6,100 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions
Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”), sometimes called “fast track,” was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee the next day. TPA, as incorporated into H.R. 1314 by substitute amendment, passed the Senate on May 22 by a vote of 62-37. In the House of Representatives, the measure was voted on under a procedure known as “division of the question,” which requires separate votes on each component, but approval of both to pass. Voting on June 12, TPA (Title I) passed by a vote of 219-211, but TAA (Title II) was defeated 126-302. A motion to reconsider that vote was laid by Speaker Boehner shortly after that vote. The previous grant of authority expired on July 1, 2007.
TPA requires that if the President negotiates an international trade agreement that would reduce tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade in ways that require changes in U.S. law, the United States can implement the agreement only through the enactment of legislation. If the trade agreement and the process of negotiating it meet certain requirements, TPA allows Congress to consider the required implementing bill under expedited (“fast track”) procedures, pursuant to which the bill may come to the floor without action by the leadership, and can receive a guaranteed up-or-down vote with no amendments.
Under TPA, an implementing bill may be eligible for this expedited consideration if (1) the trade agreement was negotiated during the limited time period for which TPA is in effect; (2) the agreement advances a series of U.S. trade negotiating objectives specified in the TPA statute; (3) the negotiations were conducted in conjunction with an extensive array of required notifications to and consultations with Congress and other stakeholders; and (4) the President submits to Congress a draft implementing bill, which must meet specific content requirements, and a range of required supporting information. If, in any given case, Congress judges that these requirements have not been met, TPA provides mechanisms through which the eligibility of the implementing bill for expedited consideration may be withdrawn in one or both chambers.
The most recent previous renewal of TPA covered agreements reached between December 2002 and the end of June 2007. Current legislation would apply to agreements reached before July 1, 2018, with a possible extension to July 1, 2021. The United States is now engaged in several sets of trade agreement negotiations. Legislation to reauthorize TPA was introduced, but not considered, in the 113th Congress.
The issue of TPA reauthorization raises a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including the following: What is trade promotion authority? Is TPA necessary? What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes? What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA? Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy
Recommended from our members
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: History, Impact, and Issues
[Excerpt] The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) established requirements for enacting certain legislation and issuing certain regulations that would impose enforceable duties on state, local, or tribal governments or on the private sector. UMRA refers to obligations imposed by such legislation and regulations as “mandates” (either “intergovernmental” or “private sector,” depending on the entities affected). The direct cost to affected entities of meeting these obligations are referred to as “mandate costs,” and when the federal government does not provide funding to cover these costs, the mandate is termed “unfunded.”
UMRA incorporates numerous definitions, exclusions, and exceptions that specify what forms and types of mandates are subject to its requirements, termed “covered mandates.” Covered mandates do not include many federal actions with potentially significant financial impacts on nonfederal entities. This report’s primary purpose is to describe the kinds of legislative and regulatory provisions that are subject to UMRA’s requirements, and, on this basis, to assess UMRA’s impact on federal mandates. The report also examines debates that occurred, both before and since UMRA’s enactment, concerning what kinds of provisions UMRA ought to cover, and considers the implications of experience under UMRA for possible future revisions of its scope of coverage.
This report also describes the requirements UMRA imposes on congressional and agency actions to establish covered mandates. For most legislation and regulations covered by UMRA, these requirements are only informational. For reported legislation that would impose covered mandates on the intergovernmental or private sectors, UMRA requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to provide an estimate of mandate costs. Similarly, for regulations that would impose covered mandates on the intergovernmental or private sectors, UMRA requires that the issuing agency provide an estimate of mandate costs (although the specifics of the estimates required for legislation and for regulations differ somewhat). Also, solely for legislation that would impose covered intergovernmental mandates, UMRA establishes a point of order in each house of Congress through which the chamber can decline to consider the legislation. This report examines UMRA’s implementation, focusing on the respective requirements for mandate cost estimates on legislation and regulations, and on the point of order procedure for legislation proposing unfunded intergovernmental mandates
The existence of rational expectations equilibrium: a retrospective
This paper provides a selective review of theoretical research on the consistency of rational expectations equilibrium and its properties in microeconomic models. The general equilibrium framework is emphasized throughout the paper. After defining rational expectations equilibrium for a pure exchange economy, the paper presents a simple counterexample to illustrate that rational expectations equilibria need not exist. Results are summarized for the generic existence of fully revealing rational expectations equilibria in smooth economies satisfying additional dimensionality assumptions. Then the rational expectations equilibrium existence problem is related to earlier analysis of informationally decentralized allocation mechanisms. Next the efficiency properties of rational expectations equilibrium allocations are examined. Finally, the possibilities for partially revealing rational expectations equilibria are discussed.Equilibrium (Economics) - Mathematical models ; Rational expectations (Economic theory)
“I Identify with Her,” “I Identify with Him”: Unpacking the Dynamics of Personal Identification in Organizations
Despite recognizing the importance of personal identification in organizations, researchers have rarely explored its dynamics. We define personal identification as perceived oneness with another individual, where one defines oneself in terms of the other. While many scholars have found that personal identification is associated with helpful effects, others have found it harmful. To resolve this contradiction, we distinguish between three paths to personal identification—threat-focused, opportunity-focused, and closeness-focused paths—and articulate a model that includes each. We examine the contextual features, how individuals’ identities are constructed, and the likely outcomes that follow in the three paths. We conclude with a discussion of how the threat-, opportunity-, and closeness-focused personal identification processes potentially blend, as well as implications for future research and practice
Recommended from our members
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), formerly called fast track, is the authority Congress has granted to the President for limited periods of time to negotiate reciprocal trade agreements. The authority lays out U.S. trade negotiating objectives, procedures for congressional-executive notification and consultation, and expedited legislative procedures under which bills implementing trade agreements negotiated by the executive branch are to be considered. The most recent authority was enacted in December 2002 and expired as of July 1, 2007. Legislation to reauthorize TPA has been introduced in the 113th Congress. The United States is engaged in several sets of trade agreement negotiations. The issue of TPA reauthorization has raised a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including:
• What is trade promotion authority?
• Is TPA necessary?
• What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes?
• What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA?
• Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy
Publication of topographic atlas and control network of Mars
To aid planetary studies and the planning of future Mars missions, the Topographic Atlas and Control Network for Mars will be submitted by the end of fiscal year 1992 for publication as a NASA Special Publication. It will consist of reduced versions of 108 1:2 million-scale photomosaics that show contour lines from topographic maps at the same scale, as well as precisely located control points. The control points are from the planetwide network, which is not only instrumental in the compilation of maps at various scales, but is also widely used in other research such as studies of Mars' gravity and atmosphere. An example, a combination of MC 8-NW and -SW, of the photomosaics to be included in the atlas is presented. Contour lines in the figure are at 1-km intervals. The final adjusted ground coordinates and elevations of the 77 control points shown are given in table form. The last column in the table lists the topographic datum (zero elevation) that can be used to compute the solid radius of the control point from the center of mass of Mars. The atlas will also include information such as the adjusted C-matrices of each image, descriptions of the methods used, and their accuracy, and guidelines for users
- …