Search Results

The Disaster Relief Act of 1974: Richard Nixon and the Creation of Emergency Management

Timothy W. Kneeland

in Playing Politics with Natural Disaster: Hurricane Agnes, the 1972 Election, and the Origins of FEMA

This chapter studies how, after his landslide reelection in 1972, Richard Nixon began his campaign to change the trajectory of American disaster policy and create a new era in which preparation and ... More

This chapter studies how, after his landslide reelection in 1972, Richard Nixon began his campaign to change the trajectory of American disaster policy and create a new era in which preparation and mitigation at the local level of government was a requirement to receive any assistance from the federal government. In signing the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 on May 22 of that year, Nixon remarked that this bill “truly brings the new federalism to our disaster preparedness and assistance activities.” The significance of the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 is debatable; some analysts see it as a continuation of practices set into motion by the Disaster Relief Act of 1950, whereas others see it as a significant departure from prior disaster legislation. The Disaster Relief Act of 1974 marked the beginning of the regulatory phase of disaster assistance, an era in which the federal government limited federal costs and forced individuals and communities to assume some of the responsibility of living in disaster-prone areas. The legislation contained the provisions requiring states and localities to take steps to mitigate future disasters. Moreover, it required communities to have plans and contingencies for disaster, which laid the foundation of the professionalization of emergency management. The chapter then considers the creation of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).Less

Agencies, Juries, and the Public Interest

Thomas O. McGarity

in The Preemption War: When Federal Bureaucracies Trump Local Juries

This chapter focuses exclusively on the question of institutional competence, and the two chapters that follow examine the other arguments for and against preemption. Among other things, this chapter ... More

This chapter focuses exclusively on the question of institutional competence, and the two chapters that follow examine the other arguments for and against preemption. Among other things, this chapter explores arguments about comparative strengths and weaknesses of common law courts and federal regulatory agencies in providing technical expertise, policymaking expertise, relevant information, common-sense judgment, and responsiveness to changing information and policies as they arise. The most vigorous argument for federal agency preemption of state common law claims is probably the “enormous comparative advantage” that federal agencies have over judges and juries in the expertise required to resolve highly technical questions of science, engineering, and economics that typically arise when federal regulatory requirements arguably come into conflict with common law duties. Proponents of preemption argue that regulatory agencies are able to call on expert resources and information-gathering abilities “that dwarf those of any trial jury.”Less

MAD, NUTS, and Civil Defense, 1963–1980

Dee Garrison

in Bracing for Armageddon: Why Civil Defense Never Worked

This chapter shows how after Kennedy's death, the new and greatly underfunded civil defense agency was moved to the Department of Defense, and the government no longer talked of bomb shelters. During ... More

This chapter shows how after Kennedy's death, the new and greatly underfunded civil defense agency was moved to the Department of Defense, and the government no longer talked of bomb shelters. During the Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, and Richard Nixon terms, most states and cities either drastically reduced or ended civil defense programs. Then, Jimmy Carter came along and reactivated civil defense as a live issue in American politics. He set up a new program termed crisis relocation planning (CRP), which set out for the evacuation of people from cities to safer areas in the country during the presumed few days of advance notice the government would have before Soviet missiles arrived. Carter created CRP partially to mollify the NUTS proponents, who touted a “civil defense gap” between the superpowers. The job of providing secret shelters for the select few was assigned to the new civil defense organization, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which Carter created in 1979.Less

Funding Social Work Research: Federal and Foundation Opportunities

Ruth G. McRoy, Jerry P. Flanzer, and Joan Levy Zlotnik

in Building Research Culture and Infrastructure

Finding grant funding for research is one of the biggest challenges social work faculty and research administrators often face. While few research funding resources are specifically targeted only to ... More

Finding grant funding for research is one of the biggest challenges social work faculty and research administrators often face. While few research funding resources are specifically targeted only to social workers, there are many funding sources that are available and of which social work faculty should be aware. This “how to” chapter specifically provides information as well as many electronic links to information on funding opportunities. A number of potential funders are described and highlighted including: National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Substance Abuse and Mental health Services Administration, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Violence Against Women, and the Department of Education. In addition to the focus on potential federal funders, attention is given to foundation funders including the Hartford Foundation W. T. Grant Foundation, and the Robert Wood John Foundation among many others.Less

The Preemption War in the Federal Agencies

Thomas O. McGarity

in The Preemption War: When Federal Bureaucracies Trump Local Juries

This chapter describes the quiet effort by several federal agencies during the George W. Bush administration to preempt state common law litigation through aggressive administrative interpretations ... More

This chapter describes the quiet effort by several federal agencies during the George W. Bush administration to preempt state common law litigation through aggressive administrative interpretations of federal regulatory laws in informal contexts largely out of public view. In most cases, this represented a dramatic shift from past agency practice. Perhaps for this reason, the agencies buried these new interpretations within lengthy preambles to regulations, sometimes without allowing an effective opportunity for public comment, in a process that Professors Sam Issacharoff and Catherine Sharkey have referred to as “backdoor federalization.” After taking a quick look at a short-lived attempt by the FRA to expand the range of its preemptive power during the second half of the Clinton administration, this chapter visits the three most prominent Bush administration initiatives in the contexts of food labeling regulations, automobile roof crush rules, and rules for mattress flammability.Less

The Truncated Career of Autonomous Federal Agencies

Gail Radford

in The Rise of the Public Authority: Statebuilding and Economic Development in Twentieth-Century America

This chapter traces the history of federal corporate agencies. Modeled after the Emergency Fleet Corporation and the Federal Land Banks, government-owned corporations became a familiar part of the ... More

This chapter traces the history of federal corporate agencies. Modeled after the Emergency Fleet Corporation and the Federal Land Banks, government-owned corporations became a familiar part of the federal government's administrative repertoire during the First World War, and these mechanisms were again called into service during the Great Depression by both the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations. While President Hoover initiated this practice when he asked Congress to establish the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and the Federal Home Loan Banks, it was Franklin Roosevelt and his officials who extensively used these devices as they struggled to expand government capacity under emergency conditions.Less

Law Enforcement’s Institutional Machinery and the Criminal Process

Lauren A. McCarthy

in Trafficking Justice: How Russian Police Enforce New Laws, from Crime to Courtroom

This chapter describes Russia’s four law enforcement agencies: the police (Ministerstvo vnutrennykh del, MVD), the Procuracy (Prokuratura), the Federal Security Service (Federal’naia sluzhba ... More

This chapter describes Russia’s four law enforcement agencies: the police (Ministerstvo vnutrennykh del, MVD), the Procuracy (Prokuratura), the Federal Security Service (Federal’naia sluzhba bezopasnosti, FSB), and the Investigative Committee. Each agency is responsible for different aspects of investigating and prosecuting criminal activities as outlined by the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). All of them are organized hierarchically into three territorial levels. The local (raion) agents answer to their regional (sub’’ekt) superiors who answer to the federal-level agency heads. Law enforcement agents do not answer to anyone outside their agencies, except for the courts and the Procuracy under its powers of general oversight.Less

. The 1950s Welfare Backlash and Federal Complicity

Ellen Reese

in Backlash against Welfare Mothers: Past and Present

This chapter presents an overview of the 1950s welfare backlash and explores how federal officials’ lax control over Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) encouraged states to develop tough new welfare ... More

This chapter presents an overview of the 1950s welfare backlash and explores how federal officials’ lax control over Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) encouraged states to develop tough new welfare policies. After New Deal officials were replaced with more conservative ones, they became more tolerant of states’ efforts to restrict ADC, encouraging the spread of new rules and regulations. Federal welfare officials permitted the use of “suitable home” policies, overturning only the most blatant forms of discrimination against unwed mothers. In 1960, Louisiana adopted a thirty-bill “segregation package” that included restrictions on voting and other antiblack measures. Louisiana’s “suitable home” policy provoked considerable criticism. The federal agency’s response to the “Louisiana crisis” was significant because it signaled a decline in federal tolerance for states’ restrictive welfare policies.Less

Environmental Protection

Thomas O. McGarity

in Freedom to Harm: The Lasting Legacy of the Laissez Faire Revival

This chapter focuses on four federal agencies that bear some responsibility for protecting the nation's natural resources and environment, namely the Environmental Protection Agency, the Army Corps ... More

This chapter focuses on four federal agencies that bear some responsibility for protecting the nation's natural resources and environment, namely the Environmental Protection Agency, the Army Corps of Engineers in the Department of Defense, and the Office of Surface Mining and Minerals Management Service in the Department of Interior. Flush with resources and backed by strong public opinion, the environmental agencies initially generated a healthy flow of proactive implementing regulations that they vigorously enforced against some of the most powerful corporations in the country. Congress no longer appeared capable of enacting legislation to address emerging environmental problems. The last two significant environmental statutes were the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.Less

Collaborative Organizational Prosecution

Brandon L. Garrett

in Prosecutors in the Boardroom: Using Criminal Law to Regulate Corporate Conduct

This chapter examines the relationship between prosecutors and regulators in corporate cases, with particular emphasis on the merits of corporate regulation by prosecution. It first considers the ... More

This chapter examines the relationship between prosecutors and regulators in corporate cases, with particular emphasis on the merits of corporate regulation by prosecution. It first considers the role that regulators are already playing in the formulation of nonprosecution agreements and deferred prosecution agreements before discussing corporate prosecutions and the involvement of regulators in the negotiation of settlements. It then offers suggestions to improve the relationship between prosecutors and federal regulatory agencies and notes how a largely collaborative approach has emerged from the relationship between federal regulators and prosecutors. It also describes the benefits of the complex system of overlapping enforcement authority despite a sometimes tense partnership between prosecutors and regulators.Less

Good Enough for Government Work?: Federal Agencies at the Smithsonian Folklife Festival

James I. Deutsch

in Curatorial Conversations: Cultural Representation and the Smithsonian Folklife Festival

The author addresses the benefits and liabilities of presenting domestic government agencies as part of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, making evident that the negotiations involved can be as ... More

The author addresses the benefits and liabilities of presenting domestic government agencies as part of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, making evident that the negotiations involved can be as complicated for curators as those in the international arena. The chapter poses the questions of whether the Smithsonian “sold out” to Forest Service, NASA, and Peace Corps agencies, as some critics have charged? Or whether the presentation of tree pathologists and wildlife biologists in 2005; astronauts and astrophysicists in 2008, and volunteers and their partners from fifteen different countries in 2011 support the goals and mission of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival?Less

Public Interest Lost

in The People's Agents and the Battle to Protect the American Public: Special Interests, Government, and Threats to Health, Safety, and the Environment

The fundamental principle—that government has a vital role to play in protecting people from harm—could lead to endless arguments in the arena of traditional social welfare programs over exactly when ... More

The fundamental principle—that government has a vital role to play in protecting people from harm—could lead to endless arguments in the arena of traditional social welfare programs over exactly when individual people cannot help themselves. But in the arena of protecting health, safety, and the environment, it is a serviceable, working proposition: when the threats are polluted urban air, dangerous drugs, and unsafe workplaces, individuals need government because control over the threat lies with someone else. This chapter introduces the five most important federal “protector agencies” created to shoulder these responsibilities—the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.Less

Positive Metrics

in The People's Agents and the Battle to Protect the American Public: Special Interests, Government, and Threats to Health, Safety, and the Environment

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires agencies to compile “strategic plans” that establish goals for evaluating their performance. Agencies devote thousands of hours to ... More

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires agencies to compile “strategic plans” that establish goals for evaluating their performance. Agencies devote thousands of hours to complying with the statute annually, but these efforts have a surreal quality, typically failing to acknowledge the impediments that produce regulatory failure. This chapter argues that performance must be measured based on positive metrics that invite a diagnosis of the impediments that prevent agencies from achieving their statutory missions. It begins with an examination of how national policy agendas get set. It then analyzes why the GPRA and other similar efforts have failed. This is followed by a discussion of the key attributes of positive metrics.Less

The New Commission Goes to Work, 1923–1938: Organizing and Implementing the Nation’s Overseas Commemorative Program

Thomas H. Conner

in War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission

This chapter gives an overview of the ABMC’s first fifteen years as an official independent federal agency. Adding to the work of the Graves Registration Service and the National Commission of Fine ... More

This chapter gives an overview of the ABMC’s first fifteen years as an official independent federal agency. Adding to the work of the Graves Registration Service and the National Commission of Fine Arts, it beautified the eight European cemeteries, added eleven monuments and two commemorative plaques, formulated polices to regulate against the proliferation of private and non-federal American war memorials in Europe, and built relationships with other federal agencies. As a new agency, the ABMC’s primary job was to begin notifying the public of its existence, and one way of accomplishing that was by securing a permanent office in Europe, which opened in 1924 in Paris. This new base in Europe allowed the ABMC to establish a firmer foothold across the Atlantic and a means to further monitor the work that was being accomplished there.Less

Lincoln's Judge Advocate General, September 3, 1862–April 14, 1865

Elizabeth D. Leonard

in Lincoln's Forgotten Ally: Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt of Kentucky

This chapter discusses the ways in which the post of judge advocate general of the army had changed dramatically since the war began. The Federal army had grown from a small force of about 16,000 ... More

This chapter discusses the ways in which the post of judge advocate general of the army had changed dramatically since the war began. The Federal army had grown from a small force of about 16,000 regular soldiers into a massive conglomerate of regular and volunteer regiments in which more than 2.2 million men served before the war came to a close. Prior to the Civil War, the federal government “agency” assigned to monitor the application of military law had consisted of a single bureaucrat, whose responsibilities had been limited to maintaining the army's court-martial records. On July 17, 1862, however, the U.S. Congress substantially expanded the size and purview of the judge advocate general's office, assigning to its head the rank, pay, and allowance of a colonel of cavalry and authorizing him to appoint a team of assistant judge advocates, each of whom served with the rank and pay of a major.Less

Cost-Benefit Analysis

in The People's Agents and the Battle to Protect the American Public: Special Interests, Government, and Threats to Health, Safety, and the Environment

This chapter begins by explaining how health and safety statutes intend for agencies to make regulatory decisions. It then discusses how traditional cost-benefit analysis distorts such deliberations. ... More

This chapter begins by explaining how health and safety statutes intend for agencies to make regulatory decisions. It then discusses how traditional cost-benefit analysis distorts such deliberations. It presents a case study—the Environmental Protection Agency's excessively delayed rulemaking on controlling mercury emissions from power plants—to illustrate the distinctions between the two approaches. It concludes with an evaluation of the prospects for reform.Less

Regulating the Front Line From Above: The Joint Commission and Hospital Regulation in the United States

Rebecca Kolins Givan

in The Challenge to Change: Reforming Health Care on the Front Line in the United States and the United Kingdom

This chapter suggests that although the casual observer may see that the American health care system is fragmented and market driven, the underlying reality is that it is also highly regulated. Just ... More

This chapter suggests that although the casual observer may see that the American health care system is fragmented and market driven, the underlying reality is that it is also highly regulated. Just as in the United Kingdom, in the United States there is a complex, overlapping web of regulating agencies that make crucial decisions in perpetuating the status quo, promulgating change, and incentivizing certain activities and priorities. According to a newspaper, “unlike some other nations … the United States has no federal agency charged with hospital oversight. Instead, it relies on a patchwork of state health departments and a nonprofit group called the Joint Commission that sets basic quality standards for the nation.”Less