Not exact matches
Opinion: As a matter of constitutional jurisdiction, the
federal government does not need Alberta's buy - in to legally enact and implement its national climate change
policy
Importantly, none of these groups could point to
federal government dysfunction on climate
policy to defend their own inaction, he said, because the wild rhetoric of
government dissidents like Craig Kelly
does not reflect mainstream
government policy for the nation to meet its Paris commitments for a 26 - 28 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030.
Share: FacebookTwitterLinkedinGoogle + emailIf asked what the
federal government is
doing to cut carbon pollution, most Canadians would likely point to the
policy they've heard the most about: carbon pricing.
If asked what the
federal government is
doing to cut carbon pollution, most Canadians would likely point to the
policy they've heard the most about: carbon pricing.
We want a country where the
federal government does not adopt short sighted
policy for political gain, but acts in the best interests of the whole country with a long term vision of what Canada can and should be.
So here's a modest proposal: why doesn't the
federal government get things rolling by pushing for reform of supply management — that convoluted mess of
federal and provincial
policies that actually make it an offence for farmers to sell milk and poultry across provincial boundaries?
For more than a year, public
policy experts across Canada have hotly debated the
federal government's strict anti-corruption rules, which are aimed at ensuring that Ottawa
does business only with ethical suppliers.
The legal bottom line: As a matter of constitutional jurisdiction, the
federal government does not need Alberta's buy - in to legally enact and implement its national climate change
policy.
So for me, the key issue is not the sorts of welfare
policies the
federal government can
do.
That
does not equate to a «reduction in
government», it simply means they want to restrain
federal fiscal
policy.
The views expressed here
do not necessarily represent the official
policy of
federal, territorial or provincial
governments.
The
Federal Government may have initiated another strategy to increase the ease of
doing business in Nigeria with a visa
policy that allows visitors to be issued visas on arrival.
«[Underwood] is an extremely capable lawyer, and the office primarily
does litigation, but there are also public
policy decisions that have to made,» such as how aggressively the office challenges the
federal government to represent the interests of New Yorkers, Horner said.
If Palin
does make a stab at presidential politics, she'll have a natural following among Tea Party activists, whose grassroots network is fueled by anger over the growth of the
federal government and President Barack Obama's
policies.
«We
do hope that the
federal government will quickly reimburse us to complement our efforts, so that our people will benefit from the change
policy.»
And, in the U.S., the
federal government has almost no control over state tax
policy (even less than the E.U.
does over its member states).
Do you have any examples where the
federal government implemented
policy and it
did not limit the power of the state
government?
Acting Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal argued in the
government motion that the justices should reject a request by the Log Cabin Republicans to reinstate a
federal judge's injunction against the «don't ask, don't tell»
policy.
(CNN)- A
federal appeals court sided with the
government Monday, allowing the military to maintain its «don't ask, don't tell»
policy during an appeal of a lower court ruling that the law barring openly gay and lesbian soldiers is unconstitutional.
«He supports marriage equality, and a 45 - minute discussion with him several weeks ago, revealed that the former Naval Officer has always been against the «Don't Ask, Don't Tell»
policy espoused by the
federal government.»
Robert H. Nelson, a professor of public
policy focusing on public lands management at the University of Maryland and a proponent of the
federal government transferring
federal public lands to the states, said that what's most notable about McMorris Rodgers» nomination is that, unlike other Trump cabinet nominees, she
does not appear to be a well - known activist.
Actually, «the
federal government is looking at our water
policy, realizing we have none, and wants to position itself as
doing something,» contends Swackhamer, chair of the US Environmental Protection Agency's Scientific Advisory Board.
However, those contents
do not necessarily represent the
policy of the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the
Federal Government.
To the extent the speech laid out
policy positions, or at least bright lines, it
did so through a series of «I believe» statements and a device that differentiated between an active
federal government and deference to states (i.e., making things «optional»).
A new
policy brief from a civil rights group is calling on the
federal government to
do more to counter racial segregation in the nation's growing population of charter schools.
It's vintage Jennings, perceptive about both what has happened and why and how it has (and hasn't) worked, then incurably and relentlessly over-ambitious — in a classic, big -
government, big - spending, liberal sort of way — about what
federal policy should
do tomorrow.
Because, at least when it comes to education
policy, just about everything he wants the
federal government to
do involves things that can't be
done successfully from Washington but that well - led states can and should
do: raise academic standards, evaluate teachers, give kids choices, and more.
National Leaders The
federal government's political leadership has adopted school
policies that the public
does not support or
does not believe will lead to better education.
First, it is most certainly a civil rights matter when there are racial disparities in how
policies are applied, and there is most definitely a role for the
federal government to be sure this
does not happen.
While not yet acknowledging how holding teachers accountable for their students» test scores, while ideal, simply
does not work (see the «Top Ten» reasons why this
does not work here), at least the
federal government has given back to the states the authority to devise, hopefully, some more research - informed educational
policies in these regards (I know....).
He noted that teacher evaluation is «the biggest factor that most
policies get wrong... Teacher appraisal, even if you get it right — which the
federal government doesn't
do — is the wrong driver.
As Lindsey described, a really good opportunity to rethink how the
federal government supports the education of active - duty military families and to try to consider more choice - based, choice - friendly
policies, so that these families
do have that flexibility.
After all, Brown knows full well that any attempt to withhold
federal funding will be challenged by Golden State's influential congressional delegation (including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Dianne Feinstein); the former state attorney general is also likely betting that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling last year on the Affordable Healthcare Act, which effectively makes it impossible for the
federal government to withhold subsidies from states for not implementing new regulations, can also be applied to what the administration can
do on the education
policy front.
What ESSA sets out to
do is strike the right balance between the respective roles of the
federal, state and local
governments in formulating education
policy.
These facts, along with the reality that the
federal government is barred from developing a national curricula and doesn't have much ability to force states to stick to any promises to enact college - preparatory curricula standards, belies Malkin's argument that Common Core is merely an Obama administration effort to «usurp state authority» over education
policy.
The survey, which was conducted in November, found that only 10 percent of superintendents thought the
federal government had
done a good or excellent job with education
policy over the last five years.
However, the contents of the described report
do not necessarily represent the positions or
policies of the National Institute on Student Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment or the National Institute on Early Childhood development, or the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the
Federal government.
Those Republicans thought that someone who keeps insisting that states and local school districts should make education
policy should not be overseeing a process in which the
federal government tells states what to
do.
While the vast majority of K - 12 spending is
done by state and local
governments, the bulging layers of bureaucracy that administer education
policy are the direct result of
federal overreach into our education system.
The new
federal data were released on the heels of a report by the nonprofit Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities showing that state
governments in at least 31 states are contributing less to public education than they
did in 2008, before the recession.
However, those content of the event
does not necessarily represent the
policy of the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume the endorsement by the
Federal Government.
Information presented in this site
does not necessarily represent the
policies of the Department of Education, and
does not imply endorsement by the
Federal Government.
While DeVos acknowledged that not every state will choose to implement programs that give parents the most choices, she noted that the
federal government will encourage such programs, and she emphasized the value of federalism, regardless of what states choose to
do in the realm of education
policy.
These are genuinely damaging
policy shifts that fail to generate very many headlines, but they also represent an overall pattern for the Trump administration: hacking away at expansions of the
federal governments role as protector of vulnerable populations is a lot easier than
doing anything new.
Not only
does the
federal government lack constitutional jurisdiction (outside of Washington, D.C., military installations, and tribal lands), but a
federal voucher program poses a danger to school choice efforts nationwide because a less - friendly future administration could attach regulations that undermine choice
policies.
The contents
do not necessarily represent the positions or
policies of these agencies, and readers should not assume endorsement of these positions by the
federal government.
At the
federal level, Vargas concluded, the first recommendation is the same:
do no harm — the
federal government should be aware of
policies that stand in the way of dual enrollment because they treat high school and college as silos which may force those systems to work at cross purposes.
However, the contents
do not necessarily represent the positions or
policies of the National Institute on Student Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment or the National Institute on Early Childhood Development, or the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the
federal government.
For the most part, the
federal government doesn't tax the proceeds benefits from a life insurance
policy.
By requesting, obtaining or using a Credit Card from us you agree that we may release information in our records regarding you and your Credit Account: (a) to comply with
government agency or court orders; (b) to share your credit performance with credit reporting agencies and other creditors who we reasonably believe are or may be
doing business with you on your Credit Account; (c) to provide information on your Credit Account to any third party who we believe is conducting an inquiry in accordance with the
Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act; (d) to share information with our employees, agents or representatives performing work for us in connection with your Credit Account; or (e) as otherwise permitted by the Bank's privacy
policy.