Mark A. Graber
Contemporary civil libertarians claim that their works preserve a worthy American tradition of defending free-speech rights dating back to the framing of the First Amendment. Transforming Free Speech challenges the worthiness, and indeed the very existence of one uninterrupted libertarian tradition.
Mark A. Graber asserts that in the past, broader political visions inspired libertarian interpretations of the First Amendment. In reexamining the philosophical and jurisprudential foundations of the defense of expression rights from the Civil War to the present, he exposes the monolithic free-speech tradition as a myth. Instead of one conception of the system of free expression, two emerge: the conservative libertarian tradition that dominated discourse from the Civil War until World War I, and the civil libertarian tradition that dominates later twentieth-century argument.
The essence of the current perception of the American free-speech tradition derives from the writings of Zechariah Chafee, Jr. (1885-1957), the progressive jurist most responsible for the modern interpretation of the First Amendment. His interpretation, however, deliberately obscured earlier libertarian arguments linking liberty of speech with liberty of property. Moreover, Chafee stunted the development of a more radical interpretation of expression rights that would give citizens the resources and independence necessary for the effective exercise of free speech. Instead, Chafee maintained that the right to political and social commentary could be protected independent of material inequalities that might restrict access to the marketplace of ideas. His influence enfeebled expression rights in a world where their exercise depends increasingly on economic power.
Untangling the libertarian legacy, Graber points out the disjunction in the libertarian tradition to show that free-speech rights, having once been transformed, can be transformed again. Well-conceived and original in perspective, Transforming Free Speech will interest political theorists, students of government, and anyone interested in the origins of the free-speech tradition in the United States.
A Comparative Study of Liability Law and Compensation Schemes in Ten Countries and the United States
Werner Pfennigstorf and Donald G. Gifford
This book compares principles and applications of liability law in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. Foreign perspectives are provided by Werner Pfennigstorf, who served as research attorney and project director of the American Bar Foundation 1973-86 and now is in private law practice in the Federal Republic of Germany. American perspectives are provided by Donald G. Gifford,
On the Publications List this title is under Liability Insurance.
Donald G. Gifford
This book presents a comprehensive overview of legal negotiation for law students and lawyers studying their negotiating behavior. The analysis presented often is derived from the research of social scientists, but the book is specifically designed to teach the reader how to negotiate more effectively in the actual practice of law. Examples of specific negotiation techniques are included throughout the text, and theoretical models of social scientists are discussed only when the conclusions derived from them are directly relevant to legal negotiation. At the same time, the book avoids the mundane mechanics of both local negotiation practice and “pop-psychology.” Included within this single book are analysis of both competitive negotiation tactics and more collaborative approaches, such as problem-solving and cooperative tactics. No single negotiation strategy works best in all negotiations. Accordingly the lawyer should be able to use a variety of approaches and know when to choose each tactic. Most lawyers not only change their tactics from one negotiation to another, but also use a combination of varying tactics – for example, problem solving and competitive tactics – within a single negotiation. For this reason, this text divides the negotiation process into six components or subprocesses: negotiation planning, initial orientation, initial proposals, information bargaining, narrowing of differences and closure. This organization allows discussion in a single chapter of how the different approaches to negotiation – competitive, cooperative or problem-solving – address varying aspects of the negotiation process. The book focuses on negotiation as client representation. The lawyer’s role as an advocate changes the negotiation process in a number of ways that often are not considered in general negotiation texts written by social scientists and others. This book includes separate chapters on Negotiation Planning and Negotiation Counseling, and the impact of the client is stressed throughout the text.
Robert E. Suggs
This important study identifies the effects of municipal privatization on blacks and Hispanics. The author examines three fundamental issues: how privatization affects minority employment in municipal government; how it affects minority employment in the resulting private sector positions; and how it affects city contracting among minority-owned businesses. Contents: Introduction; Privatization in Theory and Practice; The Impact of Privatization on Minority Employment in Government; The Impact of Privatization on Minority Employment in the Private Sector; The Impact of Privatization on Minority Business Opportunities; Recommendations.
David S. Bogen
John Capper, Garrett Power, and Frank R. Shivers Jr.
Preface The Chesapeake Bay is the most studied and best understood estuary in the United States. Yet, it is practically unexamined in the areas of the social sciences and the humanities. While millions of dollars have been spent on producing the thousands of studies that examine the physical, biological, chemical, and engineering aspects of the Bay, little attention has been given to understanding the political, cultural, and economic character of Bay governance. The relationship of the governments of Maryland and Virginia to the Bay is imperfectly documented. Government documents which do exist are scattered in various libraries in both states and have not found their way into the numerous bibliographies that have been assembled for the Bay. In Virginia, the State Water Control Board did not produce annual reports until 1972, the cutoff date for this study. In Maryland, the reports of water-quality agencies tend to be perfunctory and repetitive, and they give little indication of the real issues facing the agencies over the years. The many planning documents which do exist (the recent Corps of Engineers’ Chesapeake Bay Study is the largest) are general compilations of information and issues rather than original pieces of research. As a result, the present study has had the benefit of little scholarship to point the way. The researcher is forced to approach his material as though he were an archeologist, finding a few shards here, a few bone fragments there. Piecing together a coherent study out of the fragments requires a certain amount of logic, a workable hypothesis about the overall nature of the creature to be described, and some theories about how the evidence fits together. But the story is worth telling. After all, the quality of Chesapeake Bay is a matter of public opinion as well as scientific opinion. Those concerned about the Bay must understand the human-political dimension as well as the physical-biological side. We relied primarily on written sources. Those proving most fruitful have been the annual reposts of various state agencies, the occasional reports of study commissions and blue ribbon panels, and the codes, statutes, and case law of the two states. Agency files proved difficult to use because they are boxed and stored, full of irrelevant material, unorganized, and uncataloged. Interviews with persons familiar with Bay issues have given a general orientation to a particular period and suggestions of topics of sources for further research. We have not attempted to get detailed information of specific events through such interviews. The written record, we feel, stands on its own. In particular, we also made use of the abundant collections of newspaper files in libraries. While newspaper articles may have questionable accuracy, they identify key issues and place them definitively in time. Without them, numerous controversies, left only to the official archivists, would go unrecorded. In this study, information from newspapers gives a sample of issues and shows the broad trends in water-quality awareness. Feature articles in magazines and newspapers are particularly useful, because they both reflect, and partially shape, the public attitudes toward the bay. Changes in these attitudes provide data used through the report. We hope that this book has something to say that has been neglected in the public debate over the Bay. Its conclusions do not mean that scientists should be involved less in research on the Bay. They simply suggest that economists, political scientists, historians, and lawyers, should be involved more.
Lawrence M. Friedman and Robert V. Percival
Oscar S. Gray