7,477 research outputs found
E. Barrett Prettyman papers
No full textE. Barrett Prettyman, Jr. (b. 1925), was Katherine Anne Porter's lawyer and close friend from the mid-1960s until her death in 1980. He has been in private practice in Washington, D.C., since 1955, and a partner with the prominent firm of Hogan and Hartson since 1964. He is the author of Death and the Supreme Court. His papers include personal letters and business correspondence relating to Porter. During the lifetime of Mr. Prettyman, no one may quote from these papers unless authorized in writing by him. In addition, researchers may not consult the portion of these papers donated in 1997 without Mr. Prettyman's written permission
Oral history interview with Herman Barrett
No full textHerman Barrett was born in Muskogee, Oklahoma to Herman and Millie Ann Barrett in 1920. His first years of elementary school were spent in a three-bedroom house on Fortieth and Broadway that was set up for African American children to attend until an actual elementary school, Wheatley Elementary School, was constructed. He graduated from Manual Training High School in 1939. After this, he set off for Washington, D.C. to attend Howard University where he graduated with a degree in English in 1954
Slave deed from Lewis Barrett of Montgomery County, deeding his seven-year-old slave, Teresa to John A. Ruff of Washington D.C. for $100, March 9, 1852
No full textSlave deed from Lewis Barrett of Montgomery County, deeding his seven-year-old slave, Teresa to John A. Ruff of Washington D.C. for $100
[Madalyn Murray O'Hair in Washington, D.C.]
No full textPhotocopy of an image of Madalyn Murray O'Hair outside of the E. Barrett Prettyman US Courthouse in Washington, D.C
Recommended from our members
[Madalyn Murray O'Hair in Washington, D.C.]
No full textPhotocopy of an image of Madalyn Murray O'Hair outside of the E. Barrett Prettyman US Courthouse in Washington, D.C
Rites of Spring concert flier, Food For Thought, Washington, D.C. - December 15, 1984
No full textPhotocopy of an advertising flier promoting a concert by the Washington, D.C. punk band, Rites Of Spring. The concert occurred on December 15, 1984 at Food For Thought, a restaurant/concert venue in Washington, D.C. The other bands on the bill were the Washington, D.C. punk bands Gray Matter and Grand Mal. The photocopy was made by D.C. artist, author, and musician Sharon Cheslow as part of the research for "Banned in D.C.," a book she co-authored with Cynthia Connolly and Leslie Clague
Recommended from our members
Why the Senate Should Confirm Judge Barrett
No full text(Excerpt)
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. Her confirmation seems very likely. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court confirmation process has become a predictable and partisan affair. At the moment, Republicans have the votes, now that filibusters no longer apply to Court nominations. But Judge Barrett deserves better than a partisan endorsement. She easily qualifies for a seat on the Court; there is nothing improper—or, as some have wildly asserted, unconstitutional—about confirming her now; and objections that she poses a unique threat of judicial activism are, as lawyers say, hard to credit.
Judge Barrett is a well-regarded legal scholar, with expertise in constitutional law and federal courts. Her reputation as a thoughtful member of the textualist school predates her current celebrity. As to her professional path, she placed first in her class at Notre Dame Law School, served as a clerk at the D.C. Circuit and then at the Court (for Justice Antonin Scalia), worked in private practice at a prominent D.C. firm, and spent many years on the faculty at Notre Dame. She has served as a judge on the Seventh Circuit for a couple years now. No one can doubt her acumen, and actually no one does. The objections to her nomination relate to other concerns
Why the Senate Should Confirm Judge Barrett
No full text(Excerpt)
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. Her confirmation seems very likely. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court confirmation process has become a predictable and partisan affair. At the moment, Republicans have the votes, now that filibusters no longer apply to Court nominations. But Judge Barrett deserves better than a partisan endorsement. She easily qualifies for a seat on the Court; there is nothing improper—or, as some have wildly asserted, unconstitutional—about confirming her now; and objections that she poses a unique threat of judicial activism are, as lawyers say, hard to credit.
Judge Barrett is a well-regarded legal scholar, with expertise in constitutional law and federal courts. Her reputation as a thoughtful member of the textualist school predates her current celebrity. As to her professional path, she placed first in her class at Notre Dame Law School, served as a clerk at the D.C. Circuit and then at the Court (for Justice Antonin Scalia), worked in private practice at a prominent D.C. firm, and spent many years on the faculty at Notre Dame. She has served as a judge on the Seventh Circuit for a couple years now. No one can doubt her acumen, and actually no one does. The objections to her nomination relate to other concerns
Pan-American Union building, Washington, D.C., circa 1907-1914
No full textImage of the Pan-American Union building in Washington, D.C., circa 1907-1914. Caption reads: "The Pan-American Union is maintained by the twenty-one American Republics, including the United States, for the development of Pan-American commerce, friendship and peace. This new building, completed in April, 1910, cost $1,000,000. Officers are John Barrett, Director General; F. J. Yanes, Ass't Director.
FOOD AID EFFECTIVENESS: "IT'S THE TARGETING, STUPID!"
No full textIn the 1992 United States presidential campaign, Bill Clinton and his staff regularly invoked the forceful reminder "It's the economy, stupid!" in order to maintain a tight focus on the core issue that would ultimately decide their electoral success or failure. This initially seemed reductionist to many observers, because a presidential campaign is a complex affair, with myriad issues and pressures confronting the candidate every day. But Clinton and his staff were ultimately proved correct. Most of the important issues that could ignite or derail their campaign did boil down to the economy, and their famous, ruthless focus proved highly successful. This paper advances the argument that similar focus on issues of targeting are essential if food aid is to succeed in its core mission to contribute to human development by providing temporary relief of food insecurity among poor peoples in the world. The issue of "targeting" concerns the who, the when, the what and the how questions surrounding transfers: is aid reaching people who need it (and not flowing to people who do not need it), when they need it, in appropriate form, and through effective modalities? There has been considerable research in recent years on targeting transfers generally, much of it motivated by the search for effective targeting mechanisms that do not require costly administrative screening. Targeting is of special importance in food aid for two basic reasons. First, food is a critical resource. People who go without enough and appropriate food for even a relatively short period of time can suffer irreversible health effects of undernutrition and related diseases and injuries. Therefore, reaching beneficiaries who would otherwise suffer undernutrition, in a timely manner, and in an appropriate form is especially important for the effectiveness of food transfers. And if done right, food transfers can be fundamental to effective development strategy, by safeguarding the most valuable asset of the poor: the human capital embodied in their health and education. Second, the key alleged problems surrounding food aid - displaced international trade, depressed producer prices in recipient countries, labor supply disincentives, delivery delays, misuse by intermediaries, diversion to resale or feeding livestock or alcohol brewing, dependency, inattention to beneficiaries' micronutrient needs, etc. - all revolve ultimately around questions of targeting. If the donor community could improve the targeting of food aid, it could improve the effectiveness of food aid in accomplishing its primary humanitarian and development aim - the maintenance of valuable human capital - and reduce many of the errors that sometimes make food aid controversial, ineffective, or both. A limited amount of descriptive research has explored ex post whether food aid has reached intended beneficiaries, and has found considerable targeting errors of inclusion (providing aid to the non-needy) and exclusion (failure to reach the needy) at both macro and micro levels. There have also been considerable efforts at improving ex ante food aid targeting through the development and refinement of early warning systems, vulnerability mapping, and similar tools, so that aid might reach needy people in a more reliable and timely fashion. This paper offers a brief interpretive review of this evidence. Section I summarizes the empirical evidence on food aid targeting at both macro- and micro- levels, emphasizing the inherent tradeoff between errors of exclusion (missing intended beneficiaries) and errors of inclusion (providing transfers to the non-needy). Section II then discusses the consequences of targeting errors, again looking at both errors of exclusion and inclusion and at micro- as well as macro- levels. Section III reviews some of the options available for improving targeting. Section IV concludes.Food Security and Poverty, Q18, O1, I1,
- …
