The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008

U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Darrell Issa (CA-49), Ranking Member. The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 STAFF REPORT U.S.HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 111TH CONGRESS COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM ORIGINALLY RELEASED JULY 1,2009 UPDATED MAY 12,2010

AIG: Where is the Taxpayers\u27 Money Going?

Hearing before the Committee on Oversight and Government Refor

The Federal Bailout of AIG - Hearing before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

HEARING before the COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION Serial No. 111-10

Human cloning and embryonic stem cell research after Seoul. [Brown]

4 pages (out of 249 pages)Full text of the congressional hearing discussing the ethical issues raised by stem cell research recently conducted in Seoul, South Korea. Issues include human cloning for the purpose of producing human stem cells. [Opening statements] contains the opening statements of the congressional committee. [Battey] contains the testimony and prepared statement of James F. Battey, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Stem Cell Task Force chair. [Schwetz] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Bernard A. Schwetz, director of the Office for Human Research Protections, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Pascal] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Chris B. Pascal, director of the Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Panel 1 questioning] contains the questioning of the first panel, consisting of Battey, Schwetz, and Pascal. [Chole] contains the testimony and prepared statement of stem cell researcher Dr. Richard A. Chole. [Norsigian] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Judy Norsigian, co-author of "Our Bodies Ourselves" and women's health advocate. [Brown] contains the testimony and prepared statement of patient advocate Joe Brown. [Beeson] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Diane Beeson, professor at California State University, East Bay. [Doerflinger] contains the testimony and prepared statement of pro-life advocate Richard M. Doerflinger. [Mathews] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Debra Mathews, scientist and bioethics scholar. [Panel 2 questioning] contains the questioning of the second panel, consisting of Chole, Norsigian, Brown, Beeson, Doerflinger, and Mathews. [Additional information (1)] contains additional information submitted. [Follow-up questions] contains follow-up questions for both panels. [Uniform requirements for manuscripts] contains the document "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication." [Hinxton Group] contains a statement from The Hinxton Group, "An International Consortium on Stem Cells, Ethics, and Law." [Values in conflict] contains the document "Values in Conflict: Public Attitudes on Embryonic Stem Cell Research." [Additional information (2)] contains additional information submitted

Human cloning and embryonic stem cell research after Seoul. [Chole]

11 pages (out of 249 pages)Full text of the congressional hearing discussing the ethical issues raised by stem cell research recently conducted in Seoul, South Korea. Issues include human cloning for the purpose of producing human stem cells. [Opening statements] contains the opening statements of the congressional committee. [Battey] contains the testimony and prepared statement of James F. Battey, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Stem Cell Task Force chair. [Schwetz] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Bernard A. Schwetz, director of the Office for Human Research Protections, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Pascal] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Chris B. Pascal, director of the Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Panel 1 questioning] contains the questioning of the first panel, consisting of Battey, Schwetz, and Pascal. [Chole] contains the testimony and prepared statement of stem cell researcher Dr. Richard A. Chole. [Norsigian] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Judy Norsigian, co-author of "Our Bodies Ourselves" and women's health advocate. [Brown] contains the testimony and prepared statement of patient advocate Joe Brown. [Beeson] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Diane Beeson, professor at California State University, East Bay. [Doerflinger] contains the testimony and prepared statement of pro-life advocate Richard M. Doerflinger. [Mathews] contains the testimony and prepared statement of Debra Mathews, scientist and bioethics scholar. [Panel 2 questioning] contains the questioning of the second panel, consisting of Chole, Norsigian, Brown, Beeson, Doerflinger, and Mathews. [Additional information (1)] contains additional information submitted. [Follow-up questions] contains follow-up questions for both panels. [Uniform requirements for manuscripts] contains the document "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication." [Hinxton Group] contains a statement from The Hinxton Group, "An International Consortium on Stem Cells, Ethics, and Law." [Values in conflict] contains the document "Values in Conflict: Public Attitudes on Embryonic Stem Cell Research." [Additional information (2)] contains additional information submitted

The moral economy of the pharmaceutical industry: Legitimising prices

The practices of pharmaceutical companies have been widely criticised by researchers and investigative journalists, yet their conduct has mostly escaped significant moral opprobrium from the wider public, health professionals and governments. This article examines one reason for this by exploring the techniques companies use when seeking to justify and legitimise their conduct – legitimising techniques that help to render their failures to adhere to accepted standards less visible. It explores these techniques by examining four cases involving pricing where the companies’ conduct has, nonetheless, been questioned. It is divided into three parts. The first looks at the various publicly-stated standards that provide the moral context for the industry’s activities. The second examines four cases, each involving pricing, where companies’ prices have been challenged as morally unacceptable, each leading to a US Government investigation. These provide a means of exploring how companies seek to justify their actions in order to maintain the appearance of conformity to accepted moral standards. The third considers some reasons why the industry’s efforts at legitimation have considerable force. The analysis shows not only the character of the claims made by pharmaceutical companies in defence of their practices – claims about the health benefits of the medicine, access to it, and research and development costs, which are all often exaggerated. It also shows why the companies’ legitimising tactics are typically effective

Security: Collective good or commodity?

This is the author's accepted manuscript. The final published article is available from the link below. Copyright @ 2008 Sage.The state monopoly on the legitimate use of violence in Europe and North America has been central to the development of security as a collective good. Not only has it institutionalized the state as the prime national and international security provider, it has helped to reduce the threat from other actors by either prohibiting or limiting their use of violence. The recent growth of the private security industry appears to undermine this view. Not only are private security firms proliferating at the national level; private military companies are also taking over an increasing range of military functions in both national defence and international interventions. This article seeks to provide an examination of the theoretical and practical implications of the shift from states to markets in the provision of security. Specifically, it discusses how the conceptualization of security as a commodity rather than a collective good affects the meaning and implementation of security in Western democracies.ESR