Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy最新文献_第4页

Google and the Cyber Infiltration b谷歌和网络渗透

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.99

Xiaorong Li

引用次数: 0

Philosophers to the Rescue? The Failed Attempt to Defend the Inclusion of Intelligent Design in Public Schools 哲学家来拯救?为公立学校纳入智能设计理论辩护的失败尝试

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.102

Jay Sloan-Lynch

引用次数: 1

Constitutional Rights for Nonresident Aliens 非居民外国人的宪法权利

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103

A. Walen

引用次数: 0

The Harms of Homeschooling 在家上学的危害

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.104

R. West

引用次数: 35

Insider Trading: A Moral Problem 内幕交易:一个道德问题

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.105

A. Strudler

引用次数: 1

Is There a Moral Obligation to Limit Family Size 限制家庭规模是道德义务吗

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.108

Scott Wisor

引用次数: 3

Regulatory Review and Cost-Benefit Analysis 法规审查和成本效益分析

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107

M. Sagoff

{"title":"Regulatory Review and Cost-Benefit Analysis","authors":"M. Sagoff","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107","url":null,"abstract":"In a Memorandum issued within a few days after he assumed office, President Barack Obama called for an overhaul of the policies the White House uses to review regulations proposed by federal departments and agencies. The president acknowledged the necessity of regulatory review \"to ensure consistency with Presidential priorities, to coordinate regulatory policy, and to offer a dispassionate and analytical 'second opinion' on agency actions.\" Critics of previous administrations had charged that they misused the process of regulatory review to thwart agency actions. \"In this time of fundamental transformation,\" the president wrote, \"that process--and the principles governing regulation in general--should be revisited.\" Regulatory agencies have missions--but they must also consider the economic costs and consequences of what they do. This essay considers how the White House, in reviewing regulations, can direct agencies to take these costs and consequences into account while letting them do their work. Regulatory Review From the time of the Reagan administration, federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and departments, such as the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture, have had to obtain the approval of the White House before proposing any major regulation. Each year, the White House through its Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews about 500 rulemakings. Those it approves may become law; those it rejects it \"returns\" to the agency. The Executive Order that currently governs regulatory review within OIRA requires every department and agency that proposes a regulation to \"assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation\" and to \"propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs.\" This requirement may seem innocuous; that agencies should balance the benefits and costs of a regulation appears to make common sense. Yet over the past 30 years, economists have developed a formal and technical method of defining and measuring \"costs\" and \"benefits.\" Agencies must package regulatory proposals in a way that passes a cost-benefit test in the specific and technical sense that \"costs\" and \"benefits\" are now defined and measured within the theory of microeconomics. Within microeconomic theory, benefits are measured in terms of the amount people are willing to pay for outcomes they want. In economic parlance, \"benefit\" and \"willingness to pay\" (WTP) refer to the same thing. According to one authoritative text, \"Benefits are the sums of the maximum amounts that people would be willing to pay to gain outcomes that they view as desirable.\" Costs are measured in terms of the minimum amounts people demand as compensation (or are willing to accept) to allow outcomes they do not like. \"Willingness to accept\" (WTA) is counted as a kind of negative WTP. Economists me","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"21-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66667418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

What Is Charity 慈善是什么

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.106

J. Lichtenberg

引用次数: 14

Recreating the Creation 再造创作

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-04-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.110

R. Nelson

引用次数: 0

"Mental Illness" and Justice as Recognition “精神疾病”与正义的认同

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy Pub Date : 2009-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111

S. Goering

{"title":"\"Mental Illness\" and Justice as Recognition","authors":"S. Goering","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111","url":null,"abstract":"My friend T was diagnosed with bipolar disorder over a decade ago, just in the midst of his medical residency. Since that time, he hasn't been able to complete his residency, though he's held a variety of different jobs, some of them making use of his medical knowledge (intake physician for insurance companies), others not (golf course attendant). Although T will grant that he needed help at the time of his diagnosis, to this day he doesn't approve of the kind of help he received (relatively coerced but officially \"voluntary\" commitment, a wide range of ineffective pharmaceutical cocktails, electroshock). Like many people diagnosed as bipolar, he has at various times come off the medications prescribed for him. In part this is due to frustration with their side effects (liver damage, weight gain, hair loss, mental fuzziness, anxiety) and their limited effectiveness. But it's also because he questions whether whatever occurred in his brain and resulted in his difficulty functioning \"normally\" is chronic, and in any case, he's not convinced that \"normal\" functioning is always to be preferred. In this judgment, he is echoed by many patients and former patients, both those relatively sanguine about psychiatry (Redfield Jamison) and those who identify with the more radical \"psychiatric survivors' network.\" What he wants is to be respected for his abilities, accommodated for his illness (when it cannot be adequately treated), and treated as capable of making a positive social contribution. When many people hear T's story, they think, \"What a sad story; what bad luck!\" They understand it through a lens of personal tragedy and misfortune. If they sense unfairness, it is unfairness in an existential or perhaps even divine sense: how could the impersonal world or God treat him so poorly? The idea that some part--perhaps even a large part--of his disadvantage is socially imposed is foreign to them. Most people firmly believe in a medical model of disability, and by extension, a medical model of psychiatric disability. For them, disability is an intrinsic feature of a person, and the best way to help a disabled person is to find a cure. If a cure is not available, the person might be compensated for an inability to work, or pitied and offered charity. But according to my friend and people in the disability rights movement, many of his disadvantages could and indeed should be addressed through social change. If so, then we shouldn't shake our heads in pity over his case; we should wrestle with how to do justice for him. Sociopolitical Conception of Disability Disability scholars often distinguish between an impairment (usually taken to be a non-standard state of the body, such as deafness or paraplegia) and disability (understood to be a lack of fit between the body and the social environment, resulting in disadvantages for the individual who is impaired). With this distinction, the disadvantage of disability is something that calls out for social change. In ","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"14-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668156","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3