One Day You'll Thank Me

Short story about the friendship between a young Jewish doctor and a restaurant owner in a small town in New South Wales

Judaism's voice on the re-education of man*

The purpose of education is to show that all things belong to God and that all things emanate from Him

A Reality Check on an Empirical Study: Comments on Inside the Administrative State

Presidential control is the term used for the process (or some would say, the model) by which agency decision-making (more particularly, rulemaking) is brought under the direction of the president to render such decision- making accountable and effective. Until now scholars, who have generally endorsed both the theory and the practice of the process, have written from the perspective of those who exercise presidential control - those at the White House or the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs ( OIRA ). In a recent article in the Michigan Law Review, Lisa Schultz Bressman and Michael Vandenbergh ( the authors ) decided to study presidential control from the perspective of those who experience it-those inside the agencies. They undertook a significant empirical study, interviewing top political appointees who served at the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) during the George H.W. Bush and William J. Clinton Administrations. The authors find, based on their data, that presidential control is more complex and less positive than previous accounts acknowledge and that presidential involvement in rule-making may not sufficiently enhance political accountability and may not achieve regulatory efficacy. Because they acknowledge that the president has a role to play in controlling agency decision-making, they conclude that the model requires reworking and identify next steps in that direction. I served as the Administrator of OIRA during the Clinton Administration, I am unabashedly a proponent of centralized review of rule-making, and I have a very different take on some of the data presented in Bressman & Vandenbergh\u27s article. Nonetheless, I value continued productive dialogue, rather than an adversarial contest, on the issues. My comments in this Article, therefore, are presented as just that-comments, as in the thoughts, observations, or reactions of someone who has been involved in the process-with the hope that they may be useful to those doing follow-on work in this field

On amending Executive Order 12866

During the last six years, there has been a slow but steady change in the process by which regulations are developed and issued—specifically, in the balance of authority between the federal regulatory agencies and the Office of Management and Budget

A Reality Check on an Empirical Study: Comments on Inside the Administrative State

Presidential control is the term used for the process (or some would say, the model) by which agency decision-making (more particularly, rulemaking) is brought under the direction of the president to render such decision- making accountable and effective. Until now scholars, who have generally endorsed both the theory and the practice of the process, have written from the perspective of those who exercise presidential control - those at the White House or the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs ( OIRA ). In a recent article in the Michigan Law Review, Lisa Schultz Bressman and Michael Vandenbergh ( the authors ) decided to study presidential control from the perspective of those who experience it-those inside the agencies. They undertook a significant empirical study, interviewing top political appointees who served at the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) during the George H.W. Bush and William J. Clinton Administrations. The authors find, based on their data, that presidential control is more complex and less positive than previous accounts acknowledge and that presidential involvement in rule-making may not sufficiently enhance political accountability and may not achieve regulatory efficacy. Because they acknowledge that the president has a role to play in controlling agency decision-making, they conclude that the model requires reworking and identify next steps in that direction. I served as the Administrator of OIRA during the Clinton Administration, I am unabashedly a proponent of centralized review of rule-making, and I have a very different take on some of the data presented in Bressman & Vandenbergh\u27s article. Nonetheless, I value continued productive dialogue, rather than an adversarial contest, on the issues. My comments in this Article, therefore, are presented as just that-comments, as in the thoughts, observations, or reactions of someone who has been involved in the process-with the hope that they may be useful to those doing follow-on work in this field

A follow-up study to survey the 1957-1958 graduates of the Katherine Gibbs School to determine the effectiveness of the course in secretarial procedures.

Thesis (Ed.M.)--Boston Universit

Some observations on the acute abdomen in children

No Abstract