DOCSLIB.ORG

Conflict, Conciliation, and the Future of the Planet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Conflict, Conciliation, and the Future of the Planet Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Shahar, Dan Coby Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 29/09/2021 21:32:31 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/625463 CONFLICT, CONCILIATION, AND THE FUTURE OF THE PLANET by Dan C. Shahar _______________________ Copyright © Dan C. Shahar 2017 A DissErtation SubmittEd to thE Faculty of thE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY In Partial FulfillmEnt of thE RequirEmEnts For the DEgrEE of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In thE Graduate CollEgE THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2017 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Dan C. Shahar, titled Conflict, Conciliation, and the Future of the Planet, and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ____________________________________________________ Date: May 26th, 2017 David Schmidtz ____________________________________________________ Date: May 26th, 2017 Gerald Gaus ____________________________________________________ Date: May 26th, 2017 Steven Wall Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate’s submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. ____________________________________________________ Date: May 26th, 2017 Dissertation Director: David Schmidtz 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that an accurate acknowledgment of the source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: Dan C. Shahar 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Some of the chapters of this dissertation have been adapted from previously published papers. Chapter 3 revises and expands “Rejecting Eco-Authoritarianism, Again,” published in Environmental Values 24, no. 3 (2015): 345-366. Chapter 4 revises and expands “Turning Adversaries into Allies: Conciliation in Environmental Politics,” published in Macmillan Interdisciplinary Handbooks in Philosophy: Environmental Ethics, edited by David Schmidtz (Farmington Hills, Mich.: Macmillan, 2016), pp. 243-268. Some material from “Turning Adversaries into Allies” also appears in Chapter 1. I am grateful to Macmillan and Environmental Values for allowing me to use these materials in this dissertation. The research presented here has been made possible by the generosity of many organizations. In addition to support provided by the University of Arizona Department of Philosophy and the Arizona Center for the Philosophy of Freedom, I have also been fortunate enough to receive external financial assistance from the H.B. Earhart Foundation, Institute for Humane Studies, Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and Thomas W. Smith Foundation. The Institute for Humane Studies and Mercatus Center deserve special mention not only for funding my work, but also for flying me across the country on numerous occasions for seminars and workshops that have greatly enriched my graduate experience. My growth as an academic has benefited from too many people to name, but in the context of this project a few colleagues deserve special thanks. Dave Schmidtz has been as good an advisor and mentor as a person could ask for, hashing out my ideas, reading drafts, and being my advocate on more occasions than I can count. I would not be where I am today if not for Dave, and I hope only to do justice to the opportunities that he has helped me to gain. Likewise, Jerry Gaus and Steve Wall have been great committee members, giving me encouragement and space to develop my ideas but also telling me frankly when I have gone down the wrong path. At the Center for the Philosophy of Freedom, Taylor Davidson, Michael McKenna, Kerry Montano, Carmen Pavel, Guido Pincione, Dan Russell, and Mario Villarreal-Diaz have been incredible both as sources of support and as intellectual resources. I am especially grateful to have spent my graduate career working with Gayle Siegel and Rosie Johnson, who have always made me feel like a priority even while juggling countless tasks as the Center’s administrative leaders. The whole faculty and staff of the Department of Philosophy have been wonderful to me. But to single out a few people in addition to those already named, Julia Annas, Stew Cohen, Tom Christiano, Michael Gill, Terry Horgan, Laura Howard, Jennan Ismael, Marga Reimer, Connie Rosati, and Mark Timmons have played important roles in helping me become a better thinker and a better professional. Debbie Jackson and Sandra Kimball have been invaluable resources as well; Sandra in particular deserves thanks for enabling me to go about my professional affairs with the appearance of competence despite my ignorance of administrative procedures, university requirements, and techniques for operating the office printer. 4 Since this dissertation was written while I juggled a variety of teaching assignments, a few people deserve special thanks for making my courses run smoothly, thereby giving me more time to write. At the Office of Digital Learning, Melody Buckner, Luis Carrión, Tim Foster, Ginger Hunt, Jacobo Ramirez, Matt Romanoski, and Jose Toro have been amazing to work with, and the same has been true of Gretchen Gibbs at the Office of Instruction and Assessment. Ultimately, the most valuable part of my graduate experience has been interacting with my fellow graduate students. For much of my time at the University of Arizona, Chad Van Schoelandt occupied the desk adjacent to mine in the Center for the Philosophy of Freedom. My conversations with him have probably been responsible for as much of my understanding of political philosophy as anything else, and I will always appreciate his friendship. More generally, the political philosophy graduate students at Arizona—Sameer Bajaj, Jacob Barrett, Keith Hankins, Brian Kogelmann, Greg Robson, Alex Schaefer, Daniel Silvermint, Stephen Stich, John Thrasher, Justin Tosi, and Kevin Vallier—have made it virtually impossible not to finish our program with a rich understanding of the field, and I am lucky to count them among my friends. Outside of political philosophy, I should offer special appreciation to Adam Arico, Brandon Ashby, Ann Baril, Kimberly Baeza, Will Braynen, Piper Bringhurst, Michael Bukoski, Mindy Butterworth, Jacob Caton, Bryan Chambliss, Phoebe Chan, Hun Chung, Helen Habermann Daly, Oisín Deery, Matt DeStefano, Ian Evans, Brian Fiala, Mario Ivan Juarez Garcia, Richard Garzón, Adam Gjesdal, Chris Howard, Tim Kearl, Caroline King, Benji Kozuch, Victor Kumar, Grace Lager, Stephen Lenhart, Will Leonard, Justin Lillge, Yael Loewenstein, Theresa Lopez, Brennan McDavid, Joe Metz, Tyler Millhouse, Nathan Oakes, Bill Oberdick, Roberto Parra, Sarah Price, Andrea Pritchard, John Proios, Sarah Raskoff, Kristin Reglitz, Jeremy Reid, Tristan Rogers, Emil Salim, Santi Sanchez Borboa, Matt Schuler, Rachel Schneebaum, Lucy Schwarz, Wes Siscoe, Eric Solis, Tabby Spence, Eyal Tal, Hannah Tierney, Robert Van’t Hoff, Alex von Stein, Robert Wallace, Brandon Warmke, Bjorn Wastvedt, Sean Whitton, and Karolina Wisniewska. All have provided wonderful sources of philosophical conversation and companionship during my time at the University of Arizona. Outside of Tucson, I owe thanks to many people on other campuses who have helped me to reach this point in my professional career, especially including Paul Dragos Aligica, Pete Boettke, Jay Brennan, Harry Brighouse, Mark Budolfson, Phil Cafaro, Gene Callahan, Chris Coyne, Dan D’Amico, Stephen Davies, Kevin Elliott, David Estlund, Bill Glod, Ben Hale, Lauren Hartzell Nichols, Dan Hausman, Trevor Hedberg, Jeanne Hoffman, Lester Hunt, Geoffrey Lea, Mark LeBar, Pete Leeson, Andrew Light, Peter Lipsey, Phil Magness, Elijah Millgram, Mike Munger, Mark Pennington, John Quong, John Tomasi, Virgil Storr, Allen Thompson, Bas Van Der Vossen, Fabian Wendt, Matt Zwolinski. Closer to home, Cate Johnson deserves special thanks for her support, generosity, and excellent cooking since I arrived in Tucson. Of course, the biggest thanks have nothing to do with degree programs or dissertation projects. Thank you, Amy, for being the most wonderful partner and companion I could have ever imagined. Writing this dissertation was a lot of fun, but you know better than anyone that there were low points as well. If not for all of your encouragement over these last few years, I’m not sure I could have finished this project. Now that it’s done, I’m excited to get
Recommended publications
  • An Ethical Defense of Global-Warming Skepticism —William Irwin and Brian Williams Adam Smith on Economic Happiness —Douglas J

    An Ethical Defense of Global-Warming Skepticism —William Irwin and Brian Williams Adam Smith on Economic Happiness —Douglas J

    REASON PAPERS A Journal of Interdisciplinary Normative Studies Articles An Ethical Defense of Global-Warming Skepticism —William Irwin and Brian Williams Adam Smith on Economic Happiness —Douglas J. Den Uyl and Douglas B. Rasmussen Direct and Overall Liberty: Areas and Extent of Disagreement —Daniel B. Klein and Michael J. Clark Violence and Postmodernism: A Conceptual Analysis —Iddo Landau Providing for Aesthetic Experience —Jason Holt Why Has Aesthetic Formalism Fallen on Hard Times? —David E. W. Fenner Austro-Libertarian Publishing: A Survey and Critique —Walter E. Block Discussion Notes Left-Libertarianism—An Oxymoron? —Tibor R. Machan Rejoinder to Hoppe on Indifference Once Again —Walter E. Block with William Barnett II Review Essay Review Essay: Edward Feser’s Locke and Eric Mack’s John Locke —Irfan Khawaja Book Review James Stacey Taylor’s Practical Autonomy and Bioethics —Thomas D. Harter Vol. 32 Fall 2010 Editor-in-Chief: Aeon J. Skoble Managing Editors: Carrie-Ann Biondi Irfan Khawaja Editor Emeritus: Tibor R. Machan Editorial Board: Jordon Barkalow Walter Block Peter Boettke Donald Boudreaux Nicholas Capaldi Andrew I. Cohen Douglas J. Den Uyl Randall Dipert John Hasnas Stephen Hicks John Hospers William T. Irwin Kelly Dean Jolley N. Stephan Kinsella Stephen Kershnar Israel M. Kirzner Shawn Klein Leonard Liggio Eric Mack Fred D. Miller, Jr. Jennifer Mogg James Otteson Douglas Rasmussen Ralph Raico Lynn Scarlett David Schmidtz James Stacey Taylor Edward Younkins Matthew Zwolinski Reason Papers Vol. 32 Editorial The editorial to volume 26 of Reason Papers began with this: Reason Papers was founded in 1974 by Professor Tibor R. Machan, who edited the first twenty-five volumes.
  • Natural Resource Damage Valuation

    Natural Resource Damage Valuation

    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 42 Issue 2 Issue 2 - March 1989 Article 1 3-1989 Natural Resource Damage Valuation Frank B. Cross Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation Frank B. Cross, Natural Resource Damage Valuation, 42 Vanderbilt Law Review 269 (1989) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol42/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 42 MARCH 1989 NUMBER 2 Natural Resource Damage Valuation Frank B. Cross* Some consume beauty for gain; but all of us must consume it to live.1 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................... 270 II. LEGAL AUTHORITY FOR GOVERNMENT RECOVERY OF NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES ..................................... 273 A. Superfund ...................................... 273 B. The Clean Water Act and Other Federal Laws ..... 276 C. State Statutes and Common Law ................. 277 III. VALUES ATTRIBUTABLE TO NATURAL RESOURCES ........... 280 A . Use Value ...................................... 281 B. Existence Value ................................. 285 C. Intrinsic Value .................................. 292 D. Achieving a True Valuation of Natural Resources .. 297 IV. METHODS FOR MONETIZING DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES 297
  • G Reen Pa G Es

    G Reen Pa G Es

    Save Our Democracy: Support the Green Party! The Green Party is unique because we reject corporate money. We believe that our values — your values — of peace, GREEN PAGES ecological wisdom, democracy and social justice should be The Newspaper of the Green Party of the United States guiding public policy. We are fully funded by real people (not corporations) like you. The Green Party’s success also serves the larger cause Vol. 19, No. 2 • Fall 2017 of multi-party democracy and independent politics in s e t the United States. I strongly believe in citizen lobbying a t and activism, but it must be coupled with electoral S d strategies and strong candidates. Com pared to other e Utah Greens t i organizations, the Green Party is relatively small, and n U so I know that every dollar I contribute has an enor - e S h t mous impact. I always give to the Green Party first and then to other wor - f E o Reboot, Make thy causes. — John Andrews y t r G 3 a 1 I can’t sit by and see wrongs and not do P 0 A n anything. I couldn’t justify having a kid if I e 0 e 2 P r wasn’t going to try and fix the world. When Ballot G C I’m around my Green friends, I feel like e 5 D h N 7 t there’s hope. Green values encompass n f 0 o o 5 E everything that’s important, and give us t n See story page 4 7 g o i an avenue to fix the problems in our soci - x E n t i a o h ety.
  • United States District Court for the District of Arizona

    United States District Court for the District of Arizona

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) THE ARIZONA LIBERTARIAN ) PARTY AND MICHAEL KIELSKY, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) COMPLAINT ) MICHELE REAGAN, ) Civil Action No. ___________ ) Defendant. ) ) INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Arizona Libertarian Party (“AZLP”) and its Chairman Michael Kielsky (together, “the Libertarians”) bring this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to vindicate rights guaranteed to them by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The Libertarians specifically challenge the constitutionality of two provisions of Arizona law, A.R.S. §§ 16-321 and 16-322, which establish the requirements that political parties must meet to place their candidates on Arizona’s primary election ballot. These provisions formerly enabled candidates to appear on the primary ballot by submitting nomination petitions with a number of signatures defined as a percentage of their party’s qualified registered voters in the relevant jurisdiction. In 2015, however, the provisions were amended, such that they now define the signature requirements as a percentage of all “qualified signers” in the relevant jurisdiction – a pool defined to include independent and unaffiliated voters. As applied to the Libertarians – though not to the major parties – this drastically increased the number of signatures required. In general, the new requirements for the Libertarians are at least 20 times greater than the old ones, depending on the office, and in many cases much greater. Sections 16-321 and 16-322, as amended, violate the Libertarians’ First Amendment rights on several grounds. First, they impose unconstitutionally severe signature requirements under the settled precedent of the Supreme Court of the United States. Second, they violate the Libertarians’ freedom of association, because they compel AZLP, as a practical matter, to rely on non-members for purposes of nominating its own partisan candidates.
  • From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945-Present

    From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945-Present

    From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945-Present The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Thomson, Jennifer Christine. 2013. From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945- Present. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11125030 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945-Present A dissertation presented by Jennifer Christine Thomson to The Department of the History of Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of History of Science Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts May 2013 @ 2013 Jennifer Christine Thomson All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: Charles Rosenberg Jennifer Christine Thomson From Wilderness to the Toxic Environment: Health in American Environmental Politics, 1945-Present Abstract This dissertation joins the history of science and medicine with environmental history to explore the language of health in environmental politics. Today, in government policy briefs and mission statements of environmental non-profits, newspaper editorials and activist journals, claims about the health of the planet and its human and non-human inhabitants abound. Yet despite this rhetorical ubiquity, modern environmental politics are ideologically and organizationally fractured along the themes of whose health is at stake and how that health should be protected.
  • 2009-10 County Clerk Election Study Group Final

    2009-10 County Clerk Election Study Group Final

    Analysis of Travis County’s Current Voting System and Recommendations for Future Systems 2009 Travis County Clerk Election Study Group Final Report 2009 Travis County Clerk Election Study Group Chaired by Dana DeBeauvoir, Travis County Clerk P.O. Box 149325, Austin, Texas 78714-9325 5501 Airport Blvd., Austin, TX 78751-1410 512-854-9188 or 512-854-4996 www.co.travis.tx.us 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 5 Executive Summary 7 Mission Statement 11 The Format of this Report 11 Introduction and Background 13 Election Study Group Membership 15 Rules of Conduct 19 A Brief History of Travis County Voting Issues 21 During the Last Twenty Years Summaries of the Meetings of the 2009 Election Study Group Meeting 1: Welcome and Overview of Election Administration 27 Meeting 2: An Up-Close Look at Travis County’s Current Voting System 31 Meeting 3: Group Discussion of Concerns with Travis County’s Current Voting System 33 Meeting 4: Understanding the Certification Process for Voting Systems 43 Meeting 5: Electronic Voting Systems (DREs) and Use of the Voter Verified Paper Trail (VVPAT) 47 Meeting 6: Optical Scan/Digital Scan Precinct Ballot Counter Voting Systems 53 Meeting 7: Conducting Hand Count Paper Ballot Elections 57 Meeting 8: Cost Comparison of Voting Systems with Review and Discussion 61 Meeting 9: Developing Recommendations for Presentation to Commissioners Court 71 Comments and Recommendations 73 Appendices Appendix A Outline of Study Group Mission, Background Issues and Process 79 Appendix B Voting Systems Comparisons 85 Appendix C Evaluating Security for Travis County Voting Systems by Brent Waters 125 Appendix D Texas House Committee on Elections, 2008 Interim Report, Pages 5-30 131 Minority Reports Appendix E #1:Submitted by Jim McNabb 161 Appendix F #2:Submitted by Karen Renick 167 3 4 Acknowledgements First, please permit me to say thank you to the voters of Travis County for allowing me the honor of conducting elections in this community for the last 24 years.
  • Course Syllabus

    Course Syllabus

    Freedom Political Theory Project Course Description: Freedom has been called the greatest political concept of the modern world. But what is freedom? And if freedom is important, what should we do about it? Does freedom conflict with other important values, such as gender equality or distributive fairness? Can political systems that claim allegiance to freedom also make room for other values? Is the best society the one that cares only about freedom? Format: This is a demanding, reading intensive freshman seminar. As a seminar, classroom discussion is of the utmost importance. Be sure to complete all the readings before class meets each week, and come to class ready to join in the conversation. In this class, we are a team. So join in. Presentations: Each week, seminar will be opened by a brief presentation prepared by a team of two students. When it is your turn to present, your mission is NOT to teach the whole class, or to become world-class experts on the issues at hand. Rather, each presentation team is expected to study the assigned readings carefully, briefly summarize the main points, and to identify a few fundamental questions or challenges posed by the readings that they found most interesting (or confusing!). Requirements: 1. Students are expected to attend in each seminar, and to participate actively. We will allow one excused absence during the semester. Any additional absence will be penalized by a grade unit deduction from your final grade (so, if you had an A++, your final grade would be reduced to a measly A+, though of course if you had a B-, that would become a C+.
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ARIZONA LIBERTARIAN PARTY; No. 13-16254 ARIZONA GREEN PARTY; JAMES MARCH; KENT SOLBERG; STEVE DC No. LACKEY, 4:11 cv-0856 Plaintiffs-Appellants, CKJ v. ORDER AND MICHELE REAGAN, Secretary of AMENDED State, OPINION Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted January 29, 2015—University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law, Tucson, Arizona Filed April 24, 2015 Amended August 7, 2015 Before: A. Wallace Tashima, M. Margaret McKeown, and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges. Order; Opinion by Judge Tashima; Concurrence by Judge McKeown 2 ARIZONA LIBERTARIAN PARTY V. REAGAN SUMMARY* Civil Rights The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in an action brought by the Arizona Green Party, the Arizona Libertarian Party, and three of their members alleging that Arizona’s voter registration form violates their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. In 2011, the Arizona Legislature enacted a law requiring the voter registration form distributed by the Arizona Secretary of State to list the two largest parties (as measured by number of registered voters) on the form, as well as provide a blank line for “other party preferences.” See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-152(A)(5). Prior to the 2011 amendment, Arizona law required only that voter registration forms include a blank space for the registrant’s party preference. The panel first determined that plaintiffs failed to adduce evidence that the revised registration form actually discourages or prevents voters from registering with minor parties.
  • SOY Volume 14 Issue 2 Cover and Front Matter

    SOY Volume 14 Issue 2 Cover and Front Matter

    Downloaded from VOLUME 14 NUMBER 2 SUMMER 1997 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052500001771 Social Philosophy https://www.cambridge.org/core & Policy The Welfare State . IP address: CONTENTS 170.106.33.22 DAVID SCHMIDTZ Guarantees , on DAVID T. BEITO "This Enormous Army": The Mutual Aid 25 Sep 2021 at 21:17:23 Tradition of American Fraternal Societies before the Twentieth Century STEPHEN DAVIES Two Conceptions of Welfare: Voluntarism and Incorporationism HOWARD HUSOCK Standards versus Struggle: The Failure , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at of Public Housing and the Welfare-State Impulse THEDA SKOCPOL The G.I. Bill and U.S. Social Policy, Past and Future DANIEL SHAPIRO Can Old-Age Social Insurance Be Justified? PETER J. FERRARA Privatization of Social Security: The Transition Issue JAMES M. BUCHANAN Can Democracy Promote the General Welfare? H. TRISTRAM ENGELHARDT, JR. Freedom and Moral Diversity: The Moral Failures of Health Care in the Welfare State https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms LAWRENCE M. MEAD Citizenship and Social Policy: T. H. Marshall and Poverty ALAN WOLFE and Identity Politics and the Welfare State JYTTE KLAUSEN RICHARD A. EPSTEIN The Problem of Forfeiture in the Welfare State CAMBRIDGE . UNIVERSITY PRESS Downloaded from https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052500001771 Social Philosophy & Policy https://www.cambridge.org/core ISSN 0265-0525 Editor Ellen Frankel Paul Associate Editors: Fred D. Miller, Jr., and Jeffrey Paul Managing Editor: Harry Dolan Social Philosophy and Policy Center . IP address: Editorial
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the DISTRICT of ALASKA JED WHITTAKER, Plaintiff, V. BYRON MALLOTT, in His Official Capac

    IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the DISTRICT of ALASKA JED WHITTAKER, Plaintiff, V. BYRON MALLOTT, in His Official Capac

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA JED WHITTAKER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:16-cv-00220-SLG BYRON MALLOTT, in his official capacity as Lieutenant Governor of the State of Alaska, Defendant. ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before the Court at Docket 8 is Plaintiff Jed Whittaker’s Motion for Summary Judgment and at Docket 15 is Defendant Byron Mallott’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant did not respond to Plaintiff’s motion, which was filed before Defendant was served with the Complaint. Plaintiff opposed Defendant’s motion at Docket 19. No reply was filed.1 Also before the Court, at Docket 17, is Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant opposed this motion to strike at Docket 19. Oral argument was not requested and was not necessary to the Court’s decision. BACKGROUND This case concerns the constitutionality of Alaska’s ballot access requirements as codified at Alaska Statute (AS) 15.25.160. Plaintiff Jed Whittaker was a candidate for United States Senator for Alaska in 2016; he was not affiliated with a “political party” as that term is defined by Alaska law.2 To have his name printed on the official ballot, Mr. 1 Plaintiff filed a notice of supplemental authority at Docket 25 and Docket 26. 2 See AS 15.80.010(27) (defining a “political party” as one whose candidate obtained three percent of the vote in the immediately preceding general election for governor, U.S. Senator, or Case 3:16-cv-00220-SLG Document 27 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 23 Whittaker was required to submit a petition “signed by qualified voters of the state equal in number to at least one percent of the number of voters who cast ballots in the preceding general election.”3 For the 2016 election, a petition was valid if it contained at least 2,854 signatures.4 Mr.
  • View, Nuclear Power Plants Provide a Hope Which Coal Plants Cannot

    View, Nuclear Power Plants Provide a Hope Which Coal Plants Cannot

    ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY: THE CASE OF PHOTOVOLTAICS Submitted to fulfill the requirements for candidacy as an Honors student in the Environmental Studies Program by Abram Walden Kaplan April, 1985 Oberlin College Please do not quote or distribute without the express permission of the author ----and the Environmental--· . --- Studies -- Program,----- Oberlin--- College.--- - Acknowledgements This proJect has been tremendously challenging and satisfying. It has given me the opportunity to link together my studies in many-- different disciplines, and to show their relevance to one another certainly a crucial facet of Environmental Studies. Four people in particular have invested considerable effort in seeing me through the research and writing process, and I cannot express enough my appreciation for their advice: Gil Heilaender and Larry Buell, my Honors advisors, have given me carefully prescribed doses of constructive feedback and thoughtful criticism. Thia proJect never ran into anything one might call a crisis, and my advisors can take much of the credit for preventing that. The two other maJor influences have been my parents, who have been incredibly patient and encouraging in seeing through the development of some of the themes in this thesis. Harlan Wilson, one of my Honors advisors for the first half of the proJect (until he left for a semester in London) was also very helpful in narrowing my focus and forcing me to think about what it was that I was attempting to do. Michael Kraft, Lucy Jarosz, Bob Tufts, Bob Hilborn, David Orr, Jay HacDaniel, George Lankford, and George Foy read all or part of my thesis in various stages, and offered excellent advice in clarifying and refining my writing.
  • Sida Application

    Sida Application

    SIDA APPLICATION VO1 2016-2018 Green Forum Pustegränd 1-3 118 20 Stockholm [email protected] ABBREVIATIONS AGF African Greens Federation AGP Albanian Green Party CDN Cooperation & Development Network of Eastern Europe CEMAT Centro Mesoamericano de Estudios sobre Tecnolgìa Apropriada, Guatemala CEPROCA Centro de Produccion, Promocion y Capacitacion, Bolivia CSO Civil Society Organization EE Eastern Europe EGP European Green Parties (The Green group of the EU Parliament) ENoPS European Network of Political Foundations EVS European Voluntary Service (Programme) FYEG Federation of Young European Greens GEF Green European Foundation (PAO for the Green Group in EU) GeYG Georgian Young Greens GGWN Global Greens Women’s Network Groen Flemish Greens LGBT (Q) Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transsexual (Questioning) NGO Non-Governmental Organization ODA Official Development Assistance PAO Politically Affiliated Organization PVE Partido verde ecología (The Bolivian Green Party) PME Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation PWC Price Waterhouse Coopers – Previous auditors of Green Forum PYPA Programme for Young Politicians in Africa Sage Accounting Software, used in AGF SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SGY Serbian Green Youth WF Westminster Foundation (UK). British found. handling PAO-support of British greens INDEX A. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION 4 B. PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION 5 2 1. SUMMARY PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH 5 2. GREEN FORUM AND THE GREEN MOVEMENT 6 3. OVERALL CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS 7 4. ANALYSIS OF PROBLEMS AND PARTNERS 8 4.1 Problem Analysis 8 4.2 Analysis of prospects for the programme’s feasibility 8 4.3 Analysis of cooperation partners and programmes 9 5. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND THE STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK 10 5.1 The revised Green Forum Strategy and the overall objectives of the programme 10 5.2 Indicators 11 5.3 Human Rights Based Approach 11 6.