PDF Archive

Easily share your PDF documents with your contacts, on the Web and Social Networks.

Share a file Manage my documents Convert Recover PDF Search Help Contact


Search


PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 20 September at 23:07 - Around 220000 files indexed.

Show results per page

Results for «represented»:


Total: 10000 results - 0.072 seconds

Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi PILA Represented Member HY 97%

PILA Membership Agreement Han Yazilim Bilisim Hizmetleri Represented Member This membership agreement, version 5.2, and any duly executed addenda and any other attachments hereto (“Agreement”) sets forth the terms and conditions under which a qualified institution becomes a member of The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/11/19/dokuz-eyl-l-niversitesi-pila-represented-member-hy/

19/11/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

STUDIES OF THE OTTOMAN DOMAIN PILA Represented Member HY 97%

PILA Membership Agreement Han Yazilim Bilisim Hizmetleri Represented Member This membership agreement, version 5.2, and any duly executed addenda and any other attachments hereto (“Agreement”) sets forth the terms and conditions under which a qualified institution becomes a member of The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/11/19/studies-of-the-ottoman-domain-pila-represented-member-hy/

19/11/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

ReformEssay1 94%

Reform Essay #1    It is nearly uncontested that the national legislature of the United  States is massively flawed. Seldom is it contested, specifically,  that many of these flaws originate in the structure of the  government. Armchair political theorists the world over note problems  and generate solutions, although it must be said that no two  theorists concur on either the nature of the problems or the optimal  solutions thereof. That said, as an armchair political theorist, it  seems incumbent upon me to spew my ideas across the land.  Before we start, it must be made clear that among the more common  objections to any proposed reform is that the Founders of the United  States did not intend it. Leaving aside the hagiographic  interpretation of American history necessary to believe that they  were infallible and the many successful amendments showing that such  changes as these have had a good track record, so to speak, the  governance available for a largely­agricultural nation of fewer than  four million residents, where the fastest transportation was the  horse and the fastest calculator the abacus, is not the same as the  optimal governance for the present United States, nor will either it  or this be optimal in the America of nearly two and a half centuries  hence.  There seem to be two major schools of thought regarding the purpose  of a legislator. The first, of which the First­Past­The­Post system  is the brainchild, suggests that a legislator’s responsibility is to  the area that elected that representative, and that a legislature  ought to be the meeting­place of the voices chosen to speak for  various communities. The other theory, which begat Proportional  Representation, contends that each representative represents an  ideologically­bound swathe of the population ­ say, one­fourth of one  percent of all voters ­ that votes for a certain ideology shared by  that representative, and that a legislature ought to be the political  views of the nation in a microcosm.   Both schools of thought have their positives and negatives. The  former means that it is possible for beliefs that are common but do  not prevail in any particular community to be silenced. The latter  means that no one legislator is tied to a community, and thus that  the interests of that community go without support. The former means  that a plurality interest or view in individual communities can  become the sole interest or view represented, even if the other views  are similar enough that, banded together, they would outnumber them.  The latter means that legislators who do badly can only be easily  removed by their parties. The former means that interests bound to a  particular area, even if they are despised by the country at large,  can be represented. The latter necessitates large parties and  disadvantages non­partisan but popular candidates. And so on, and so  forth...  It seems likely that no system of government yet designed will both  perfectly represent the political views of the populace and produce  the optimal results for the purposes of good governance, even when  the two are in concord ­ indeed, it is unlikely that any system will  successfully do either one. That said, there are nevertheless  improvements to be made to the present system.  While the former view ­ the view of FPTP ­ is massively prevalent in  the United States government, the alternative also makes good points  and deserves a seat at the table. And what better place than the  Senate, that great Proteus of the government ­ first the voice of the  state legislatures, then that of the people of the various states,  with its elections arrhythmically staggered in an odd 2/3 time  signature. In truth, the states are strange choices for electoral  districts ­ except for a few examples, too small for a viable  regional identity, yet too large for a local one, usually too  heterogenous to represent a specific community or type of community  yet too homogenous to be reasonably competitive, and nowhere near  proportional, with the residents of Wyoming having more than sixty  times the electoral power of an equivalent quantity of Californians.  What better solution than to replace the entire thing with a system  which represents all Americans equally, is founded on a national  identity rather than any smaller one (or, perhaps, if necessary, a  number of regional interests that elect national representatives),  and is exactly as heterogenous or homogenous as the country? Granted,  such a system would be ill­fitting for the end­all and be­all of the  legislature ­ but its consistency of results make it nearly­ideal as  an upper house.  And what of the lower house?  Political factions are fractal. There are two schools of thought  regarding how a district ought to be designed ­ that a district ought  to reflect some kind of natural community, and that a district ought  to be designed so that it changes with the nation. The extent of the  former would be a district filled with homogenous electors, seldom  changing its political affiliation ­ only when the mass views or  party loyalty of the public changed, as in the American South between  1960 and 1972. The latter suggests a legislature that vacillates from  one supermajority to another, according to the vicissitudes of the  electorate amplified to staggering crests and troughs.  The former, it seems self­evident, is a better model for a  legislature founded on representing the wills of individual  constituencies. But while the United States House of Representatives  intends to represent individual constituencies, it is subverted by  gerrymandering and single­member districts, which split natural  communities.  Granted, single­member districts have their advantages. Notably, it  improves minority representation ­ when the Texas House of  Representatives switched over in 1972, African­American members were  elected for the first time since Reconstruction. But that minority  candidates are disadvantaged is not solely the fault of  multiple­member districts ­ after all, they remain disproportionally  uncommon in single­member legislatures. That minority candidates have  been forced to obviate representative democracy means that the forces  that oppose them should be tackled first, but it does not in and of  itself present a reason not to use multi­member districts.  Where, in multi­member and fairly apportioned districts, it could  honestly be said that there are five national representatives for  Houston (or perhaps three from South Houston and two from North  Houston, or some other scheme), in this present system, it can only  be said that there is one district for a swathe of Houston stretching  from Atascocita to Montrose by way of Spring, another for a vaguely  horse­shaped zone between Bush Intercontinental and Downtown Houston,  &c...  But why should representation be dependent on where someone lives ­  in many ways, the least important thing about a person? What common  interests bind a Channelview longshoreman and an affluent Downtown  lawyer, more than they are bound to their compatriots in, say, Los  Angeles? Why should the vote of a company executive in River Oaks  determine who represents a teacher in Bellaire, or vice versa? In  this new world of the Internet ­ of, as one might say, e­democracy ­  why must we be bound to the districts of the past, which divert  untold billions into porkbarrel spending? True, local affairs such as  roads bind them ­ but shouldn’t those be handled by local authorities  anyway? 

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/06/reformessay1/

06/02/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Barcelona-Declaration-95 93%

Barcelona declaration adopted at the Euro-Mediterranean Conference - 27-28/11/95 • The Council of the European Union, represented by its President, Mr Javier SOLANA, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Spain, • The European Commission, represented by Mr Manuel MARIN, VicePresident, • Germany, represented by Mr Klaus KINKEL, ViceChancellor and Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Algeria, represented by Mr Mohamed Salah DEMBRI, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Austria, represented by Mrs Benita FERREROWALDNER, State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, • Belgium, represented by Mr Erik DERYCKE, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Cyprus, represented by Mr Alecos MICHAELIDES, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Denmark, represented by Mr Ole Loensmann POULSEN, State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, • Egypt, represented by Mr Amr MOUSSA, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Spain, represented by Mr Carlos WESTENDORP, State Secretary for Relations with the European Community, • Finland, represented by Mrs Tarja HALONEN, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • France, represented by Mr Hervé de CHARETTE, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Greece, represented by Mr Károlos PAPOULIAS, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Ireland, represented by Mr Dick SPRING, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Israel, represented by Mr Ehud BARAK, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Italy, represented by Mrs Susanna AGNELLI, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Jordan, represented by Mr AbdelKarim KABARITI, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Lebanon, represented by Mr Fares BOUEZ, Minister for Foreign Affairs, • Luxembourg, represented by Mr Jacques F.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/22/barcelona-declaration-95/

22/02/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

ch11 93%

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/03/24/ch11/

24/03/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

legal representatives and what to1108 93%

Ask friends if they know a great legal representative and exactly what he represented them for.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/01/15/legal-representatives-and-what-to1108/

15/01/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Calculus at it's finest 93%

The base of these rectangular prisms are represented by , where A represents area.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/02/calculus-at-it-s-finest/

02/06/2014 www.pdf-archive.com