Eminent domain has been a government power for centuries. In most cases, eminent domain is used to provide essential public goods. Using it for the advantage of private entities is hotly debated. The 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo vs. New London allowed the use of eminent domain for privately driven endeavors. By examining the holdout problem, compensation and the effects of the Kelo case, national reform is determined as the best solution to private/public ventures using eminent domain.
1998 IS THE CENTENNIAL OF THE BIRTH OF PAUL ROBESON. ROBESON, THE SON OF A RUNAWAY SLAVE, GREW TO BECOME NORTH AMERICA'S FIRST TRULY RECOGNIZED BLACK RENAISSANCE MAN. WITH A SUPERB BARITONE VOICE, HE BEGAN TO BUILD A SINGING AND ACTING CAREER. ROBESON WAS ALSO A POLITICALLY COMMITTED ANTI-RACIST INTERNATIONALIST, WHO, BECAUSE OF HIS SWEEPING TALENT AND POWER, BECAME THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN THE U.S. AT THE TIME.
AS THE AUTHOR STEPPED UNDER THE ARCADES OF THE NEW DELHI CONNAUGHT CIRCLE, THE UNNERVING RACKET OF THE CONTINUOUS CHAOS ON THE STREET RECEDED A LITTLE. BUT THERE WAS NO TIME TO RELAX. THE AUTHOR WAS QUICKLY CORNERED BY HALF A DOZEN SHOE-SHINE BOYS, WHO INSISTED ON REMOVING THE DELHI DIRT FROM HIS FOOT-WARE. AFTER SOME HELPLESS ATTEMPTS TO EVADE THEM. THE AUTHOR SCCUMBED. AND AS HIS RIGHT SHOE BEGAN TO BE WORKED. THE AUTHOR EVEN MANAGED TO RELAX A LITTLE. TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND TO ELEVATE THE YOUNG MAN KNEELING IN FRONT OF HIM BY A GENEROUS SAHIB SMILE. 'YOU GERMAN?' HE ASKED. HOW DID HE KNOW? THE AUTHOR WONDERED AND CONFIRMED. GERMANY RICH COUNTRY', HE WENT ON. 'YES'. THE AUTHOR REPLIED, 'A RICH COUNTRY, BUT IN GREAT DANGER!' THE AUTHOR PAUSED TO UNDERLINE THE IMPORTANCE OF HIS MESSAGE. 'WE LIVE UNDER THE CONSTANT THREAT OF WAR'. HE LOOKED AT HIM SOMEWHAT UNIMPRESSED. SO THE AUTHOR DRAMATIZED: BOMBS ... MISSLES ... NUCLEAR WEAPONS, YOU UNDERSTAND?' IT SEEMS HE DID NOT, THOUGH HE NODDED. INSTEAD OF BEING SATISFIED WITH THE MONEY THE AUTHOR OFFERED (IT WAS SUFFICIENT), HE ASKED FOR ONE RUPEE MORE. THEY ALWAYS TRY TO CHEAT YOU.
ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE STATE, TO PROVIDE FOR THE COHESION OF SOCIETY, IS UNDER THREAT. THE PROBLEM IS AGGRAVATED BY MOUNTING PROBLEMS TO REGULATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CITIZEN AND STATE VIA THE INSTRUMENT OF CITIZENSHIP IN FACE OF A TRANSNATIONALIZATION OF SOCIAL RELATIONS. THIS ARTICLE ANALYZES THESE DEVELOPMENTS AS AN EXPRESSION OF DEBORDERING PROCESSES IN THE THE WORLD OF STATES WHICH MIGHT LEAD TO A DEBORDERING OF THE WORLD OF STATES. IT DEFINES THE MEANING OF DEBORDERING AND EXPLORES ITS DIMENSIONS; OFFERS EMPIRICAL POINTERS TO DEBORDERING AND DEMARCATION; AND ANALYZES THE WORLD OF STATES AND WORLD SOCIETY.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
