Trends in Approval Times for Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States and the European Union

Genetically engineered (GE) crops are subject to regulatory oversight to ensure their safety for humans and the environment. Their approval in the European Union (EU) starts with an application in a given Member State followed by a scientific step (risk assessment), and ends with a political decision-making step (risk management); and in the United States (US) it starts with a scientific (field trial) step and ends with a ‘bureaucratic’ decision-making step. We investigated trends for the time taken for these steps and the overall time taken for approving GE crops in the US and the EU (traders in these commodities). Results show that from 1996-2015 the overall time trend for approval in the EU decreased and then flattened off, with an overall mean completion-time of 1,763 days. In the US in 1998 there was a break in the trend of the overall approval time: Initially, from 1988 until 1997 the trend decreased with a mean approval time of 1,321 days; from 1998-2015, the trend almost stagnated with a mean approval time of 2,467 days.

Speech of Hon. John Lowndes McLaurin, of South Carolina, in the Senate of the United States, Monday, December 9, 1901

This document contains a speech by John L. McLaurin of South Carolina presented in the Senate of the United States. Sections of the speech include: sectionalism the cause, conditions in South Carolina, the federal administration in South Carolina, should not array class against class, freedom of thought and speech, the issues, under caucus dictation the Senate no longer a deliberative body, the beginning of the fight, matter of arraying class against class, freedom of thought and speech, and issues.

Consolidation. An account of parties in the United States, from the convention of 1787, to the present period

This document is an account of a convention of South Carolina state representatives following the drafting of the Declaration of Independence. There were three parties involved in the convention and the account is based on the notes of Mr. Luther Martin who attended as well Mr. Justice Yates’ account. The first party wished to abolish all state governments and have one uniform monarchical government for the continent that would be restricted and limited. The second party did not wish to abolish state governments to give their own state some importance. The third party was advocating for a federal government in conjunction with state government. This document is an account of the convention.

Speech of Hon. James H. Hammond, of South Carolina, on the relation of states; delivered in the Senate of the United States, May 21, 1860

The speech is a response by Hon. James H. Hammond as to whether or not the territorial governments established by Congress have the power to define and declare what shall be and what shall not be property within the territorial boundaries. The speech goes on to discuss colonists who went to newly purchased territory and claimed land as their own. He argues whether or not these people have sovereignty of the land over the government.

Speech of Hon. John Lowndes McLaurin, of South Carolina, in the Senate of the United States, Monday, December 9, 1901

This speech is to address the statement that Mr. McLaurin has been excluded from the caucuses of his party and thus that he will be without assignment on any committee. He goes on to explain his exclusion and defend his views that led to his exclusion.

Speech of Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, on the slavery question. Delivered in the Senate of the United States, March 4, 1850

The speech addresses the question, how can the union be preserved? He goes on to explain the threats to the union and give suggestions for how the threats can be handled.

Stable standard essential for prosperity. Speech in the Senate of the United States, February 4, 1878

This speech was given when the United States Senate was considering a bill to authorize the free coinage of the standard silver dollar and to restore its legal tender character. Mr. Bayard argues against the bill in this speech. He is interrupted during his speech multiple times and questioned about his points.

Liberalization of Labor Relations in Germany and the United States: A firm-centered comparison of cross-national labor organizing at Amazon and Volkswagen

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2015

Does Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Have a Role in US Managed Care Drug Formularies? An Empirical Study of Utilization, Costs, Outcomes, and Elasticity of Demand of a Value-Based Formulary

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2015

The resilience of democratic institutions in Britain, Australia and the United States under conditions of total war

To what extent are democratic institutions resilient when nation states mobilise for war? Normative and empirical political theorists have long argued that wars strengthen the executive and threaten constitutional politics. In modern democracies, national assemblies are supposed to hold the executive to account by demanding explanations for events and policies; and by scrutinising, reviewing and, if necessary, revising legislative proposals intended to be binding on the host society or policies that have been implemented already. This article examines the extent to which the British and Australian parliaments and the United States Congress held their wartime executives to account during World War II. The research finds that under conditions approaching those of total war, these democratic institutions not only continued to exist, but also proved to be resilient in representing public concerns and holding their executives to account, however imperfectly and notwithstanding delegating huge powers. In consequence, executives—more so British and Australian ministers than President Roosevelt—were required to be placatory as institutional and political tensions within national assemblies and between assemblies and executives continued, and assemblies often asserted themselves. In short, even under the most onerous wartime conditions, democratic politics mattered and democratic institutions were resilient.

Should the U.S. adapt to the world? The first debate on american exceptionalism and its impact on the founding of the United States

This paper aims at putting into perspective the recent, post 9/11 debate on the United States‘ alleged exceptionalism and its impact on the definition of American foreign policy. It reminds the readers that the United States was born as a result of a similar debate, at a time when a crucial choice for its future was to be made. Indeed, the Founding Fathers discarded the revolutionary idea that America was altogether different from other (European) nations and, as such, could succeed in saving republicanism and concentrate on domestic affairs. As Gordon Wood and Harvey Mansfield have shown, the 1787 version of republicanism stood as a departure from its earlier version, and such a change was necessary to the creation of a full-fledged federation, therefore paving the way to the current powerful Federal Republic. The early failure of the exceptionalist creed did not cause its disappearance, as the contemporary form of exceptionalism demonstrates, but created conditions that made an enduring and powerful influence very difficult.

Leverage instability and persistence: Evidence from the United States and Europe

We find that leverage behavior both in level and time-series variation is very similar between the United States and Europe throughout the 1990-2013 period. Leverage regimes are simultaneously unstable and persistent for both regions. We define instability as the extent to which firms largely deviate from their long-term leverage mean, while persistence as the extent to which today’s leverage influences its future levels. We then show that this simultaneous evidence imply a mean-reversion behavior of leverage and discuss some of its implications for future research on this field.

The relationship between liquidity and profitability in the food & beverage industry evidence from Europe and United States

This Work Project clarifies the relationship between liquidity and profitability based on a sample in the Food & Beverage (F&B) industry, and comparing the largest European and United States companies. The research concludes that liquidity, proxied by current ratio or quick ratio, correlates with return on assets taken as the measure of profitability, and so does the cash conversion cycle and its components. Moreover, company size correlates with liquidity, and indirectly affects ROA. This research contributes and addresses to managers in the F&B industry and recommends how they should act in order to improve profitability in the industry.