Search results

(167,141 - 167,160 of 182,634)

Pages

CRS85661Apage12
Title
CRS85661Apage12
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
. In the Fullilove case, however, the Court upheld a provision in the Public Works Employment Act of 1977 that required State or local governments to use 10% of Federal funds granted for public works contracts to procure services or sup- plies from businesses owned or controlled by statutorily defined minority groups. _The 6 to 3 decision removes any doubts regarding the power of Con- 'gress to mandate
CRS85661Apage25
Title
CRS85661Apage25
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
it discriminates against women and minorities. Second, and §§/ Janowiak v. City of South Bend, 36 FEP Cases 737 (7th Cir. 1984). 2g] 26 FEP Gases 114 (S.D. Ohio 1980). §§/ Cooper & Sobel, "Seniority and Testing Under Fair Employment Laws: A General Approach to Objective Criteria of Hiring and Promotion." 82 Harv. L. Rev. 1598, 1601, fn. 2 (1969).
CRS85661Apage38
Title
CRS85661Apage38
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
CRS-35 to Stotts, it chose to vacate the judgment below and remand for consideration of mootness. By insteads grounding its ruling on a percieved conflict be; tween the decree and both § 703(h), the seniority provision, and the more general remedial limits of § 706(g), Stotts implied that a district court lcannot enter a consent decree that contains make-whole relief unless thel plaintiffs prove actual victim status. Furthermore, although the Court did not repudiate existing circuit court decisions permitting affirmativef action asia remedy in litigated cases, Stotts may have implications'here as well since the majority rationale is not limited by its terms to consent, decree modifications. _lndeed, the consideration on which the Court based its holding 4- the putative conflict between the mandated relief and theri proof requirements of § 706(g) -— may be no less central in the litigation context. POST STOTTS LITIGATION The.courts to rule on the implications of Stotts for the preferential treatment of minorities in layoff situations, or for affirmative action more generally, have not borne.out this dramatic potential, however. For the most part, these courts have found Stotts inapplicable in.a variety of situations, as where seniority considerations were not at issue, or where the departure ._:from_the seniority based layoff procedures favoring minorities had been the subject‘of collective bargaining between the employer and the unions. Another - relevant distinction has been found where, unlike Stotts, the affirmative action plan was voluntarily adopted by the employer and not the product of judicial compulsion. Since virtually all the post—Stott cases have involved public employers, several courts have found constitutional rather than stat~
CRS85661Apage49
Title
CRS85661Apage49
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
, according to the Commission, each identified discriminatee is entitled to "full remedial, correct-A ive, and preventative relief,’ including backpay and an "unconditional" offer 0 .22! .'I_.<_1.-. 2§/ "Fire Department's Plan Called Invalid," Wash. Post p. Cl, 5 (March 13, 1985). A A 21/ ...I.é.~»
CRS85661Apage20
Title
CRS85661Apage20
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
bar to employment of white males and were less than those endorsed by Weber); Bratton v. City of Detroit, 704 F.2d 878 (6th Cir. 1983) (city promotion plan with goal of 50/50 black-white ratio in lieutenant corps and separate promotion lists approved in view of extremely low black participation on police force). g'£gf ,34,F.E,P, Cases 1065 (2d Cir._l984),
CRS85661Apage27
Title
CRS85661Apage27
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
with two different forms of seniority. The earliest cases involved the use of departmental seniority, or length of service within a department, by an employer who prior to the 1964 Act had overtly segregated black em- ployees in the lowest paying and least desirable jobs. With the advent of “Title VII the employer would remove these overt restrictions on job assign- ment and transfer and substitute
CRS85661Apage11
Title
CRS85661Apage11
Page from
info:fedora/mu:53597
Text
workers in the . . . plant approximates the percentage of blacks in the local labor force. lg] Weber, therefore, permits race conscious affirmative action which may adversely _ affect the interests of white workers when-such measures are necessary to re-" i"dress "manifest racial imbalance in traditionally segregated job categories."_l 1;] 443 u.s. at 208. 15/ 443 u.s, at 208-9.
CRS83635ENRpage14
Title
CRS83635ENRpage14
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
the other 30 percent was inundated by water. About 675,000 acres (roughly one-quarter) of the agricultural land annually converted to nonfarm uses was cropland. This is an annual loss of about 0.2 percent of the total U.S. crop- land base according to the NALS. The accuracy of the NALS data on farmland conversion has recently been challenged by several researchers, e.g., Fischel (1982) and Simon
CRS83635ENRpage82
Title
CRS83635ENRpage82
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
CRS-71 APPENDIX FIGURE 2. Farm Production Regions Aécording to the Census of Agriculture. J sournsnu PLAINS Souruez NALS 1981, p. 319
CRS83635ENRpage27
Title
CRS83635ENRpage27
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
CRS-16 Unfortunately, little is known about how much food and fiber prices must increase to bring various amounts of potential cropland into productionall/ Crosson has concluded that: [t]he prospective increase in land and production costs is cause for concern, but it does not now appear to pose a major threat to the national welfare or to those abroad who count on the United States to supply
CRS83635ENRpage63
Title
CRS83635ENRpage63
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
CRS-52 assistance from USDA in determining whether or not a proposed location or site meets the Act's definition of farmland. If farmland is involved, the second section presented the criteria to be used to identify and take into account farmland conversion impacts. Specifically, these criteria utilize the agricul- tural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) system recently developed by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)n3é/ Whenever State or local governments have already performed a LESA evaluation, Federal agencies are permitted to use this evaluation as an “appropriate benchmark" for assuring compatibility with state or local farmland retention policies. Finally, the third and fourth sections of the draft regulations specified the technical assistance that USDA would provide and the process by which Federal agencies can get assistance from USDA in reviewing their programs and assessing the probable effects of changes in them. i ‘About ten percent of the commentors on the draft regulations expressed opposition to implementing the FPPA. The U.S. Department of Transportation, highway agencies in eight States, the California Chamber of Commerce, and several other California-based organizations were among these commentors. Other comments on the draftregulations were focused primarily on four matters. First, many commentors criticized the lack of oversight or monitoring responsi- bilities by USDA. Noting that there is not even a requirement that Federal agencies make periodic reports on the impacts of their programs on agricultural land, many commentors expressed concern that some Federal agencies may not comply with the Act. Second, some commentors noted that the LESA criteria are not well-suited to linear or corridor-type projects (such as highways) and some types of water projects. Several technical matters involving specific site .Z§/ For more information on the LESA system, see Wright, et al.i(l983).
CRS83635ENRpage70
Title
CRS83635ENRpage70
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
CRS-59 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Secretary. "Memorandum No. 1827, Supplement 1." Washington, DC, June 21, 1976. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Policy on Agricultural Lands." Washington, DC, September 8, 1978. U.S. General Accounting Office. Preserving Americais Farmland--A Goal the Federal Government Should Support. CED-79-109. Washington, DC, 1979
CRS83635ENRpage86
Title
CRS83635ENRpage86
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
and 1975 occurred at a much faster rate than in the l958~l967 period. The NALS attributed much of this increase in rural land conversion to four demographic phenomena: 1. The more rapid growth of nonmetropolitan areas in the 19703; _ 2. The growth of development in rural and unincorporated areas; 3. The growth of construction of housing on unsewered lots; and ' 4. The more rapid growth of households
CRS83635ENRpage81
Title
CRS83635ENRpage81
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
one-quarter) of the agricultural land annually converted tononfarm uses was cropland. Over half of the converted land was forestland or "other" land. Although not precisely known, it was estimated that as much as 200,000 acres of high or medium potential cropland was annually converted between 1967 and 1975 (Brewer and Boxley 1981). Thus, about 875,000 acres of the cropland base
CRS83635ENRpage12
Title
CRS83635ENRpage12
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
.fi.,.e.__i_ _._.._,.,:3'...,e,: , 2 CRS-1 INTRODUCTION Population growth and development generally result in the conversion of rural land to more intensive uses. Some of this rural land is used for new residences, shopping centers, office buildings, and warehouses. Apart from these urban uses, new roads, airports, and highways consume relatively large amounts of rural land and significantly
CRS83635ENRpage87
Title
CRS83635ENRpage87
Page from
info:fedora/mu:88993
Text
of aerial photos revealed a 23 percent increase in urban acreageAin the53 fastest growing counties in the 1960-1970 period. In contrast, the NALS found a 47 percent increase in urban_acrea§e forA§he entire country between 1967 and 1975. Fischel (1982) concluded that this differential is highly implausible; In summary; critics have argued that problems with the NALS terminology and data resulted
CRS84573ENRpage07
Title
CRS84573ENRpage07
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84457
Text
CRS-2 The concept of specific protection of aquifers is not new. In the Safe Drinking Water Act (P.L. 93-523), aquifers that are the sole source of drinking water for areas may receive a special designation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under Subsection l42(e), the EPA administrator may designate an aquifer for special protection if it his the sole source of drinking water
CRS84573ENRpage05
Title
CRS84573ENRpage05
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84457
Text
aquifers. For further information on these Congressional activities, refer to Ground-, water Contamination and Protection. g] l] U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. Ground- water: What It Is, and How It Is Being Protected. Report no. 84-16 ENR, by Donald V. Feliciano. Washington, 1984. 52 p. 2/ U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service.u Ground- water Contamination
CRS84573ENRpage03
Title
CRS84573ENRpage03
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84457
Text
ABSTRACT This report examines the importance of sole source aquifers of ground- water to the Nation's drinking water supply and how these aquifers are protected under Federal law. The report also includes a description of the sole source aquifers recognized by the Environmental Protection Agency and identifies the Congressional districts that overlie them. At this time, 17 sole source
CRS84573ENRpage18
Title
CRS84573ENRpage18
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84457
Text
UBRARV or WASHENGTQN I umzvemawr ST. Lows;-5 ‘M0.

Pages