somewhat. He is now 6 percentage points ahead in the polls (47% to 41%) but so far has been unable to break the 50% barrier. Given the byzantine workings of the Electoral College in a presidential election, even a sliver of independents and Reagan democrats here and there (especially in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan) can win this election for McCain. The long-awaited Autumn of Freedom would then become for many, the Winter of Discontent.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
Moldova's election result has left incumbent President Maia Sandu damaged. An EU referendum delivered only a wafer-thin vote in favor of membership of the bloc. And in the first round of a presidential vote that Western commentators predicted Sandu might edge narrowly, she fell some way short of the 50% vote share she'd need to land a second presidential term. She will now face a unified group of opposition parties in the second round with her chances of remaining in office in the balance.Where did it all go wrong?Sandu's mistake was in making the Moldovan election about a binary choice between Europe and Russia. Even before the final votes were counted, Sandu was claiming widespread electoral fraud sponsored by pro-Russian oligarch Ilan Shor. Reports that pro-Russian groups paid voters to come out to vote are credible. If that achieved anything, it was to mobilize voters in Moldova naturally inclined to want ties with Russia, rather than flipping votes of pro-Europeans. With a 33% turnout needed to legitimize the plebiscite, a final roll of just 50% hinted at widespread voter apathy in Moldova. In a country where only 9% of the population identifies as ethnically Russian, an almost 50% vote against EU membership illustrates wider concerns that the government in Chisinau has not addressed domestic issues important to ordinary people. For example, many Moldovans are worried about the race to EU membership undermining small farmers and local traditions. Sandu's claims of interference must also be set against a concerted effort by Moldovan authorities to make it harder for Moldovan voters in Russia and breakaway Transnistria, to vote. A mere 10,000 ballot papers were sent to Russia, where the Moldovan population is thought to number over 150,000 people. The population of Transnistria is 367,000, but they were only allowed to vote in Moldova itself. (For the record, Moldova insists that Transnistria is part of Moldova.) Meanwhile, Shor's political party was banned and media channels linked to him closed down. In the end, the pro-European referendum passed with a tiny majority, made possible by a large number of pro-European votes by members of the Moldovan diaspora, who don't live in Russia.This will make it difficult for Sandu to claim a resounding endorsement of future EU membership. It will almost certainly stoke anti-EU sentiment in the Russia-backed breakaway Transnistria where a majority of the ethnically diverse population wants closer ties with Russia. Pro-Russian sentiment will also be fueled in the autonomous status of Gagauzia in the south, where 95% of voters did not choose a European future in the referendum. Of course, the Transnistria question, nor, to a lesser extent, that of Gagauzia, shouldn't necessarily create a bar on possible future EU membership by Moldova, as Cyprus has shown. But by making the referendum about ethno-nationalist politics, Sandu will have stimulated the secessionist tendencies there, making the process of EU integration more problematic. She also exposes herself to the accusation of letting Moldova become a geo-strategic test-tube for Western influence, something that Russia will undoubtedly look to exploit. European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen was in Chisinau shortly before the vote exhorting Moldovans to express their free choice. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte chose to weigh in with concerns about Russian efforts to derail Moldova's European future. These pronouncements are imbued with notions that Moldovan membership of the EU would stabilize Europe's eastern border and strengthen security against Russia. But that ignores the lessons of history. Those same arguments were used in Ukraine in 2014. Making the Moldovan election a zero sum tussle between Europe and Russia — rather than a vote about what ordinary Moldovans want to see happen domestically — risks making Moldova a new, much smaller, more economically vulnerable, version of Ukraine. And the critical point is that Sandu has yet to make the economic case that EU membership, rather than Moldova maintaining balanced relations with all countries, including Russia, will provide the boost that the country needs. A pro-European report from 2014 shows that significant economic benefits accrue to countries in anticipation of possible membership, but that EU membership won't necessarily benefit every new member, mentioning Greece. The reality is that annual economic growth in Moldova since the signing of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the EU in 2014 has been significantly lower, on average, than in the first 10 years of the Millennium. That anticipation effect has not yet been seen in Moldova.A key reason is that Moldova's trade with Russia has fallen sharply since the DCFTA was signed. Sandu talks about 65% of Moldovan exports going to Europe as a triumph. In fact, Moldova imports twice as much from Europe, stoking a stubborn current account deficit. To some extent, that has been offset by inflows of foreign investment into Moldova. But it is nevertheless clear that strengthened relations with Europe haven't been enough to make up for the cutting of trading relations with a country — Russia — that had previously been a key trading partner with Moldova. The other key reason is demographic. Moldova has the fastest shrinking population in the world. Over a quarter of Moldova's population have taken advantage of EU citizenship, by virtue of their entitlement to Romanian passports. That has led to an emptying of talent from Moldova as young, talented workers seek better pay elsewhere, mostly in Europe, but also in Russia. The economy would need to be growing at a brisker rate than it is to entice the most talented Moldovans back to their country. But, making Moldova the next frontier state for the West's battle with Russia will place a heavy drag on encouraging diaspora Moldovans to return.Moldova is a country that I am deeply fond of and have visited many times. As it happens, I have always considered that it is a country that would benefit from closer economic ties with Europe. I also believe that a politically stable and economically prosperous future for Moldova rests on that beautiful country maintaining close relations with Europe and with Russia. Maia Sandu may come to rue her failure to make this election about Moldova itself.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
Shreveport Democrats' plan to have the city's electorate dump Republican Mayor Tom Arceneaux is fully afoot as they play Russian roulette with the city's water and sewerage system.
The city remains under a consent decree that will demand hundreds of millions in spending to satisfy. Currently, $310.6 million worth of expenditures deemed critical need completion – most of which the city doesn't have.
It doesn't because of voter hesitancy triggered by the untrustworthy performance that featured many questionable spending choices of Democrat former Mayor Adrian Perkins, who on three occasions proposed large bond issues that included requests to fund water and sewerage. Out of around $600 million proposed, all of which involved property tax increases, only a $70.65 million estimated amount that ended up tacking on 2.5 mils for public safety made it onto the ballot and gained voter approval.
Meanwhile, the funding well for water and sewerage threatens to run dry. Such operations are set up so that users pay, but legally the city can apportion the cost to all property owners. However, users already have experienced a series of increases. In 2013 in response to the decree, the city decided that over a two-year span commencing in 2015 sewer rates would go up 14 percent, then that and water rates would increase 6 percent in 2020, rise 2 percent more for water in 2021, and a year later would be capped by 4 percent more there and 2 percent more for sewer.
Still, this doesn't appear to be enough. So, Arceneaux has proposed a two-prong strategy of another bond issue including of three items that altogether total $256 million one of $82 million for water and sewerage, and an increase in rates again, of 10 percent. Last month, the city launched a road show to gather citizen input and inform them about it.
Except that the City Council, composed of a 5-2 majority of Democrats, dragged its heels on the rate hike. Twice it delayed in February authorizing that, although last week it did cue up the three bond ballot items just in time to make the Apr. 27 election.
Democrat Councilors Tabatha Taylor and James Green voted against that, and also declared they would provide minimal rhetorical assistance to mobilize electoral support for the measures. They had backed reliably the measures Perkins had put forward, including for water and sewerage, as well as generally Perkins and his initiatives. Green expanded upon his vote and intended actions, noting that his apathy was not different from that of Republican councilors on past items, inferring particularly Grayson Boucher who was on the Council then and now who gave vocal support to the measure that passed then but not for the others ultimately rejected.
This he attributed to racism – Perkins is black, Arceneaux is white – falling back on the increasingly patterned behavior of he and Taylor and Democrat Councilor Alan Jackson, all of whom are black, to cite systemic racism as the cause whenever a non-black disagrees with their policy preferences. This card they had played when Green illegally gave raises to Council employees and Boucher and Republican Jim Taliaferro, along with Democrats Ursula Bowman and Gary Brooks, united to call for an investigation that nailed Green. Far more likely, tepid Republican support over the previous bond votes came from suspicion over Perkins' general laxity about finances – such as not vetting all available sources for funding before asking for tax increases – and his shiftiness that led to legal actions and Legislative Auditor rebukes.
Regardless, a political motive clearly presents itself. Councilors with an eye towards denying Arceneaux a second term can feel safe in supporting or ignoring a bond issue, because if voters approve the water and sewerage measure at least the people will have voted it onto themselves. But they can posture over the rate hikes, because to approve these puts the spotlight on them and to reject these makes Arceneaux look like the bad guy for bringing up the idea.
Plus, they get to take shots at Arceneaux for things Perkins left undone. In the prior administrative council meeting to the regular meeting that turned down the rate hikes but approved the bond vote, the issue of overbilling for services reemerged. A few years ago, the city settled multi-million dollar class action claims about this, and the lawyer who had led this battle alleged this still was going on. Green and Taylor particularly cast aspersions that Arceneaux's administration was negligent on this – except that the lawyer said he had notified the Perkins Administration in 2021 about this and nothing was done.
Ironically, the hold that Council Democrats have placed on rate increases they say comes from concerns that the city's program helping lower-income families pay water bills can't do enough received a major shot in the arm as a result of the overbilling settlement, where class members who couldn't be located had their shares requisitioned for this purpose. How long recalcitrant councilors stick to that story remains to be seen.
For in their ideal world, they will drag this out as long as possible – which perhaps is why Green and Taylor talked of the bond vote to come in the fall rather than spring – in order to have maximal time to paint Arceneaux as a tax- and rate-raiser with Democrat councilors as a check against his trying in this manner to impoverish the people, regardless of whether the city's water and sewerage system receives its badly-needed and legally-required fixes. Like it or not, decades of neglect have led the city to this point, and resolution might be swifter and more effective if the Council majority, and especially those members of it prone to playing the race card, would dial down the politicking focused too much on political futures.
The article provides a comparative review of the history, current status and areas of scientific activity of the Sociological Association of Ukraine (SAU), its creative ties with the European and world sociological community, in particular, joint research with Polish scientists. It emphasizes that most of the Ukrainian sociologists SAU members work in universities, the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and public opinion research centers. Numerous sociological (theoretical and empirical) studies on various issues of vital activity of modern Ukrainian society are carried out by their efforts. It is noted that in addition to studying the issues of social transformation in its political, economic, legal, social and cultural aspects, that have become traditional for Ukrainian sociology, in recent years Ukrainian sociologists have turned to the analysis of such problems as external and internal migration (the problem of internally displaced persons); military conflict in the east of Ukraine and the volunteer movement; social inequality, including in its new manifestations, including those caused by the digitalization of public life. It is emphasized that today the most pressing issue of sociological reflection is the changes that occur in Ukraine after the last presidential election. Attention is focused on the fact that the victory of the political rookie in these elections was due to the huge social disappointments of the Ukrainians, since their expectations provoked by the Revolution of Dignity were not fulfilled. The first and most important disappointment, according to sociological studies, is the fact that peace has not reigned in the country. Second, the living standards of Ukrainian citizens have not improved. Third, the fight against corruption did not bring significant results. Fourth, social inequality deepened: the rich became richer, and the poor became poorer. The fifth disappointment is the inefficiency of the declared reforms: judicial, medical, educational, customs, electoral, etc. It is emphasized that the effectiveness of the new government depends, among other things, on its consideration of such features of the mass consciousness of the Ukrainian population as a critical level of distrust of all institutions of power; value and ideological ambivalence and uncertainty. The conclusions are formulated about the unlikeliness of return of Ukraine to the orbit of Russian political and economic influence, as well as the victory of radical nationalist ideology in our country. ; В статье осуществлен сравнительный обзор истории, современного состояния и направлений научной деятельности социологической ассоциации Украины (САУ), ее творческих связей с европейским и мировым социологическим сообществом, в частности совместных исследований с учеными Польши. Подчеркнуто, что большая часть украинских социологов-членов САУ работают в университетах, Институте социологии Национальной академии наук Украины и центрах исследования общественного мнения. Их усилиями осуществляются многочисленные социологические (теоретические и эмпирические) исследования по различным вопросам жизнедеятельности современного украинского общества. Отмечено, что кроме изучения вопросов социальной трансформации, ставших традиционными для отечественной социологии в ее политических, экономических, правовых, социальных и культурных аспектах, в последние годы украинские социологи обращаются к анализу таких проблем, как внешняя и внутренняя миграция (проблема внутренне перемещенных лиц); военный конфликт на Востоке Украины и связанное с ним волонтерское движение; социальное неравенство, в том числе в его новых проявлениях, в том числе обусловленных дигитализацией общественной жизни. Подчеркнуто, что сегодня самым актуальным вопросом социологической рефлексии являются изменения, которые происходят в Украине после последних президентских выборов. Акцентировано внимание на том, что победа политического новичка на этих выборах обусловлена огромными социальным разочарованиями украинцев, поскольку их ожидания, спровоцированные Революцией Достоинства, не были осуществлены. Первое и самое важное разочарование, как свидетельствуют социологические исследования, связано с тем, что в стране так и не воцарился мир. Второе – жизненные стандарты украинских граждан не улучшились. Третье – борьба с коррупцией не принесла существенных результатов. Четвертое – социальное неравенство углубилось: богатые стали еще богаче, а бедные – беднее. Пятое разочарование – неэффективность задекларированных реформ: судебной, медицинской, образовательной, таможенной, избирательной и др. Подчеркнуто, что эффективность деятельности новой власти зависит, в том числе, от учета ею таких особенностей массового сознания украинского населения, как критический уровень недоверия ко всем институтам власти; ценностная и идеологическая амбивалентность и неопределенность. Сформулированы выводы о маловероятности возвращения Украины в орбиту российского политического и экономического влияния, а также победы радикальной националистической идеологии в нашей стране. ; У публікації здійснено порівняльний огляд історії, сучасного стану та напрямків наукової діяльності соціологічної асоціації України (САУ), її творчих зв'язків з європейською та світовою соціологічною спільнотою, зокрема спільних досліджень із науковцями Польщі. Підкреслено, що переважна частина українських соціологів-членів САУ працюють в університетах, Інституті соціології Національної академії наук України та центрах дослідження громадської думки. Їхніми зусиллями здійснюються численні соціологічні (теоретичні та емпіричні) дослідження з різноманітних питань життєдіяльності сучасного українського суспільства. Зазначено, що окрім вивчення традиційних для вітчизняної соціології питань соціальної трансформації у її політичних, економічних, правових, соціальних та культурних аспектах, в останні роки українські соціологи звертаються до аналізу таких проблем, як зовнішня та внутрішня міграція (проблема внутрішньо переміщених осіб); військовий конфлікт на Сході України та пов'язаний з ним волонтерський рух; соціальна нерівність, у тому числі в її нових проявах, зумовлених дигіталізацією суспільного життя тощо. Підкреслено, що сьогодні найактуальнішим питанням соціологічної рефлексії є ті зміни, що відбуваються в Україні після останніх президентських виборів. Акцентовано увагу на тому, що перемога політичного новачка на цих виборах зумовлена величезними соціальним розчаруваннями українців, оскільки їхні очікування, спровоковані Революцією Гідності, не були здійснені. Перше і найважливіше розчарування, як свідчать соціологічні дослідження, пов'язане з тим, що в країні так і не запанував мир. Друге – життєві стандарти українських громадян не покращились. Третє – боротьба з корупцією не принесла суттєвих результатів. Четверте – соціальна нерівність поглибилась: багаті стали ще більш багатими, а бідні – біднішими. П'яте розчарування – неефективність задекларованих реформ: судової, медичної, освітньої, митної, виборчої та ін. Підкреслено, що ефективність діяльності нової влади залежить, у тому числі, від врахування нею таких особливостей масової свідомості українського населення, як критичний рівень недовіри до всіх інститутів влади; ціннісна та ідеологічна амбівалентність та невизначеність. Сформульовано висновки щодо малої ймовірності повернення України на орбіту російського політичного та економічного впливу, а також перемоги радикальної націоналістичної ідеології на теренах нашої країни.
Luxembourg is characterized by a very specific demographic situation with 47,9% of its resident population being non-Luxembourgish nationals as of 1 January 2018. This particular circumstance makes Luxembourg the EU Member State with the highest share of non-citizens residing on its territory. At the same time, around 85% of the foreign population are citizens of another EU Member State, leading to the fact that third-country nationals constitute only 7,3% of the total resident population of Luxembourg, the lowest share of foreigners coming from a third-country in the European Union. Integration is defined in national legislation as a 'two-way process by which the foreigners shows their will to participate on a long-term basis to the host society, which, in turn, takes all the necessary measures at the social, economic, political, and cultural levels, to encourage and facilitate this approach. Integration is a task that the State, municipalities and civil society achieve together'. In addition to this legal provision, several strategic documents, most notably the multi-annual national action plan on integration 2018, or PAN integration, published in July 2018, make reference to integration and its definition. The PAN integration provides the framework for the programs and tools favouring the social cohesion of Luxembourgish and non-Luxembourgish nationals and the overall national integration policy by identifying five priority domains, one of which explicitly relates to the reinforcement of employability of non-Luxembourgish nationals. Generally speaking, employment is viewed as a core element of the overall integration process, making both the access to as well as the integration into the Luxembourgish labour market a key element in becoming a part of society. At the same time, this access to and integration into the labour market pose a challenge, particularly to third-country nationals, as the statistics show that their employment rate is lower than that of Luxembourgish nationals or citizens of another EU Member State. Third-country nationals are predominantly occupied in the accommodation and food service activities sector, followed by the administrative and support service activities sector and the wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles sector. A closer look at the evolution of the sectors employing third-country nationals over the last years, however, indicates that in particular the information and communication technologies sector, the professional, scientific and technical activities sector and the financial and insurance activities sector register the most significant growth rates, leading to a development that seem to indicate a 'double immigration' of (highly) skilled migrants on the one hand and less or low skilled migrants in the more traditional economic sectors on the other hand. In regard to the general integration approach as well as the labour market integration policy, this study shows that Luxembourg does have not have a specific policy/strategic document/model in place that only focusses on third-country nationals. All political documents (laws and strategic documents such as the PAN 2010-2014 and the new PAN integration of 2018) and public measures (Welcome and Integration Contract (CAI), linguistic leave, support measures provided by the National Employment Agency (ADEM), measures facilitating school integration, electoral registration campaigns, etc.) are aimed at all foreign nationals without distinguishing between EU nationals and third-country nationals. It is the Immigration Law that provides the legal framework regarding the various grounds of migration for economic purposes. Additionally, the legislator aims to be attractive for certain categories of migrants coming to Luxembourg for economic purposes in order to meet the needs of the country's economic development (via legislative measures such as the European Blue Card, the 'investor' residence permit or the agreement between Luxembourg and Cape Verde). This being said, this study will present examples of practices that have been identified as good practices in the context of the topic of labour market integration of third-country nationals, despite the fact that they, for the most part, do not fit 100% into the pre-set structure of the study template at hand. In section 2.2, three Member State measure are presented, the first of which is the linguistic leave, a specific form of additional special leave that is accessible for salaried and independent workers of all nationalities, resident or non-resident, to learn or perfect the command of the Luxembourgish language. This legislative measure was introduced by law in 2009 with the intention to facilitate the integration of the beneficiaries into society through the labour market. The second measure is the AMIF-project 'InSitu JOBS' by the non-governmental organisation CLAE asbl (with co-financing from the Luxembourgish State). This project, which ended in April 2018 was targeted at third-country nationals within the scope of this study as well as at beneficiaries of international protection by providing them information and counselling in the context of access and integration into the Luxembourgish labour market. The third measure was also an AMIF-project and consists of a practical guide that was developed and drafted by IMS Luxembourg, a network of Luxembourgish companies, in order to provide information on how to hire and integrate third-country nationals. As for the private sector measures in section 2.3. of this study, research of secondary resources as well as consultations with various relevant stakeholders proved to be rather difficult in terms of finding private sector initiatives that specifically target at supporting or facilitating the labour market integration of third-country nationals within the scope of this study. Two measures were selected in this context, the first consisting of a specific recruitment method (simulation-based recruitment method) by a large international company which allows them to evaluate various different profiles of people that are not necessarily detectable through the classic CV-based recruitment methods. The second measure is a business guide developed by the American Chamber of Commerce Luxembourg and aims to promote and facilitate the establishment of new business in Luxembourg by providing information on everything that entrepreneurs and international companies need to know in this context.
The 1970 AAPOR Conference was held May 21-24 at the Hotel Sagamore, Lake George, NY. It was chaired by Irving Crespi. An introductory note is presented by Ronald Gatty & John P. Robinson, Proceedings Ed's. The AAPOR Award for Exceptionally Distinguished Achievement was given to Archibald M. Crossley. The Presidential Address was given by Robert T. Bower (Bur of Soc Sci Res, Inc, Washington, DC), & entitled CAVEAT VENDITOR: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON RESEARCH SPONSORS AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS. It discusses 3 variants of client perspective in PO res & their relationship to professional norms-the adversary, with his interest in manipulative potentials & lack of interest in high technical standards; the soc action program official, who raises problems for res'ers in protecting the interests of their R's; & the proprietor who inhibits the full & free exchange of survey results. It is held that further attempts must be made to gain some consensus on standards in PO res. In THE IM- PACT OF THE SURVEY METHOD ON THEORY, abstracts of the following papers are given: Robin M. Williams, Jr (Cornell U, Ithaca, NY), 'Sociology and the Survey Method'; Albert G. Hart (Columbia U, New York, NY), 'Impact of Survey Research on Economic Theory'; Norman Bradburn (Nat'l Opinion Res Center, Chicago, Ill), 'Survey Research and Psychological Theory.' In COMMUNICATIONS THEORY REVISITED, the following are presented: Herbert E. Krugman, 'Electroencephalographic Aspects of Low Involvements: Implications for the McLuhan Hypothesis'; Clark Leavitt, 'Classic Models of Communications Effects and Innovations in these Models'; Bruce H. Westley (U of Kentucky, Lexington), 'Communications Theory and General Systems Theory: Implications for Planned Change.' In PUBLIC OPINION DATA AND OTHER REALITIES: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, the following are presented: Alfred O. Hero, Jr, 'American Public Opinion Versus Official US Foreign Policy: 1936-68'; Michael A. Rappoport, 'Trends in American Political Behavior'; Daniel Yankelovich, 'The Wrong Enemy.' In OPINION AND MARKET RESEARCH IN DEVELOPING NATIONS (WAPOR SESSION), papers are given by: Fred G. Burke (State U of New York, Buffalo), 'Some Grass Roots Attitudes Affecting Political and Social Integration in East Africa'; George M. Gaither, 'Research into Attitudes Toward the Free Enterprise System in Latin America'; Michel Hoffmann (Marcomer S. A., Paris, France), 'Recent Research in Western Africa.' In TOWARD RESPONSIBILITY IN THE REPORTING OF OPINION SUR- VEYS, the following presentations are made: Lucien Nedzi (Congressman, 14th District, Mich), 'Will Legislation Help?'; Philip Meyer (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY), 'The Journalist: Friend or Foe?'; Mervin D. Field, 'Response: The Researcher's View.' In TOWARD A THEORY OF PUBLIC OPINION, papers are presented by M. Brewster Smith (U of Chicago, Ill), 'Some Psychological Perspectives on the Theory of Public Opinion'; Sidney Verba (U of Chicago, 111), 'The Impact of Public on Policy'; TRACKING SOCIAL CHANGE: Richard Maisel (New York U, NY), 'Subjective Social Indicators: The Measurement of Well-Being'; Victor D. Beardsley, 'Monitoring the Environment through Community Leaders'; Lawrence Bloomberg (US Bur of the Budget, Washington, DC), 'Social Indicators: Their Past, Present, and Future'; Howard Baumgartel (U of Kansas, Lawrence), 'A Survey Approach to Measuring the Penetration of Modern Management Practices in India.' In CONSUMER ATTITUDES AND BUYING INTEN- TIONS AS AIDS TO MARKETING FORECASTING AND GOV- ERNMENT POLICIES (WAPOR SESSION), the following are included: Gordon Heald (London Business Sch, England), 'The Use of Consumer Attitude and Buying-Intentions Data as an Aid to Government Policymaking'; Wim de Jonge, 'Price Expectations and Time to Buy'; Jay Schmiedeskamp (U of Michigan, Ann Arbor), 'Understanding Why Consumer Attitudes and Expectations Change.' NEW DIRECTIONS IN ELECTION RE- SEARCH, includes: Robert C. Sorensen, 'Social Invention in Political Polling: An Urban Case History'; Samuel Lubell, 'The Hidden Crisis in American Politics'; William R. Klecka (Northwestern U, Evanston, Ill), 'The Use of Political Generations in Studying Political Change'; Derek W. Urwin (Yale U, New Haven, Conn), 'Persistence and Change in Western Party Systems, 1945-1968.' A section entitled, STUDENT AWARD PAPERS presents: Charles K. Atkin (U of Wisconsin, Madison), 'Reassessing Two Alternative Explanations of De Facto Selective Exposure'; Gary A. Mauser (U of California, Irvine), 'A Structural Approach to Predicting Patterns of Electoral Substitution'; Philip Palmgreen (U of Kentucky, Lexington), 'A Daydream Model of Communication: The Effect of Daydreaming on Message Reception and Comprehension.' NEW DIRECTIONS IN ANALYTICAL MODELS, ineludes: Russel Haley, 'Marketing Implications of the Perceptual Screen'; F. Gerald Kline, Marshall J. Graney, & Dennis K. Davis (U of Minnesota, Minneapolis), 'Mass Communication Theory and Nonmetric Models'; Leonard S. Kogan (City U of New York, NY), 'Multivariate Methods and Attitude Research.' BLACKS IN AMERICA TODAY: POLITICS, EDUCA- TION, AND CONSUMER BEHAVIOR, contains: Edith Arlen, 'Social Psychological Themes in Negro Life Styles'; Walter Reichman & Marguerite Levy (City U of New York, NY), 'Academic Motivation of College Discovery Program Students and Regular Matriculants in Community Colleges of the City University of New York'; Robert T. Riley & Thomas F. Pettigrew (Harvard U, Cambridge, Mass), 'Sources of White Support for Hatcher, Stokes, and Bradley.' RECENT RESEARCH IN IN- TERVIEWING, presents: Regina Loewenstein & Andre A. O. Varma (Columbia U, New York, NY), 'Effect of Interaction of Interviewers and Respondents in Health Surveys'; Fansayde Calloway (Nat'l Opinion Res Center, Chicago, Ill), 'Interviewers Wanted: No Experience Necessary'; Andre Laurent (U of Michigan, Ann Arbor), 'Memory and Information Retrieval in the Interview.' In NEW PERSPECTIVES IN CROSS- CULTURAL RESEARCH, the following are included: D. F. Haythorne, et al (U of Alberta, Calgary), 'Cross-National Differences in Reported Health Behavior'; Richard W. Brislin (Western Washington State Coll, Bellingham), 'Cross Cultural Attitude Measurement'; Alexander Szalai, 'The Timing of Everyday Activities in Twelve Countries'; F. B. Waisanen & Hideya Kumata (Michigan State U, East Lansing), 'Functional Literacy in Comparative Perspective.' YOUTH IN AMERICA TODAY: POLITICS, CIGARETTES, AND DRUGS, contains: Michael Maidenberg & Philip Meyer (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY), 'The Berkeley Rebels: Five Years Later'; Seymour Lieberman, 'Cigarette Smoking and the Teenager'; Eric Josephson (Columbia U, New York, NY), 'Adult Perceptions of Youthful Drug Behavior'; Ann F. Brunswick (Columbia U, New York, NY), 'Black Adolescents: Some of Their Self-Attitudes and Expectations of Life.' A brief report of the Annual Advisory AAPOR Business Meeting concludes the Proceedings. M. Maxfield.
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
In autumn 2022, the electoral victory of the right-centre coalition led by Giorgia Meloni's Fratelli d'Italia (FdI, Brothers of Italy) and the subsequent establishment of her government caused scepticism and apprehension among international commentators. Concerns stemmed not only from it being the first administration in the history of post-war Italy whose majority partner, FdI, is rooted in the post-fascist tradition; more concretely, the inclusion within the coalition of parties such as Matteo Salvini's Lega (League) and Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia (Come on Italy), which had entertained political and personal relations with Vladimir Putin's Russia prior to the invasion of Ukraine, raised doubts about Italy's continuing support for Kyiv and the Western coalition. In reality, unwavering Atlanticist and pro-Ukraine views were repeatedly voiced by Meloni during the election campaign already, and – apart from a few unfortunate remarks by single individuals – this stance has been unambiguously upheld by the new government since it took office, as sealed by the Prime Minister's visit to Kyiv in February and to Washington in July 2023.[1] A more complex picture emerges regarding relations with the European Union and European partners. Historically, in the post-war period, European integration has been a crucial dimension of Italy's foreign policy, along with Atlanticism and strong support for multilateralism. Rome was one of the founders of the European communities, and European integration was long seen by ruling and opposition parties alike as key to Italy's economic, cultural and social modernisation. Since the 1990s, however, criticism of the European project began to emerge in Italy, especially among the new centre-right parties, which developed a so-called "Euro-realist" approach when in government, whereby Italy's national interest would not necessarily coincide with deeper European integration.[2] Outright Euroscepticism became more apparent since the Eurozone and migration "crises" of the 2010s, leading to the emergence of so-called "sovereigntist" narratives depicting the EU as an "antagonist", which found resonance especially among populist parties.[3] This narrative, however, lost momentum as a result of the unprecedented level of funding granted to Italy through the NextGenerationEU programme in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. In the aftermath of the 2022 election, managing relations with Europe was thus a crucial task for the newly elected Italian government.Meloni the Eurorealist Against this backdrop, Meloni's approach to Europe was centred on the vindication of Italy's "national interests" but within the framework of European integration and with a self-declared ambition to play a protagonist role. In the run-up to the 2022 election, FdI's electoral programme jettisoned some populist tones of the past (especially regarding the euro). Instead, the emphasis was placed on the need for Italy to "return as a protagonist in Europe" and to "relaunch the system of European integration, for a Europe of homelands, founded on peoples' interests".[4] In a similar vein, in her inaugural address to the Chamber of Deputies, Meloni stressed the desire for Italy to stand "with head high" in Europe and the other international fora, "with a constructive spirit, but without subordination or inferiority complexes". The emphasis on the "national interest" was accompanied by the acknowledgement of "a common European and Western destiny" – as well as of the importance of a frank dialogue within the European institutions, taking a "pragmatic" approach.[5] As a matter of fact, Meloni's first mission abroad as Italy's prime minister was to Brussels. In its first months of government, the Meloni administration adopted a Eurorealist stance in line with that of previous centre-rights governments from the early 2000s. While expressing a strong preference for an intergovernmental view of Europe, the Italian government acted within the framework of EU rules and governance. Meloni tried to bring forward, with mixed results, the Italian point of view on the main issues under discussion in European fora – from energy to migration. In terms of economic policy, despite a few contentious measures, the 2023 budget law on the whole met Brussels' expectations.[6] The management of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan funds and related reforms was instead more troubled, marked by sluggish implementation, delays and subsequent requests for revision by the Italian government.[7]Migration and the economy: Dark clouds ahead One year after the establishment of Giorgia Meloni's government, dark clouds are gathering on the horizon of Italy–EU relations. In the realm of policy, Rome is faced with increasing challenges, although these have often been concealed, belittled or even denied in the past months. This is especially true for two key areas: migration and the economy. On migration, while unauthorised arrivals to Italy through the Central Mediterranean route were soaring, in June, Meloni tried to put on a good face by declaring that Europe was eventually addressing the external dimension of migration, which according to her had previously been "unthinkable".[8] However, as the agreement reached between the EU and Turkey in 2016 at the height of the "migration crisis" shows,[9] there is actually nothing new in this approach. For many years now, the Union has systematically failed to address the migration issue in a holistic way – that is, considering the internal, external and border management dimensions together – and has instead tried to shift the responsibility onto countries of origin and transit through a transactional approach – with the latter being called upon to keep, readmit or repatriate migrants in exchange for economic support.[10] Agreements reached on paper, however, amount to very little when the counterparts do not duly implement them. The memorandum of understanding between the EU and Tunisia signed amid great optimism on 16 July seems to be a case in point: arrivals from the North African country to Italy increased by almost 60 per cent in the eight weeks after the agreement, while a group of members of European Parliament who wanted to monitor the situation in the country was recently refused entry.[11] The reality is that Meloni is focusing on the external dimension of EU migration policies because, while migration flows are on the rise under her government, Italy has so far failed to achieve anything on the internal dimension. This is true even for the bland agreement on the New Pact on Migration and Asylum reached at the Justice and Home Affairs Council in early June, which – in spite of Meloni's failed mediation efforts – has been strongly opposed by her supposed allies in Poland and Hungary.[12] If the Italian government has already failed in migration policy, the key area of economic policy looks increasingly troubled too. Having very little fiscal room for manoeuvre, Italy is unable to benefit from any relaxation of state aid rules; hence, Rome supported the establishment of a new European sovereignty fund as the backbone for an EU-wide industrial policy.[13] Many member states are sceptical,[14] though, and Italy's apparent troubles in spending existing NextGenerationEU funds provides a very good argument against it. Indeed, for the time being, ambitions for a new fund have been scaled back drastically, with a "platform" on strategic technologies being established instead. Added to this are the dilemmas in the negotiation of the new Stability and Growth Pact. Germany, in particular, is stonewalling on the European Commission's proposal, which would significantly benefit Italy by bringing greater flexibility to the old rules. Indeed, Italy's priority should be the creation of a common front along the lines of the Commission's proposal, which may well include member states such as Spain and France. But some postures of the Italian government are instead weakening Italy's credibility and negotiating strength: so far, it has been unable to compose an internal quarrel over the ratification of the European Stability Mechanism (already ratified by all other Eurozone states), while its campaign for excluding certain types of public investment from EU deficit targets is unlikely to be successful. There is a real risk that, in the end, the new Pact will be well below Italian expectations and needs.[15]Italy's true national interest: A stronger Europe The coming months will most likely see Meloni intensify her efforts to prepare the ground for a change of majority at the European level after the June 2024 election, working towards a coalition inclusive of conservative and nationalist forces. However, the political cohesion of a supranational alliance between movements, leaders and governments whose watchword is the vindication of their respective national interests "first and foremost" would be likely put to the test over and over again. Even domestically, in the run up to next year's European Parliament elections, Meloni now faces increasing opposition from within her own government, pushed to run a populist-nationalist race against Matteo Salvini. Whatever affinities European conservatives and nationalists may find in the realm of values, the extent to which they would be able to find common ground on issues pertaining, among others, to migration – as has already been evidenced in the past months – or economic governance seems uncertain, to say the least. There's the rub: an international context riven by multiple crises and increased competition, even assuming that one follows the logic of merely protecting the national interest, for a country like Italy – with the second-highest government debt-to-GDP ratio in the European Union and the highest old-age dependency ratio of all EU member states[16] – the priority should be further promoting European integration, advancing Italian demands in a frank and constructive manner within strengthened EU fora and institutions. National ambitions must always confront international realities. An overestimation of one's own means, any attempts to water down the system of supranational governance, or a resurfacing confrontational attitude would damage not only the European project, but Italy first and foremost.Nathalie Tocci is Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) and Honorary Professor at the University of Tübingen. Leo Goretti is Head of the Italian Foreign Policy programme at IAI.[1] Nona Mikhelidze, "Italy's Response to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine", in IAI Commentaries, No. 23|06 (February 2023), https://www.iai.it/en/node/16643.[2] Lucia Quaglia, "The Role of Italy in the European Union: Between Continuity and Change", in Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Vol. 9, No. 2 (August 2007), p. 133-148, DOI 10.1080/14613190701414426.[3] Fabrizio Coticchia, "A Sovereignist Revolution? Italy's Foreign Policy under the 'Yellow–Green' Government", in Comparative European Politics, Vol. 19, No. 6 (December 2021), p. 739-759, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-021-00259-0.[4] Fratelli d'Italia, Il programma. Pronti a risollevare l'Italia. Elezioni politiche 25 settembre 2022, August 2022, point 25, https://www.fratelli-italia.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Brochure_programma_FdI_qr_def.pdf.[5] Italian Government, President of the Council of Ministers Giorgia Meloni's Parliamentary Address on the Government Programme, 25 October 2022, https://www.governo.it/en/node/21000.[6] Nicoletta Pirozzi, "I rapporti Italia-Ue", in Ferdinando Nelli Feroci and Leo Goretti (eds), L'Italia dal governo Draghi al governo Meloni. Rapporto sulla politica estera italiana. Edizione 2022, Roma, IAI, January 2023, p. 25-31, https://www.iai.it/en/node/16471.[7] Giuseppe Fonte, "Italy Struggling to Meet Reform Policy Targets Agreed for EU for Post-COVID Funds", in Reuters, 8 June 2023, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/italy-struggling-meet-reform-policy-targets-agreed-eu-post-covid-funds-2023-06-08.[8] Italian Government, President Meloni's Doorstep Following the European Council Meeting of 29-30 June, 30 June 2023, https://www.governo.it/en/node/23062.[9] European Council, EU-Turkey Statement, 18 March 2016, http://europa.eu/!Uv88TM.[10] Luca Barana and Asly Okyay, "Shaking Hands with Saied's Tunisia: The Paradoxes and Trade-offs Facing the EU", in IAI Commentaries, No. 23|40 (August 2023), node/17362.[11] Alessandra Ziniti, "L'intesa flop con la Tunisia, sbarchi aumentati del 60%. Salvini: è un atto di guerra", in Repubblica, 14 September 2023; Lisa O'Carroll, "MEPs Refused Entry to Tunisia Two Months after Signing of Migration Deal", in The Guardian, 14 September 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/p/zq9me.[12] "Meloni 'Not Disappointed' with Poland, Hungary over Migrant Deadlock", in Ansa, 30 June 2023, https://www.ansa.it/english/news/politics/2023/06/30/migrants-meloni-not-disappointed-with-poland-hungary_ec2352bb-02d2-4860-97bc-04780f6d58ba.html.[13] Italian Government, President Meloni's Introduction at Her Press Conference following the Special European Council Meeting, 10 February 2023, https://www.governo.it/en/node/21805.[14] Jan Strupczewski, "Seven EU Countries Oppose New EU Funding as Response to U.S. Subsidy Plan – Letter", in Reuters, 27 January 2023, http://reut.rs/3Jgftt6.[15] Ferdinando Nelli Feroci, "L'incrocio pericoloso fra legge di bilancio e riforma del Patto di Stabilità", in AffarInternazionali, 29 August 2023, https://www.affarinternazionali.it/?p=104942.[16] Eurostat, "Government Debt Down to 91.2% of GDP in Euro Area", in Euro Indicators, No. 83/2023 (21 July 2023), https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-euro-indicators/w/2-21072023-ap; Eurostat, Half of EU's Population Older than 44.4 Years in 2022, 22 February 2023, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/DDN-20230222-1.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
What Bossier City gave to taxpayers with one hand in 2024 the Republican Mayor Tommy Chandler Administration lobbies to take with the other in 2025, creating an election-year problem for graybeard city councilors.
Lost in all the excitement last week over the eventually-thwarted term limits power play instigated by those graybeards – Republican David Montgomery and Jeff Free plus Democrat Bubba Williams and independent Jeff Darby – with their rookie lackey Republican Vince Maggio was the budget workshop presented by the Council, hearing from city Chief Administrative Officer Amanda Nottingham about what the 2025 budget will look like that the Council will have to grapple with over the next two months, starting next week. It ended up as an object lesson as to the wages of the profligacy practiced by the graybeards over the past decade and more.
Nottingham painted a discouraging picture. Under current assumptions, she foresaw a $3 million deficit because expenses would increase faster than revenues. The main culprit she fingered was escalating insurance costs although the lingering problem of the state trying to shore up underfunded retirement systems, by passing costs onto local governments, also contributed.
And, this figure depended upon the city bidding out its general liability insurance business. That directly challenges Montgomery, who wasn't present and famously has declared that, referring to professional services, "We don't shop this." If Montgomery, who in leveraging his elected office has made at least approaching $3.2 million from selling no-bid insurance to local governments with a foothold in Bossier Parish, were to eschew reelection that would place him in prime position to write hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of policies to the city as out of office he would become eligible to do this.
The budget also promoted extra spending as a result of a compensation study recently completed for the city, with its results summarized prior to her addressing the workshop. That led to the administration to plan for equity raises for some city employees, parity pay raises for police, and one-time bonuses for fire personnel up to a minimum of five percent increase, in the hopes for this to become permanent in 2026.
These would cost about $3 million, of which about two-thirds Nottingham said could come from the Parkway Capital Projects Fund, which backs capital projects from a sales tax although also with excesses above debt service can shovel that towards public safety operations, but $1.1 million is predicated coming from increased property tax rates. And while Nottingham said the administration planned to drain reserves to the tune of $2 million to cover everything else and assuming lower insurance costs through bidding, it would prefer to roll forward in 2025 all four property taxes the city levies to meet the increased salaries.
This collides with election year prospects for both Chandler and councilors. To great fanfare, last month the city rolled back property tax rates to hold the line on the aggregate of property tax collections for property not improved and continuously held since the last reassessment for 2024, with Montgomery in debate emphasizing that as elections loom. Now, the budget will dispense with that but leaving a dodge for Chandler and councilors: the actual vote to roll forward could occur after elections as it can occur as late as prior to year's end, allowing officials to claim they haven't raised taxes even though they budgeted to do so and then their following through only after safely back in office. If so, the roll back last month will turn out to be nothing more than a crass diversionary tactic to serve electoral ambitions.
One graybeard suggested this wouldn't be enough. Darby stumped for a new property tax in the future just to fund public safety salaries, even though one now set at 5.84 mills exists, so he would appear to favor going to voters to raise that beyond its 6.19 authorized maximum.
Worse, property owners and renters also will be hit up with a $12 monthly fee increase, a 50 percent hike for typical homeowners, for sanitation, about which Nottingham said present rates only cover trash collection, not other items like street sweeping, grass cutting, and general beautification which has caused a draining of reserves to offset the collection contract's escalator clause tied to inflation. And although not requested in this budget, Nottingham kept the door open for water and sewerage rate increases as well as the state requires adequate rates for participation in grant programs. It will be interesting to see if the Council doesn't delay the rate increase until midyear, after elections.
In his pitch for increased property taxation, Darby said "nobody likes taxes" but claimed these needed to maintain "our quality of living." In response, Nottingham observed that would not be maintained unless employees were there to do it, and raising salaries though diverting revenues from capital outlay for that, as is provided in the Parkway Fund, would accomplish this.
Which is a roundabout way of getting to the heart of the matter. The reason why the city is running short on operating funds is because it has so much tied up in debt. The 2023 Comprehensive Annual Finance Report reveals the city has $191 million in government debt and $201 million in enterprise debt. Throwing in interest, bond premiums, and refunding deferrals will cost $558 million over the next 20 years, which works out to each of the city's 62,971 residents as of the end of last year on the hook for over $8,800, while interest alone on government debt will cost $80 million. For both 2024 and 2025 that debt will cost over $8 million each year.
The city over the past quarter-century has a sordid history of wasting well over $100 million on building expensive monumental public works with little demonstrated need and/or to satisfy outside interests (in the breach, it turned out for one), with the Walter O. Bigby Carriageway as the latest example. Just opened (complete with a roundabout fashioned with an idol representing politicians past and present costing hundreds of thousands of dollars), the 2023 CAFR pegged its final cost to be over $84 million that originally was set at $60 million and supposed to provide a true alternative limited-access route north from the Arthur Ray Teague Parkway's terminus at Traffic Street and East Texas Street to Interstate 220 or thereabouts.
Instead, it actually started a way up East Texas at Old Benton Road, then travels northeast past the Hamilton Road intersection until it hits a sliver of Shed Road (that part now eviscerated from points east because the city's contracted engineering firm Manchac Consulting botched the process to keep Shed Road whole), then heads north to terminate on Benton Road well south of the interstate highway (in fact, just north of the side street to Montgomery's insurance agency). For travelers from the Red River with a destination on the northern reaches of Benton Road it does avoid a couple of railway crossings and a big intersection at East Texas and Benton, but generally it's just not going to save much time for many people, making such a huge expense for relatively low return questionable (except perhaps for some landowners who found their tracts in the path of the road suddenly much more valuable and city councilors wanting a quicker way to head southwest from their offices).
Using available bond issue data, the interest alone on the Carriageway dollars spent would cover the proposed salary increases for the next dozen years, and the principal that would have been available matches that. Think of the additional public safety personnel and higher wages that could be offered that instead must divert to debt service.
Or, of the lower taxes and obviated tax increases that would have resulted. Instead, present Council graybeards, the past colleagues, and the previous couple of mayors mismanaged city governance, too busy building monuments to their rule rather than taking care of employees and public safety needs, and now want taxpayers and ratepayers to pick up the tab for their mistakes.
It will be interesting to see Montgomery, Free, and Darby try to explain all of this away at the next Council meeting during budget discussions and thereafter (and Williams as well, although he has said he doesn't plan to run for reelection while the others haven't ruled it out). The graybeards broke it, they own it, and voters need to hold them accountable for it.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
Legally impaired from the start, Bossier City's Charter Review Commission finds itself hurtling towards a politicized and suspect outcome that may cost taxpayers dearly.
The panel was born of the desires of four Bossier City councilor graybeards – Republicans David Montgomery and Jeff Free, Democrat Bubba Williams, and no party Jeff Darby – plus their lapdog newcomer Republican Vince Maggio to scuttle term limits, as a reaction to a successful petition drive to impose retroactive three-term limits on city elected officials. It ran afoul of a legal technicality, so organizers are out there again with another attempt plus another couple of measures upon which they report they are making steady progress in signature collection.
However, while possible it's not probable that enough signatures will have been collected and certified to meet a Jun. 19 deadline to have the measures appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. The timing is important, not only because if the petitioners are too slow – even as it appears almost certain they will have enough signatures to make the Dec. 7 ballot, which is due Oct. 14 – then next years' city elections won't have limits in place.
If not making the deadlines, that will elicit a sigh of relief from the graybeards as the term limits measure almost certainly would succeed at the ballot box and thereby disqualify them from any more time in office, as they have served anywhere from three to seven terms. But as it appears petitioners will be on time to try to cancel their 2025 electoral participation, they also need a strategy to try to head off limits in that eventuality.
The Council majority bloc of the graybeards plus Maggio – who, even if it never may apply to him, recently in no uncertain terms declared opposition to term limits – thus wants to have a new charter, as indicated by a joint list the Council forwarded to the Commission, up for at least the November vote to beat the amendments to the punch. This could obviate, if not moot, the petitioners even if successfully gaining enough signatures.
But the charter doesn't allow for that. Instead, it makes very clear that amendments are to occur singly. The section dealing with charter changes makes that immensely clear (emphases mine):
Sec. 21-03: Each amendment, however proposed, may include more than one section of the Charter, provided that it relates to a single subject that must be clearly expressed in the title. Each section amended shall be set forth in full as it will stand after the proposed amendment. There shall be appended to the proposed amendment a statement of its nature not to exceed one hundred and fifty (150) words.
Sec. 21-04: The City Council shall submit any amendment or amendments as recommended by the Charter Review Commission to the electors of the City…. Any number of proposed amendments to this Charter may be submitted at any such general municipal election.
Sec. 21-06: The ballot used at such elections shall contain these words: "For the charter amendment" (stating the title thereof and the nature of the proposed amendment as appended to the same); "Against the charter amendment" (stating the title thereof and the nature of the proposed amendment as appended to the same).
Sec. 21-07: If a majority of the votes cast on any proposed amendment….
That's it. Nothing in the charter mandates that the electorate take one up-or-down vote en globo on the entire lot. Indeed, the charter seems to dictate separate consideration for each and every one and does not authorize a vote to "replace" the charter, but only to amend parts of the existing one.
So, to get around that, the graybeards+ have to resort to state law. Shilling for them, as he has consistently on other issues, Assistant City Attorney Richard Ray has told the Commission that their efforts should focus on charter replacement, which was pursued the two times previously the city has gone through the process. State statute makes this possible as well as amending, but Ray has treated both the charter's language and statute on amending as if they didn't exist.
Thus, the very ordinance establishing the panel, Ordinance 154 of 2023 passed on Dec. 5, didn't follow the charter. Sec. 21-01 reads "Amendments to the charter may be proposed as follows: (a) By the City Council in the form of an ordinance, except that it shall not be subject to veto, embodying the proposed amendment … (emphasis added). No such language appears in the ordinance, with it only rendering a general statement that the Council "does hereby authorize appointment of a Charter Review Commission for the purpose of proposing changes to the Charter." The clear statement that amendments are discrete in nature and should have been stated then and there eliminates the chance that the Commission can follow charter guidelines throughout the process.
Note as well that by saying the Commission was in the business of "proposing changes to the Charter," that removes use of the Commission as permitted by state law to replace the charter, because it was not empowered to do so. Thus, the ordinance is defective in two ways: it does not legally follow the charter, thus removing the possibility of the Commission to amend the charter through the process outlined in the charter; and, by not stating the Commission is to replace the charter, it cannot use statute as a vehicle to replace it. The only option thus left is by amendment through statute, which merely states that a commission must be employed (and sets out parameters for it that are mirrored in the charter) and amendments be approved by a majority of the electorate, as stated in the Constitution.
If the Commission continues on a course to replace the charter, whatever end product rests on very shaky legal ground. Ironically, when faced with a similar situation regarding the initial term limits petition where it appeared the process didn't explicitly follow state law, the graybeards+ through Ray and City Attorney Charles Jacobs (currently on medical leave) spared no effort or expense – outside counsel advice followed by legal actions – to try to cut it off at the pass, and eventually succeeded in court. Yet with this situation of a discrepancy between process followed and the law, nothing has been done by the city to investigate whether it's about to waste a whole lot of time and money on something legally impaired from the very start.
Of course, that's because the graybeards+ want that outcome of replacement, regardless of its legal dubiousness. That's as by a theory floated by Ray that any of the three amendments being petitioned would apply only to the existing charter, so if on the same ballot these and a new charter passed they all would be mooted out of existence. That thinking itself seems as dubious, since the language of the propositions doesn't tie them to any particular charter and the term limits one, the death of which lies behind the whole effort, slots into the proposed new charter seamlessly.
Still, the strategy is there for all to see – present a new document to voters at or before the amendments appear on the ballot and hope it passes that then casts aside the amendments even if these pass voter muster also. That it could lead to years of expensive litigation troubles them not at all; after all, it's not their money they would be wasting which the graybeards have an extensive history of doing and they need to defeat limits to keep power to fulfill whatever cravings they have, such as Montgomery's ability to surpass the $3 million mark in taxpayer dollars shoveled his way.
The wisest course would be to have the Commission stick with a few discrete amendments rather than bring legal wrath to the city by attempting charter replacement. If a majority of its members really want to opt for replacement, at the very least it needs to slow down – it meets next later this week – and make sure expert outside legal counsel gives a satisfactory review of the process to date, if not have the city request an attorney general's opinion about that. We can hope prudence, rather than nakedly political ambitions, takes precedence on this matter.
