Bureaucratic issues and environmental concerns: a review of the history of federal land ownership and management

Article Abstract:

Approximately 32% of US land is publicly owned and administered by either the US Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management. The General Revision Act of 1891 reversed the previous policy favoring rapid transfer of land from the federal government to private parties and instituted permanent bureaucratic management of federal lands. Although the agencies are frequently criticized for their environmental and economic policies, free market environmentalism does not seem to be a viable option in this area given the existing bureaucratic system.

Author: Libecap, Gary D.
Management, History, Environmental aspects, United States. Forest Service, Public lands, United States. Bureau of Land Management

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The federal common law of ERISA

Article Abstract:

Congress's delegation to the federal courts of the power to create federal common-law rights and obligations under employee benefit plans is universal doctrine, and the courts claim that in creating these rights they are filling gaps in ERISA. The courts have, however, too often used the federal common law to accomplish their own will and wishes. The courts may fill true gaps in the law, when a subsidiary rule is needed to carry out a congressional directive, but common law should not be a means to carry out the will of a court.

Author: Brauch, Jeffrey A.
Interpretation and construction, Pension funds, Common law

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Toward a comprehensive understanding of the federal appointments process

Article Abstract:

Bringing historical and institutional factors into the federal judicial appointments process explains that process as a clash between those managing two distinct institutions with unique structures and different goals. Institutional analysis explains the confirmation process as a struggle between the executive and legislative branches over selecting those people who will help or hinder the presidential agenda. The greater media coverage is desirable because it leads to increased accountability.

Author: Gerhardt, Michael J.
Officials and employees, Federal courts, Judicial selection

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Laws, regulations and rules
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.