| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
163358
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT THE ONLY COUNTRY to find its health care arrangements at the center of political debate. The United Kingdom, too, has seen increasing argument over whether its health system is being fundamentally reordered. The health care wars in the United Kingdom have not seen conflict as ferocious as that over the Affordable Care Act. All major parties publicly agree on the need to preserve the state‐run National Health Service (NHS) as the core element of the United Kingdom's health care delivery, but opponents of recent change insist that the system is being surreptitiously, but steadily, privatized and moved away from its socialized roots. Generally, reform advocates have simultaneously claimed to be making necessary changes while preserving the basic values of the NHS. Critics, however, have talked of an NHS moving away from its treasured principles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
096263
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
For all the focus on economic issues in the wake of the crisis of 2008 the Obama administration has remained ambiguous about a central component of economic policy. As both candidate and President, Obama has sent mixed messages about trade policy. This ambiguity reflects wider uncertainty within the Democratic Party about global trading relationships and this paper explores and assesses the reasons for this uncertainty. A large part of the answer lies in the disparate sources of support for the Democrats. That is, the party has courted support from interest groups and core groups of voters that have widely divergent views about the value of trade liberalisation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
155590
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Much has been written about “American exceptionalism” in social policy, but one aspect has received relatively little attention thus far: the absence of universal public social programs where entitlements to benefits and services are derived from citizenship or residency. This absence is especially striking because other liberal welfare regimes such as Canada and the United Kingdom have long developed such programs. Focusing on policy design and using Canada as a contrasting case, this article explains why there are no universal social programs in the United States, a country where the dichotomy between social assistance and social insurance dominates. The empirical analysis focuses on three policy areas: health, pensions, and family benefits. Stressing the impact of institutional factors on policy design, the article adopts a historical institutionalist approach and shows that the explanation for the absence of universal social programs varies from one policy area to the next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|