Search results

(164,521 - 164,540 of 181,958)

Pages

CRS85797Epage12
Title
CRS85797Epage12
Page from
info:fedora/mu:22047
Text
"1““\"“‘ ‘
CRS85797Epage18
Title
CRS85797Epage18
Page from
info:fedora/mu:22047
CRS85797Epage08
Title
CRS85797Epage08
Page from
info:fedora/mu:22047
CRS85797Epage04
Title
CRS85797Epage04
Page from
info:fedora/mu:22047
CRS85797Epage10
Title
CRS85797Epage10
Page from
info:fedora/mu:22047
CRS85890Apage11
Title
CRS85890Apage11
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
cnsws , , . » '1. ‘ I settled out of court before any subsequent action was taken, and to date this I precise question has not recurred. ; , , . . ' . ' ‘ ' ‘Even in the absence of such a decision, however, there appears to,be some i I «support for the proposition that speech or debate clause immunity does in fact ' | ' 9 n I I apply to employment practices involving
CRS85890Apage24
Title
CRS85890Apage24
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
of additional duties to judges who have already been properly ap- pointed and confirmed. If being'named to the Board is thought to constitute‘a new appointment of government officers, the process of appointment (i.e., selec- tion by the congressional leadership and the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court), arguably iolates the appointments clause, art. 11, sec. 2, cl. 2_ of the Constitution
CRS85890Apage02
Title
CRS85890Apage02
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
CRS85890Apage20
Title
CRS85890Apage20
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
-citizens,’immune from criminat’responm g I I ‘ 3 I ‘ ' ' I ' ', ? sibility." ' s ‘ ' I 1 '3 C7 $37‘: egta the al IN? ‘:41 ‘-4 C3 (I) ya. (3 (D 03 "1 (D - C3 D 09 53 CL ‘~5- U) 0’) . (D D (“T ya». :1 . Q -*1 (D L4 (0 (3 (‘T 17) L14 F1’ :3‘ ("D {D If Oi) £2 £3 ('0 C] F‘? 1 ch 3 \ a 6 ~ ‘ bribery could not be considered part'of_a legislative act, and argued
CRS85890Apage10
Title
CRS85890Apage10
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
....[H]owever, on account'of the unusually heavy workload in my Washington office, and the diversity of the job, I concluded that it was , essential that the understudy to my administrative assistant be a man." _3/ 554 F. 2d 865 (5th Cir. 1977), reh._3§ banc 571 F. 2d 793 (1978). 39/ 442 U.S. at 248-9.’
CRS85890Apage19
Title
CRS85890Apage19
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
to regulate the conduct of its members. ;g/. l v 23/ Former l8 U.S.C. sec. 281, now 18 U.S.C. sec. 201. 33/ 18 U.S.C. sec. 371. 33/ 419 9. 2d 56‘(4th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 397 u.s. 1010 (1970). g_/ 383 0.3. at 185. n
CRS85890Apage13
Title
CRS85890Apage13
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
Radio Show; 338 U.S. 912, 917 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., denying petition for a writ of certiorari, citing Supreme Court‘ Rule 38))‘ ‘ 1 ' ‘
CRS85890Apage05
Title
CRS85890Apage05
Page from
info:fedora/mu:80853
Text
111 O P . charged with, among other things, developing a plan for.the application of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act throughout the legislative branch. This ap- proach does not present any constitutional problems at the present time, although the Commission's recommendations should ideally be drafted.with the,above dis~ cussed constitutional considerations in mind. ' ‘ l
CRS861020ENRSPRpage41
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage41
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
in a congressional hearing on BST, USDA Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economics, Ewen M. Wilson, characterized new 48 See, [Objective 3, Approach 3.3, "Improve Animal Nutrition and Feed Efficiency to Increase Productivity and Product Quality,"] Agricultural Research Service Program Plan, 6--Year Implementation Plan, 1986--1992. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service. Washington
CRS861020ENRSPRpage08
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage08
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
. Extracting natural protein from such animals is expensive and timerconsuming. The glands of at least 200 slaughtered cows are needed to produce enough natural BST for one daily supplement for a single cow.5 The recent rapid advances in biotechnology have made the mass production of BST commercially feasible. Scientists have isolated the gene responsible for naturally occurring EST and transferred
CRS861020ENRSPRpage19
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage19
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
considered "excessive" at a lower support rate than the rate for milk produced within a predetermined quota. Supply management is one of the options being considered in late 1986 by the National Milk Producers 16 For details see U.S. Library of Congress. CR3. Fundamentals of”””WW”m Domestic Commodity Price Support Programs (CRS Rept. No. 86-128 ENR), by Geoffrey 3. Becker. Washington, June 1986.
CRS861020ENRSPRpage23
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage23
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
. Ms. Alleng of Resources for the Future, cited a New York study indicating that the State's farmers could afford to pay up to 50 cents per BST injection if the all-milk price were $14.44/cwt. and corn averaged $3.25 per bushel. iThey could only afford to pay 20 cents per daily dose if the all-milk price were $11.44/cwt. and corn were $2.75 per bushel. But the price per injection p would have
CRS861020ENRSPRpage28
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage28
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
pushing more farmers out of business. "In the short run, improvements in economic efficiency can rarely be made without making some sectors worse off while improving others," the December 1984 Cornell report commented. Critics argue that this downside outweighs the touted benefits of the new technology.i Most importantly, it threatens to flood a market already saturated by too much milk
CRS861020ENRSPRpage27
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage27
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
CRS~23 While conceding at the House hearing that larger operators tend to adopt new technology more rapidly than smaller ones, Dr. Jorgensen of the University of Wisconsin agreed that the technology itself does not inherently favor large herds. "In fact, unless manufacturers can overcome the problem of daily injections, this may be a technology that works better in smaller herds, and more carefully managed herds than in megaherds held in loose housing," he said- THE U.S. DAIRY INDUSTRY AT A CROSSROADS The advent of BST could place the U.S. dairy industry at a crossroads. A producer will either produce the same amount of milk with fewer cows, ore i produce more milk with his or her present, or perhaps a larger, herd. What makes either road passable is the ability of BST to lower production costs, proponents observe. These lower costs will enable producers to provide milk and dairy products to consumers at lower prices, according to proponents,. who argue that the greater efficiencies promised by BST are merely typical of the advances that have enabled U.S. farmers to provide an abundance of food for consumers at the lowest relative cost in the world. USDA's Wilson summarized these arguments at the House hearing: The potential benefits of bGH are greater efficiency, lower costs of production, increased consumption, improved profitability for remaining dairy farmers, a greater ability to compete in the world dairy market and also to compete with substitute dairy products. Noting that other countries already are conducting their own research on BST, Wilson added: We cannot, nor should we stop technological development from taking place. Attempting to halt technology in this country will only place us at a comparative disadvantage relative to other countries which continue to pursue new technology. m -
CRS861020ENRSPRpage30
Title
CRS861020ENRSPRpage30
Page from
info:fedora/mu:73520
Text
CRS*26 REGULATION OF BOVINE SOMATOTROPIN* INTRODUCTION The authority to regulate animal drugs, including BST, rests with the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The Secretary promulgates theseregulations under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act KFDCA) and upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Commissioner's recommendation is based upon a review of scientific information prepared by the drug sponsor (usually a company seeking to sell the drug commercially) concerning the safety and effectiveness of the drug, the safety for treated animals and for humans exposed to the drug, and the possible environmental impact of drug use. The FDCA provides for regulation of animal drugs in two principal phases. First, for an experimental drug, a Notice of Claimed Investigational Exemption for a New Animal Drug (an INAD) must be filed with FDA before it can be shipped for use in clinical studies. Second, before a drug can be approved for comercial use, a New Animal Drug Application (NADA) must be approved by FDA. Superimposed over these statutory requirements are those of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). ‘Regulations promulgated under NEPA require that environmental effects of drug use be considered in connection with filing an INAD or before a drug may be approved for commercial use. * By Sarah Taylor, Analyst, Science Policy Research Division.

Pages