This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
To that end, they turned to lobbying and advocacy to fend off any possible profit-reducing limitations that Congress might impose on them. As an example of their lobbying power, in 2004 and 2005 the George W. To maintain their profitability and even grow it, F&F had to be heavily political.
He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and advocacy groups. And that feeling feeds communicative capitalism insofar as it leaves behind the time-consuming, incremental and risky efforts of politics. […] It is a refusal to take a stand, to venture into the dangerous terrain of politicization” (Dean 2005, p.
14 Only when government gets involved – which is when policy and political concerns are combined with advocacy by ideological and economic interest groups – does one sometimes see something different, with the inevitably resulting cross-subsidies. This claim is simply untrue.
Or is it just a case, in a highly politicized industry, of a politically convenient advocacy rationale to justify not increasing G-fees? Bush, when the administration and the Federal Reserve proposed to limit the size of the investment portfolios of the two companies in 2005. But is this argument valid? Also, the 0.10 See [link].
Advocacy groups like Feet First of Seattle and Starkville in Motion (Mississippi) have utilized walk to school initiatives as a way to drive pedestrian improvements more broadly across their respective Safety is a key element. make it almost impossible for mayors to play that role.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 40,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content