Majority Leader Research Articles

Harry Reid and Health Care Reform in the Senate: Transactional Leadership in a Transformational Moment?

On December 24, 2009, the United States Senate passed H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, by a vote of 60-39. Final passage was the culmination of over a month of behind-the-scenes negotiations and strategy sessions coordinated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). In this paper, I trace and evaluate Harry Reid’s coalition-building efforts on health care reform in the months leading up to the Christmas Eve vote using concepts drawn from the political science literature on legislative leadership. I conclude that Reid adopted precisely the transactional, "keep-the-chains-moving" leadership posture that matched both the institution he leads and his limited personal investment in the issue of health care prior to 2009. Efforts to paint Reid's performance on this issue as a failure of leadership ignore the extent to which contextual factors in the Senate were stacked against reform.

Nearing Negotiations — Reconciling Key Differences between House and Senate Reform Measures

With Republicans unanimously opposed to the Democrats' health care reform, the challenge of melding the House and Senate reform bills has fallen to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). To broker a deal by the end of January on the most expansive health care legislation in a generation, Democrats must reach agreement on some contentious issues and keep the total cost under the administration's limit of $900 billion over a decade. Among the key issues are how to pay for the measure, balancing the cost of premium subsidies with making coverage affordable, and coverage . . .

A Glimpse of History: Working for the House Majority Whip in the Early Days of the 111th Congress

The rapidity, duration, and intensity of it all caught me by surprise. Nearly at a full run, I dashed through a corridor and down a winding staircase to my first morning meeting. I took a place along a wall with a few other staff, but my eyes were fixed upon the principals. Gathered around a vast table were the chairs, the majority leader, and my boss—the house majority whip. The discourse was mostly heavy—President Obama's historic election, the burden of leadership, and the daunting task to balance politics and policy in order to deliver on the promises and hopes of the people who sent them. The immediate business was expanding children's health insurance and a stimulus package to turn around an economy teetering on the brink. The majority leader was resolute. Congress would need to deliver bold actions in order to overcome the deep anxiety of the times and to build confidence for the long struggle ahead. The whip was equally resolute as he summoned back hard lessons from lost eras—Roosevelt's New Deal and Truman's Fair Deal. Congress could not allow mistakes of the past to be repeated. With a clear appreciation of history, the whip made the case for a 21st Century New Deal that ensured the poor and most vulnerable would not be left behind. No sooner did I try to reflect upon this special moment and it was time to rush off once again.

Ahron Marcus: Portrait of a Zionist Hasid

Ahron Marcus (1843-1916), a committed Hasid and an active player in the early Zionist movement until his withdrawal in late 1900, developed a form of Jewish identity and politics that combined his Hasidic piety with deep adoration for Theodor Herzl and political Zionism, precisely at the moment that Orthodoxy was closing its ranks against the Zionist movement. This article gathers a wide range of sources on Marcus, particularly his Zionist-supported newspaper and nearly two dozen surviving letters between Marcus and Herzl, to establish the history and development of this Zionist and to consider its implications for the history of Zionism and political Orthodoxy. I argue that Marcus's attempt to link political Zionism with Hasidic Orthodoxy both theologically and politically—by uniting the Zionist Organization with major Hasidic leaders while remaining within traditional society—was an intriguing exploration of Jewish identity beyond the existing typologies of eastern European Jewry.

Sustained Growth Rate Fixed For Now

Alicia Ault is an associate editor with Elsevier Global Medical News.President Obama on Dec. 19 signed a Defense Department spending bill that included a 2-month delay in the scheduled 21% cut in the rate Medicare pays physicians.Physician groups have not given up on securing a permanent overhaul to the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula, which governs the Medicare payment rate.In a statement, J. James Rohack, MD, president of the American Medical Association, said that the group agreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) who removed a 1-year fix from his health reform package with an aim of separately winning a permanent overhaul.“As we call for a permanent solution, the AMA acknowledges the House and Senate votes to stop the cuts for 2 months so that access to care for Medicare and TRICARE patients is not disrupted while the Senate works on solving the problem once and for all,” said Dr. Rohack in the statement.The House of Representatives voted for a permanent fix in a standalone bill, but the Senate later rejected it. Neither the House nor the Senate included a permanent fix in their respective health reform bills.The fee reduction was due to go into effect Jan. 1. Lawmakers had few legislative vehicles left to avert that cut, and thus attached the delay to the Defense spending bill, knowing that with American military in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was a must-pass proposal.The $636 billion Defense appropriations bill had passed the House. The package includes almost $14 billion in non-Defense spending, including an extension of unemployment benefits and subsidies to help laid off employees and others who are out of work pay for COBRA health-insurance benefits.With the Senate's 88–10 vote to approve the bill, the legislation went to President Obama to be signed into law, temporarily stopping the cut. Alicia Ault is an associate editor with Elsevier Global Medical News. President Obama on Dec. 19 signed a Defense Department spending bill that included a 2-month delay in the scheduled 21% cut in the rate Medicare pays physicians. Physician groups have not given up on securing a permanent overhaul to the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula, which governs the Medicare payment rate. In a statement, J. James Rohack, MD, president of the American Medical Association, said that the group agreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) who removed a 1-year fix from his health reform package with an aim of separately winning a permanent overhaul. “As we call for a permanent solution, the AMA acknowledges the House and Senate votes to stop the cuts for 2 months so that access to care for Medicare and TRICARE patients is not disrupted while the Senate works on solving the problem once and for all,” said Dr. Rohack in the statement. The House of Representatives voted for a permanent fix in a standalone bill, but the Senate later rejected it. Neither the House nor the Senate included a permanent fix in their respective health reform bills. The fee reduction was due to go into effect Jan. 1. Lawmakers had few legislative vehicles left to avert that cut, and thus attached the delay to the Defense spending bill, knowing that with American military in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was a must-pass proposal. The $636 billion Defense appropriations bill had passed the House. The package includes almost $14 billion in non-Defense spending, including an extension of unemployment benefits and subsidies to help laid off employees and others who are out of work pay for COBRA health-insurance benefits. With the Senate's 88–10 vote to approve the bill, the legislation went to President Obama to be signed into law, temporarily stopping the cut.

Rallying the Caucus — The Democrats' Struggle for Unity on Reform

Fighting Republicans and a few wary Democrats as he races against the clock, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) must muster 60 votes to defeat an anticipated series of GOP procedural measures, including a filibuster, and clear the way for enacting ambitious health care reform legislation. Underscoring the need for the vote of every senator in the Democratic caucus, Reid agreed, in exchange for the support of party moderates and independent Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, to drop a plan to expand Medicare by enabling people 55 to 64 years of age to enroll in the program. Having thus revised their . . .

Forestalling a Filibuster — Senate Reform Bill Cleared for Floor Debate

Faced with unanimous Republican opposition, Senate Democrats, joined by two independents, closed ranks in a rare Saturday session on November 21 to advance consideration of a vast health care reform bill. Without a vote to spare on a motion to clear the way for floor consideration of the contentious bill, Democrats prevailed 60 to 39. Having defeated Republican efforts to derail the measure, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada can now open floor debate in early December.The bill would expand health insurance coverage to about 31 million people at a cost of $849 billion over 10 years, while . . .

Settling in for a Long Debate

With virtually all Republicans in opposition and public opinion sharply divided, the Senate opened debate on a Democratic health care reform bill that would greatly expand insurance coverage and, its leadership hopes, reverse the erosion of the party's standing in the electorate's eyes. Prospects seem dim that the Democrats will be able to enact their proposal without scaling down its scope to accommodate the more conservative Democratic senators and two independents. Nevertheless, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) opened floor debate on December 1 by saying that “the next weekends, plural, we will be working” on the reform bill, because there . . .

Ethical Issues in Cardiovascular Research Involving Humans

This component of the series “Careers in Cardiovascular Research: A Primer for New Investigators” will address ethical conduct of research involving humans. The dramatic decline in cardiovascular mortality (Figure) provides testimony to the societal benefits of research leading to new therapies and systems of care.1 In concert with these rapid developments, changing expectations have resulted in the emergence of ethical issues with highly publicized examples of concern over conduct of research in humans.2–5 Whereas professional ethics should, and for most physicians do, “regulate” conduct of biomedical research, “self-regulation” does not always meet societal expectations. Dr Barry Coller6 has pointed out that science lacks intrinsic morality. Thus, the laudable goals of improving patient care, understanding mechanisms of disease, or protecting society from perceived external threats do not justify ignoring fundamental human rights that guide (and regulate) the conduct of research. Figure. Death rates for cardiovascular disease in the United States, 1900 to 2005 (not adjusted for age). At the same time it is important to reflect on the importance of physicians participating in research and providing the opportunity for their patients to do so. Although some have argued this compromises the basic physician responsibility to a patient,7 we believe the best interest of the patient can and must be protected in the research setting. Two brief examples demonstrate the fundamental changes in understanding that may arise from direct involvement of physicians in research. As late as the 1970s, the prevailing wisdom to explain the presence of intracoronary thrombus on postmortem examination of patients after myocardial infarction was simply wrong; pathologists studying hearts in this setting found evidence to “suggest that coronary thrombi are consequences rather than causes of acute myocardial infarction”8 and “consideration is given to the possibility that some thrombi may follow rather than precede …

Long-Term-Care Insurance Finds Place in Reform Bills

Long-Term-Care Insurance Finds Place in Reform Bills

Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment (review)

Reviewed by: Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment Blake Abbott Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. By Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008; pp. xvi + 301. $24.95. The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States has become the most notable in a string of recent electoral victories for the Democratic Party over the Republican Party. What began in 2006 continued into 2008 and has the chance of continuing into the future. This trend has created a highly visible identity crisis in the Republican Party, which, left without a clear leader, has been rife with infighting over its ideological direction in the coming years. Numerous figures have emerged to claim a leadership spot—Newt Gingrich, Dick Cheney, Sarah Palin, etc.—but one person in particular has received significant attention as a potential leader of the Republican Party: radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. Republicans and Limbaugh himself have attempted to deny this accusation, but the recent record lends it some credibility. Limbaugh has been the most prominent and consistent voice in support of the Republican Party since the election of Barack Obama, for example. Republican officials who have criticized Limbaugh have immediately felt pressure to apologize to him and retract their statements. Most succumb, leaving the impression that the Republican Party takes its direction, at least in part, from Limbaugh. How is it that a radio host can be perceived as the titular head of one of the nation's two major political parties? Part of the answer can be found in Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella's new book Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Jamieson and Cappella examine the rhetorical strategies of three prominent conservative media outlets: Rush Limbaugh's daily talk radio program, the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, and key Fox News programs (specifically, Hannity and Colmes prior to Colmes's departure, and Special [End Page 662] Report with Brit Hume prior to Hume's departure). The book uses extensive research to outline a set of practices found in the rhetoric of these three outlets that can "create a self-protective enclave hospitable to conservative beliefs" that "enwraps them in a world in which facts supportive of democratic claims are contested and those consistent with conservative ones championed" (x). In the first two chapters, Jamieson and Cappella use two recent case studies to introduce their argument that conservative news media form an echo chamber that both inundates their audiences in conservative views and protects them from counterarguments. These case studies are, first, the 2004 presidential campaign between George W. Bush and John Kerry and, second, the controversial comments former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott made at a celebration of Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday. After introducing the primary players in their study in chapter 3, the fourth chapter identifies a common theme that becomes the foundation for conservative media's rhetorical positioning: the legacy of Ronald Reagan. The authors then move into an outline of their concept of the "echo chamber," drawing from the studies they conducted with the Annenberg Foundation from 1996 to 2004 on the effects of conservative opinion media (especially Limbaugh). The rest of the book examines particular rhetorical devices that conservative media in general, and Rush Limbaugh in particular, employ and their potential effects on their audience. Such devices include "framing and reframing the mainstream media" (140), "balkanization of knowledge and interpretation" (191), and "distortion and polarization" (214), among others. The authors conclude with some analysis of the advantages and drawbacks of such rhetorical strategies as they relate to democratic engagement. The book's strength comes not from the profoundness of its argument. In fact, Jamieson and Cappella admit up front that they are not breaking any new theoretical ground with this study. Rather, they note that they see their work "as an analysis of how they [the conservative media] function across a decade-long period and a theoretically driven grounding from which to understand their possible effects" (4, emphasis added). The book's contribution, then, is less about what Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and the opinion pages of...

Health Reform Advances With MH Amendments on Board

Health Reform Advances With MH Amendments on Board

Compromises and Controversies — Moving Forward on Reform

Accelerating progress toward the Democrats' goal of enacting health care reform legislation, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) unveiled a bill on October 29 that would establish a mandate for most legal U.S. residents to obtain health insurance. The bill would extend coverage to some 36 million people, and according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO),1 its net costs ($894 billion over 10 years) would be fully paid for — largely through an income-tax surcharge on high-income persons and a reduction in the growth of Medicare's payment rates for most services, except those provided by physicians. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry . . .

Measuring Implicit British Perceptions of German Intentions in 1938-1939

Implicit British perceptions of German leaders during the period September 30, 1938–September 1, 1939 (from the Munich Agreements to the German invasion of Poland) are studied with a “ratio of threat accentuation” measure. This ratio is calculated by comparing the densities of power motive imagery in two kinds of archival material: full texts of major Hitler speeches versus summaries in The Times of London, and British versus German accounts of meetings between British diplomats and major Nazi leaders. In both cases, the British ratio of threat accentuation increases following the unexpected German occupation of Prague and the rest of Czechoslovakia on March 15, 1939. These changes in implicit perception are congruent with changes in British explicit perceptions and foreign policy after the German action.

CAP AND TRADE Key Senate leaders put off introduction of climate-change bill

Last week, Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chair of the Environment & Public Works Committee, and John Kerry (D-Mass.), chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, said they would put off introduction of climate-change legislation in the Senate until late September. They blamed the delay on Kerry’s hip surgery, conflicts over timing with health care legislation, and the death of Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. Before Congress’ recess in August, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he wanted climate-change legislation on the Senate floor by September. Reid has now offered more time to “work on the final details” of a bill, Boxer and Kerry said in a joint statement. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), climate-change skeptic and ranking minority member of the Environment & Public Works Committee, however, said the delay was “emblematic of the division and disarray in the Democratic Party” and showed the majority lacked votes to clear a bill. Meanwhile, more than 300 community ...

Washington’s Fourth Interest

WASHINGTON’S FOURTH INTEREST Lars Schoultz When will the United States end its embargo and re-establish normal relations with Cuba? That question has been asked repeatedly since the end of the Cold War two decades ago, and the answer has always been the same: the estrangement will end when Cuba no longer threatens U.S. interests, which have traditionally been limited to three: security, economic trade, and US domestic politics. Until the end of the Cold War, security was the most important of these threatened interests. Small Caribbean nations are rarely considered a security concern, of course, but their physical proximity has always been worrisome – if a rival power were to establish a military base in the Caribbean, it could be used to launch an attack on the United States. It is therefore hardly surprising that the first statement of U.S. policy toward Latin America, the 1811 No-Transfer Resolution, was aimed at stopping the British from securing a toehold in Spanish Florida, and that the 1823 Monroe Doctrine was based on the same bedrock principle: prudent people keep powerful potential adversaries as far away as possible. Fast-forward to 1956, when Nikita Khrushchev warned the West that “we will bury you,” a boast that came just as Cuba’s revolutionary leaders were planning their campaign to seize power.1 Then in early 1960, a year after the rebels’ victory, Khrushchev sent the First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, Anastas Mikoyan, to open a scientific , cultural and technical exhibition in Havana. Before leaving the island, Mikoyan signed agreements that included a program of development assistance and a commitment to purchase about twenty percent of Cuba’s sugar crop for each of the next five years. This confirmed Washington’s worst fears and prompted President Eisenhower to authorize preparation for the Bay of Pigs invasion. The nation’s security required the overthrow of Cuba’s Soviet-friendly government. The Cuban revolution also attacked substantial economic interests. The U.S. government lost some of its own property, principally the Nicaro nickel facility which had been built by the U.S. General Services Administration during World War II and remained U.S. government-owned but operated by a private contractor. The contractor, Freeport Sulphur Company , also had been developing is own nickel and cobalt mine at Moa Bay, forty miles to the east. Freeport Sulphur lost both the contract and the mine, and other U.S. investors suffered losses valued at almost $2 billion back in the days when a billion was more than pocket change. About six thousand of those investors filed claims with the Foreign Claims Settlement C 2009 Southeastern Council on Latin American Studies and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 141 The Latin Americanist, September 2009 Commission, and some were extremely well-connected corporate leaders such as Robert Kleberg, the president of King Ranch in Texas, which lost its 40,000-acre ranch in Cienfuegos. With the help of Senate majority leader Lyndon Johnson, Kleberg was ushered into the Oval Office, where he asked President Eisenhower for help and got it – a full-court press by U.S. diplomats. It proved to be completely unsuccessful. Most investors of Robert Kleberg’s generation wrote off their losses decades ago, however, and in the post-Cold War era they have been replaced in the policy arena by powerful economic interests urging the United States to re-open trade with the island. Most powerful are the nation ’s farmers, who in 2000 pushed through a law that permits the sale of food to Cuba, albeit under conditions many consider onerous. At first Cuba declined to buy, insisting on normal two-way trade, but then reconsidered after a devastating hurricane in 2001, and the year ended with a boatload of U.S. poultry sailing into Havana’s harbor. It was the first significant trade with Cuba since 1963. Cubans apparently liked what they bought, and soon the invisible hand of supply and demand began to work its magic. In early 2002 six House Democrats visited the island, including Arkansas moderate Vic Snyder, touting the rice and pork produced by his constituents. Then came a delegation of Californian producers...

Maine Advocacy Wins Telepractice Coverage

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderPolicy Analysis1 Sep 2009Maine Advocacy Wins Telepractice Coverage Michael ToweyMA, CCC-SLP Michael Towey Google Scholar More articles by this author , MA, CCC-SLP https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.PA3.14112009.9 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Maine recently passed legislation that will require health insurance companies to cover health care services provided by telepractice. The law goes into effect with new insurance contracts on Jan. 1, 2010. The legislation, L.D. 1073, states that insurance companies in Maine “may not deny coverage on the basis that the coverage is provided through telemedicine if the health care service would be provided through in-person consultation.” The support for this bill grew out of frustration experienced by staff at Waldo County General Hospital’s Voice and Swallowing Center of Maine (Belfast), who were trying to provide voice treatment to patients traveling long distances. Insurance Denial In September 2008 the center was providing treatment to a teacher from northern Maine who drove eight hours—more than 500 miles round trip—to reach the center. The teacher had career-threatening vocal fold lesions and a serious voice disorder. Clinicians knew that the most efficacious way to provide treatment was by telepractice. However, even with repeated requests and documentation, the insurance company denied coverage for the treatment. Despite the denial, voice specialists at the Voice and Swallowing Center developed a telepractice treatment program for this teacher. The center absorbed the cost to create a demonstration case in Maine to support legislative efforts to require health insurance coverage for telepractice. The service was provided by direct high-speed video connection to the teacher’s classroom computer. Three telepractice voice treatment sessions were provided, including coaching for the school’s speech-language pathologist to help monitor the voice treatment (to see a video clip, go to the Voice and Swallowing Center of Maine’s Web site). The teacher has returned to normal voicing and coached the varsity softball team. Laryngeal imaging demonstrates full resolution of the vocal fold lesions. The experience prompted the Voice and Swallowing Center to contact Rep. John Piotti, the majority leader of the Maine House of Representatives, who agreed to sponsor L.D. 1073. The Voice and Swallowing Center contacted ASHA for information on telepractice bills in other states, and provided Rep. Piotti with comprehensive information about telemedicine, the efficacy of telemedicine, the status of telepractice laws in other states, and the rationale for this legislation in Maine. After Rep. Piotti sponsored the bill, Rep. Ann Perry introduced similar legislation that restricted telepractice to “existing telemedicine networks,” effectively limiting services to large organizations with existing high-cost telemedicine facilities. Proponents of the original bill were successful in demonstrating to Rep. Perry that allowing a greater variety of service delivery methods was a win-win for Maine residents. She was extremely responsive to amending the language in her bill to remove the restrictive language. Telepractice Sourcebook The Voice and Swallowing Center developed a comprehensive telepractice sourcebook and distributed it to legislators to demonstrate the many ways telepractice could be delivered, including secure video conferencing to home computers using widely available high-speed Internet connections. ASHA provided valuable information about the status of telepractice nationwide and research about its efficacy. The manager of the Voice and Swallowing Center provided testimony at the public hearing on the bill, and written testimony was provided to members of the committee with jurisdiction over the bill. Testimony focused on the efficacy of telemedicine, especially the improved access to services and cost savings for individuals traveling long distances for treatment. Coincidentally during this period, Waldo County General Hospital/The Voice and Swallowing Center of Maine became affiliated with MaineHealth, an integrated health care delivery network. As a result, a representative from the Voice and Swallowing Center now participates as a member of MaineHealth’s telepractice planning workgroup, which is coordinating efforts to develop a comprehensive plan and working paper to organize telepractice in Maine. Author Notes Michael Towey, MA, CCC-SLP, is director of the Voice and Swallowing Center of Maine at Waldo County General Hospital. Contact him at [email protected]. Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 14Issue 11September 2009 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Sep 1, 2009 Metrics Current downloads: 165 Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagasha-article-typesleader-topicsCopyright & Permissions© 2009 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Florida Homeowners Insurance: How Big Is the Availability Problem and Is There a Fair Solution?

This article features a panel discussion on hurricane and wind insurance organized by Jeffrey L. Kucera for the American Risk and Insurance Association (ARIA) 2008 Annual Meeting in Portland, Oregon. The moderator, Jeffrey L. Kucera, is a Senior Consultant with EMB in North America. He has over 30 years of experience in the property-casualty business, joining EMB after a 24-year career with Allstate and 5 years as a consultant. Jeff's primary practice areas are rate making, class plans, and product development. While knowledgeable about all personal lines, he has particular experience in the homeowners line. He graduated from the University of Nebraska in 1975 with a major in mathematics and a minor in economics. He became a member of the American Academy of Actuaries (MAAA) in 1980 and a Fellow of the Casualty Actuarial Society (FCAS) in 1984. Three presenters provide a discussion on Florida Homeowners Insurance. The first presenter is Chris Carlson, a consultant with Pinnacle Actuarial Resources, Inc. He holds a bachelor of science degree in mathematics from the University of Oregon. Before joining Pinnacle Actuarial Resources, he was employed for over 25 years with Nationwide Insurance Companies in Columbus, Ohio. He is currently the President of the Casualty Actuarial Society, a fellow of the Casualty Actuarial Society, and a Member of the Academy of Actuaries. The next presenter is Locke Burt, President and Director of Security First Insurance Co. of Ormond Beach, Florida. He has 35 years of experience in the insurance profession, and in 2005, formed Security First Insurance Company. He also owns Burt & Scheid Facultative Corporation, which underwrites property facultative reinsurance on behalf of Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. and Employers Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. He holds both a bachelor of science and a master's of business administration degree from Northwestern University and a juris doctorate degree from Loyola University in Chicago. He is a licensed reinsurance broker and a licensed attorney who is a member of the Illinois and Florida Bar Associations. He was a senator in the Florida legislature from 1991 to 2002 and experienced Hurricane Andrew first-hand. While in the Florida Senate, he served as Chair of the Appropriations Committee and Republican Majority Leader. The final presenter is Jim Massie, and he provides the reinsurance perspective on Florida homeowners insurance. He is the Senior Partner of Massie Law Offices in Tallahassee, Florida, specializing in reinsurance and insurance law, seaport issues, and administrative law. He received his bachelor of arts from Miami University in Ohio and his juris doctorate from Florida State University. Interestingly, when he is not working on insurance issues, he likes to breed and race thoroughbreds. Jeff Kucera: Florida's economic growth and exposure to hurricane losses make it unique from an insurance perspective. The potential for catastrophic losses is in the billions of dollars, and the risk of ruin is a real threat for many insurance companies. More important, it is not just insurers that face severe economic pressures should the megahurricane event occur. Many insureds will also be surprised to learn that their insurance rates could be significantly increased, and these premiums are not just for their homeowners insurance. The three panelists will further describe how the situation has grown and their perspectives of the situation as an insurance company owner and reinsurer. Christopher S. Carlson: Florida's economic picture is a rather unusual situation of supply and demand interplay. Policyholders demand insurance policies, and insurance companies provide capital to write those policies. Affordability and availability are the key dynamics in the Florida homeowners market. That is, Florida homeowners think that insurance should be affordable, whereas insurers are concerned with the availability issue since their capital is at risk. …

Party, Electoral Vulnerability, and Earmarks in the U.S. House of Representatives

Very little attention has been paid to the relationship between House members’ electoral vulnerability and the amount of federal spending they procure for their districts. I argue that vulnerable members receive more spending than safe members, on average, but only if they are in the majority party. Party leaders, as part of maintaining or pursuing a majority, have an interest in protecting their party's most vulnerable members. However, the majority party has a greater degree of control over spending than the minority party. This implies that the majority leadership is able to “protect” projects which are electorally beneficial to their party's vulnerable members, but the minority leadership is not. As a result, there is a positive relationship between vulnerability and the amount of pork procured among majority members, but not among minority members. Examinations of three different datasets centering on earmark distribution in the U.S. House from the past 15 years confirm these hypotheses.

The big bang

Over the last couple of years we have become used to the global media informing us about the revolutionary and democratic possibilities of mobile media. As a symbol of technological convergence, the multimedia possibilities of mobile media have become integral to the rise of UCC (user-created content) on the web. From the mobile novels ( keitai shosetsu ) in Japan, the OhMyNews netizens of South Korea, and the political use of mobile phones in the Philippines [Raphael 2003], the democratic and creative potential of mobile media have been exemplified in the Asia-Pacific region. In a way, the rise of mobile media parallels the rise of the webcam [Koskela 2004] by enabling everyday users to document and edit their stories -- but mobile media promises more: a portal to new forms of distribution such as MySpace, Facebook, Cyworld mini-hompy, mixi, 2ch ( ni-channeru ), YouTube, and so on. Much of the innovative mobile media art work has been conducted around hybrid reality and location-based mobile gaming [De Souza and Silva 2006a; 2006; 2004; Davis 2005] to challenge the role of copresence in everyday life -- forging questions around boundaries between the virtual and actual, online and offline, haptic and cerebral, delay, and immediacy. Examples include the PacManhattan (US), Proboscis' Urban Tapestries (UK), Blast Theory (UK), Aware (FIN), Mogi Game (JP), and INP Urban Vibe (SK). In these projects we can see the melding of various traditions and disciplines, often exceeding the boundaries of games studies and new media discourse, apart from exceptions like the ‘relational architecture’ of new media artist, Rafael Lazano Hemmer. Because mobile media grew in an interdisciplinary context, we must ask what role it can play in bringing new challenges to new media practice and theory. How can mobile media proffer insight into new media practice? How can mobile media's history as both a socio-cultural artefact and form of communication provide perception into emerging forms of new media politics in an age of global media? In order to address the potential of mobile media as new media, I will begin by discussing some aspects of what it means to be “mobile” in a period of globalization. I will then discuss South Korea as one of the major global leaders in mobile technologies, contextualising the socio-cultural dimensions of its techno-nationalist policy. I will then turn to the South Korean “mobile hacker” project, called Dotplay, conducted by INP. I argue that through this type of hactivist project we can begin to reflect the art of being immobile and mobile in an age of global UCC “flows”.