{"title":"The role of a lawyer's morals and religion when counseling clients in bioethics.","authors":"Joseph Allegretti","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"9-34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Assisted reproduction in Jewish law.","authors":"Daniel B Sinclair","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"71-106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263199","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Protestant perspectives on the uses of the new reproductive technologies.","authors":"Cynthia B Cohen","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"135-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The physician as a conscientious objector.","authors":"J David Bleich","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"245-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Religious teachings and reflections on advance directive--religious values and legal dilemmas in bioethics: an Islamic perspective.","authors":"Faroque A Khan","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"267-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The psychology of competence and informed consent: understanding decision-making with regard to clinical practice.","authors":"Barry Rosenfeld","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"173-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25263205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Traditionally, policymakers, communities, and industry have regarded the Community Reinvestment Act ("CRA") as a positive mandate for banks and thrifts to do good by increasing investment in low- and moderate-income ("LMI") neighborhoods. When Congress enacted CRA, it was inconceivable that LMI neighborhoods might eventually receive too much credit in the form of abusive mortgages. However, by the late 1990s, predatory mortgages- exploitative high-cost loans to gullible borrowers-were ravaging the inner cities.We address the question: given the surge in predatory lending, how should CRA respond? CRA and federal subsidies to regulated lenders can create perverse incentives for lenders to engage in predatory lending. For this reason, regulators should administer CRA with the goal of curbing predatory lending. In particular, federal bank regulators should use CRA to sanction behavior that could further predatory lending. Regulators should deny both satisfactory and outstanding CRA ratings to banks and thrifts that fail to satisfy specific loan eligibility criteria designed to counteract predatory lending when originating or brokering subprime mortgages. Similarly, CRA ratings should drop where banks or thrifts finance subprime lenders-either through letters of credit or working capital loans, or purchases of subprime mortgages or interests in subprime securitizations- without instituting adequate due diligence and monitoring safeguards against predatory lending.Conversely, CRA should be used to reward beneficial conduct by banks and thrifts that is designed to reduce predatory lending. For example, increased CRA credit for legitimate subprime lending by insured depository institutions could inject badly needed healthy competition into the subprime market. CRA credit should also be used to reward banks and thrifts for refinancing predatory loans with legitimate loans. Special marketing programs designed to offer legitimate credit to groups targeted by predatory lenders likewise deserve CRA credit, as do innovative underwriting guidelines for LMI borrowers. Finally, we advise against extending CRA examinations and ratings to non-bank subprime lenders, whether they are affiliated with insured depository institutions.
{"title":"THE CRA IMPLICATIONS OF PREDATORY LENDING","authors":"Kathleen C. Engel, P. McCoy","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.315103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.315103","url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, policymakers, communities, and industry have regarded the Community Reinvestment Act (\"CRA\") as a positive mandate for banks and thrifts to do good by increasing investment in low- and moderate-income (\"LMI\") neighborhoods. When Congress enacted CRA, it was inconceivable that LMI neighborhoods might eventually receive too much credit in the form of abusive mortgages. However, by the late 1990s, predatory mortgages- exploitative high-cost loans to gullible borrowers-were ravaging the inner cities.We address the question: given the surge in predatory lending, how should CRA respond? CRA and federal subsidies to regulated lenders can create perverse incentives for lenders to engage in predatory lending. For this reason, regulators should administer CRA with the goal of curbing predatory lending. In particular, federal bank regulators should use CRA to sanction behavior that could further predatory lending. Regulators should deny both satisfactory and outstanding CRA ratings to banks and thrifts that fail to satisfy specific loan eligibility criteria designed to counteract predatory lending when originating or brokering subprime mortgages. Similarly, CRA ratings should drop where banks or thrifts finance subprime lenders-either through letters of credit or working capital loans, or purchases of subprime mortgages or interests in subprime securitizations- without instituting adequate due diligence and monitoring safeguards against predatory lending.Conversely, CRA should be used to reward beneficial conduct by banks and thrifts that is designed to reduce predatory lending. For example, increased CRA credit for legitimate subprime lending by insured depository institutions could inject badly needed healthy competition into the subprime market. CRA credit should also be used to reward banks and thrifts for refinancing predatory loans with legitimate loans. Special marketing programs designed to offer legitimate credit to groups targeted by predatory lenders likewise deserve CRA credit, as do innovative underwriting guidelines for LMI borrowers. Finally, we advise against extending CRA examinations and ratings to non-bank subprime lenders, whether they are affiliated with insured depository institutions.","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"1571"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75889678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The movement towards privatization has created a sea change in the practice of public interest law. This change has given rise to legitimate concerns regarding transparency and participation in the changed regulatory environment Focus has moved from advocacy on behalf of disadvantaged client groups to a greater variety and broader array of practice models. "Old Wine in New Bottles" examines this issue through the lens of a public interest law firm in Wisconsin, using its experience in welfare reform, telecommunications, and health care. An analysis of this experience reveal that transparency and participation can be maintained in a privatized environment by adapting lawyering strategies to the altered context.
{"title":"Old Wine In New Bottles: Public Interest Lawyering In The Era Of Privatization","authors":"L. Trubek","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.284158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.284158","url":null,"abstract":"The movement towards privatization has created a sea change in the practice of public interest law. This change has given rise to legitimate concerns regarding transparency and participation in the changed regulatory environment Focus has moved from advocacy on behalf of disadvantaged client groups to a greater variety and broader array of practice models. \"Old Wine in New Bottles\" examines this issue through the lens of a public interest law firm in Wisconsin, using its experience in welfare reform, telecommunications, and health care. An analysis of this experience reveal that transparency and participation can be maintained in a privatized environment by adapting lawyering strategies to the altered context.","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"23 1","pages":"1739"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72524279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2001-06-01DOI: 10.4135/9781446217788.n5
E. Savas
Privatization is now commonplace throughout the world: in communist, socialist, and capitalist countries; in developed and developing countries; in democracies and dictatorships. In the United States privatization is being practiced by Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, blacks and whites. It is no longer a partisan or ideological issue, but rather a pragmatic and increasingly routine approach to governing and to managing public services. (1) Privatization means greater reliance on the private institutions of society and less dependence on government to satisfy people's needs. Those private institutions are: (1) the marketplace and its participants; (2) voluntary associations of all kinds, formal and informal; and (3) the family, which is, after all, the original Department of Housing, Social Services, Health, and Education. Privatization takes many forms: contracting, franchising, and "vouchering"; selling and leasing government-owned assets to the private sector; and shedding services and deregulating. The various forms of privatization all operate by allowing markets to provide desired goods and services to consumers. Contracting out common government services and selling off government-owned businesses and assets continues, but has advanced far beyond the conventional contracting out of garbage collection and selling off of in rem properties. Private towing services rescue foundering pleasure boats for a fee, something the U.S. Coast Guard once did at taxpayers' expense. (2) Privatized approaches are protecting the environment: North Atlantic salmon are protected by private environmental entrepreneurs who use market forces to buy and retire fishing rights, an improvement over government conservation efforts. (3) Private groups are saving open space: in ten years, 1200 local land trusts permanently protected 2.7 million new acres from development. (4) A market-based approach, namely, international emissions trading, is called for in the Kyoto Protocol to reduce pollution that is said to contribute to global warming. (5) New York State has turned over Stewart and Niagara Falls Airports to foreign airport operators--British and Spanish respectively--on ninety-nine year leases. New Hampshire and Georgia have leased state parks and resorts to private firms. (6) Churches in Indianapolis maintain neighborhood parks under city contracts. (7) Bryant Park, in the middle of Manhattan, was transformed from a crime-ridden haven for junkies to a six-acre jewel by a voluntary local business association. Nearby Central Park, one of the world's most famous urban open spaces, is managed by another private, nonprofit organization. (8) New York sold its popular convention center, the Coliseum, to developers who will take advantage of its premier location, (9) and is selling hundreds of millions of dollars of other prime real estate. (10) The federal government is auctioning 27,000 acres of land near Las Vegas, Nevada, worth 500 million to one
私有化现在在全世界都很普遍:在共产主义、社会主义和资本主义国家;在发达国家和发展中国家;无论是民主国家还是独裁国家。在美国，民主党人和共和党人、自由派和保守派、黑人和白人都在实行私有化。这不再是一个党派或意识形态问题，而是一种务实的、越来越常规的治理和管理公共服务的方法。(1)私有化意味着更多地依赖社会的私人机构，减少对政府的依赖来满足人们的需求。这些私人机构是:(1)市场及其参与者;(2)各种正式和非正式的自愿结社;(3)家庭，这毕竟是原来的住房、社会服务、卫生和教育部。私有化有多种形式:承包、特许经营和“担保”;向私营部门出售和租赁政府拥有的资产;削减服务和放松管制。各种形式的私有化都是通过允许市场向消费者提供所需的商品和服务来运作的。将公共政府服务外包、出售国有企业和资产的做法仍在继续，但已经远远超出了将垃圾收集外包、出售不动产的传统做法。私人拖曳服务收费救助沉没的游船，美国海岸警卫队曾经用纳税人的钱做过这样的事情。(2)私有化的方式正在保护环境:北大西洋鲑鱼受到私营环境企业家的保护，他们利用市场力量购买和取消捕捞权，这比政府的保护努力有所改进。私人团体正在节省开放空间:在10年内，1200个地方土地信托永久保护了270万英亩的新土地不被开发。(4)《京都议定书》呼吁采取以市场为基础的方法，即国际排放交易，以减少据称会导致全球变暖的污染。纽约州已将斯图尔特机场和尼亚加拉瀑布机场分别移交给英国和西班牙的外国机场运营商，租期为99年。新罕布什尔州和佐治亚州将州立公园和度假村租给了私人公司。印第安纳波利斯的教堂根据城市合同维护社区公园。(7)位于曼哈顿中心的布赖恩特公园(Bryant Park)在当地一个自愿成立的商业协会的帮助下，从一个犯罪猖獗的瘾君子天堂变成了一块占地6英亩的明珠。附近的中央公园是世界上最著名的城市开放空间之一，由另一个私人非营利组织管理。(8)纽约将其著名的会议中心——体育馆卖给了开发商，后者将利用其优越的地理位置，(9)同时正在出售价值数亿美元的其他优质房地产。联邦政府正在拍卖内华达州拉斯维加斯附近的27,000英亩土地，价值5亿至10亿美元。(11)在加州的河滨县，可以找到地方政府签订合同的一个相对较新的领域，该县与一家私人公司签订合同，管理其25个分馆的图书馆系统。(12)尽管将诸如固体废物管理之类的个人服务外包出去已是司空见惯的事，但一家名为“城市市政服务公司”的私营公司却作为密歇根州几个城镇的公共工程部门，承担着传统公共工程的全部职能。伊利诺斯州蒙茅斯市也在做同样的工作。市政停车场也正在以有趣的方式私有化。弗吉尼亚州里士满市(City of Richmond)与一家公司签订合同，负责管理包括执法在内的街头停车项目。(15)纽约市的停车罚单可以通过美国任何电话的免费电话号码，24小时用信用卡自动支付。在交易过程中，计算机检查信用卡的有效性和资金的可用性。…
{"title":"Privatization and the New Public Management","authors":"E. Savas","doi":"10.4135/9781446217788.n5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446217788.n5","url":null,"abstract":"Privatization is now commonplace throughout the world: in communist, socialist, and capitalist countries; in developed and developing countries; in democracies and dictatorships. In the United States privatization is being practiced by Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, blacks and whites. It is no longer a partisan or ideological issue, but rather a pragmatic and increasingly routine approach to governing and to managing public services. (1) Privatization means greater reliance on the private institutions of society and less dependence on government to satisfy people's needs. Those private institutions are: (1) the marketplace and its participants; (2) voluntary associations of all kinds, formal and informal; and (3) the family, which is, after all, the original Department of Housing, Social Services, Health, and Education. Privatization takes many forms: contracting, franchising, and \"vouchering\"; selling and leasing government-owned assets to the private sector; and shedding services and deregulating. The various forms of privatization all operate by allowing markets to provide desired goods and services to consumers. Contracting out common government services and selling off government-owned businesses and assets continues, but has advanced far beyond the conventional contracting out of garbage collection and selling off of in rem properties. Private towing services rescue foundering pleasure boats for a fee, something the U.S. Coast Guard once did at taxpayers' expense. (2) Privatized approaches are protecting the environment: North Atlantic salmon are protected by private environmental entrepreneurs who use market forces to buy and retire fishing rights, an improvement over government conservation efforts. (3) Private groups are saving open space: in ten years, 1200 local land trusts permanently protected 2.7 million new acres from development. (4) A market-based approach, namely, international emissions trading, is called for in the Kyoto Protocol to reduce pollution that is said to contribute to global warming. (5) New York State has turned over Stewart and Niagara Falls Airports to foreign airport operators--British and Spanish respectively--on ninety-nine year leases. New Hampshire and Georgia have leased state parks and resorts to private firms. (6) Churches in Indianapolis maintain neighborhood parks under city contracts. (7) Bryant Park, in the middle of Manhattan, was transformed from a crime-ridden haven for junkies to a six-acre jewel by a voluntary local business association. Nearby Central Park, one of the world's most famous urban open spaces, is managed by another private, nonprofit organization. (8) New York sold its popular convention center, the Coliseum, to developers who will take advantage of its premier location, (9) and is selling hundreds of millions of dollars of other prime real estate. (10) The federal government is auctioning 27,000 acres of land near Las Vegas, Nevada, worth 500 million to one ","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"19 1","pages":"1731"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82798399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"\"Partial birth\" abortion and the health exception: protecting maternal health or risking abortion on demand?","authors":"G Glidewell","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83028,"journal":{"name":"The Fordham urban law journal","volume":"28 4","pages":"1089-150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22328561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：