Skip to content
Solved Assignments

PAD 525� Constitutional and Admin Law Week 2, Assignment 1

This document discusses constitutional and administrative law principles as part of a Week 2 assignment.

Preview 9 of 27 pages

See the first 9 pages exactly as they appear in the document.

  1. Page 1
    Read page 1 as text

    Week 2, Assignment 1 Learning by Doing PAD 5 25 – Constitutional a nd Admin Law Dr. Angela J. Smith Yulonda Gravette Jackson October 21, 2013 1. Your state’s statute that defines what is considered to be a public record that must be made available to the public upon request. Governments, schools, police departments -- any entity that spends taxpayer dollars -- must make most of its documents available under the provisions of state and federal public record laws. This also means that certain information about you, including political party affiliation, property ownership and criminal history, is also available to the public under the same laws. Virginia public records, for example, are the public records for the state of Virginia. Virginia public records are designed to help you keep track of what the government is doing and what the government collects. However, in order to do this the government needs to release everything they can - anything and everything that isn't considered a breach of privacy. In many cases, that means releasing data on individuals. Things like: • Marriage Licenses • Addresses • Criminal Histories

  2. Page 2
  3. Page 3
    Read page 3 as text

    These are all examples of personal information that isn't considered to be a breach of privacy, and so Virginia public records include all of this information, even though the data is about people, not the government. It's the role of the government - and the law across the country - that each state is as open as possible about everything it does. It is for that reason that all states - including Virginia public records - need to release information on its people, because that data is contained in government documents as well. 2. The pre - World War I opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court holding, on re - argument, that a federal income tax was unconstitutional. The entry of the United States into World War I greatly increased the need for revenue and Congress responded by passing the 1916 Revenue Act. The 1916 Act raised the lowest tax rate from 1 percent to 2 percent and raised the top rate to 15 percent on taxpayers with incomes in excess of $1.5 million. The 1916 Act also imposed taxes on estates and excess business profits. Driven by the war and largely funded by the new income tax, by 1917 the Federal budget was almost equal to the total budget for all the years between 1791 and 1916. Needing still more tax revenue, the War Revenue Act of 1917 lowered exemptions and greatly increased tax rates. In 1916, a taxpayer needed $1.5 million in taxable income to face a 15 percent rate. By 1917 a taxpayer with only $40,000 faced a 16 percent rate and the individual with $1.5 million faced a tax rate of 67 percent.

  4. Page 4
    Read page 4 as text

    Another revenue act was passed in 1918, which hiked tax rates once again, this time raising the bottom rate to 6 percent and the top rate to 77 percent. These changes increased revenue from $761 million in 1916 to $3.6 billion in 1918, which represented about 25 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Even in 1918, however, only 5 percent of the population paid income taxes and yet the income tax funded one - third of the cost of the war. The economy boomed during the 1920s and increasing revenues from the income tax followed. This allowed Congress to cut taxes five times, ultimately returning the bottom tax rate to 1 percent and the top rate down to 25 percent and reducing the Federal tax burden as a share of GDP to 13 percent. As tax rates and tax collections declined, the economy was strengthened further. In October of 1929 the stock market crash marked the beginning of the Great Depression. As the economy shrank, government receipts also fell. In 1932, the Federal government collected only $1.9 billion, compared to $6.6 billion in 1920. In the face of rising budget deficits which reached $2.7 billion in 1931, Congress followed the prevailing economic wisdom at the time and passed the Tax Act of 1932 which dramatically increased tax rates once again. This was followed by another tax increase in 1936 that further improved the government's finances while further weakening the economy. By 1936 the lowest tax rate had reached 4 percent and the top rate was up to 79 percent. In 1939, Congress systematically codified the tax laws so that all subsequent tax legislation until 1954 amended this basic code. The combination of a shrunken economy and the repeated tax increases raised the Federal government's tax burden to 6.8 percent of GDP by 1940.

  5. Page 5
    Read page 5 as text

    3. The federal statute authorizing the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to make payments to states for the value of materials stockpiled near federal highway construction projects in conformity with the project specifications. (a) In General. — The Secretary, from time to time as the work progresses, may make payments to a State for costs of construction incurred by the State on a project. Such payments may also be made for the value of the materials — (1) that have been stockpiled in the vicinity of the construction in conformity to plans and specifications for the projects; and (2) that are not in the vicinity of the construction if the Secretary determines that because of required fabrication at an off - site location the material cannot be stockpiled in such vicinity. (b) Project Agreement. — No payment shall be made under this chapter except for a project covered by a project agreement. After completion of the project in accordance with the project agreement, a State shall be entitled to payment out of the appropriate sums apportioned or allocated to the State of the unpaid balance of the Federal share payable for such project. (c) Such payments shall be made to such official or officials or depository as may be designated by the State transportation department and authorized under the laws of the State to receive public funds of the State.

  6. Page 6
    Read page 6 as text

    (Pub. L. 85 – 767, Aug. 27, 1958, 72 Stat. 899; Pub. L. 88 – 157, §7(b), Oct. 24, 1963, 77 Stat. 278; Pub. L. 93 – 87, title I, §117, Aug. 13, 1973, 87 Stat. 259; Pub. L. 94 – 280, title I, §118(a), May 5, 1976, 90 Stat. 437; Pub. L. 100 – 17, title I, §133(b)(6), Apr. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 171; Pub. L. 102 – 240, title I, §1018(b), Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 1948; Pub. L. 105 – 178, title I, §§1212(a)(2)(A)(i), 1302, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 193, 226.) Amendments 1998 — Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1302(1), added subsec. (a) and struck out former subsec. (a) which read as follows: “The Secretary may, in his discretion, from time to time as the work progresses, make payments to a State for costs of construction incurred by it on a project. These payments shall at no time exceed the Federal share of the costs of construction incurred to the date of the voucher covering such payment plus the Federal share of the value of the materials which have been stockpiled in the vicinity of such construction in conformity to plans and specifications for the project. Such payments may also be made in the case of any such materials not in the vicinity of such construction if the Secretary determines that because of required fabrication at an off - site location the materials cannot be stockpiled in such vicinity.” Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1302(1), added subsec. (b) and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: “After completion of a project in accordance with the plans and specifications, and approval of the final voucher by the Secretary, a State shall be entitled to payment out of the appropriate sums apportioned to it of the unpaid balance of the Federal share payable on account of such project.”

  7. Page 7
    Read page 7 as text

    Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1302(2), (3), redesignated subsec. (e) as (c) and struck out former subsec. (c) which read as follows: “No payment shall be made under this chapter, except for a project located on a Federal - aid system and covered by a project agreement. No final payment shall be made to a State for its costs of construction of a project until the completion of the construction has been approved by the Secretary following inspections pursuant to section 114(a) of this title.” Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1302(2), struck out subsec. (d) which read as follows: “In making payments pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall be bound by the limitations with respect to the permissible amounts of such payments continued in sections 106(c), 120, and 130 of this title.” Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1302(3), redesignated subsec. (e) as (c). Pub. L. 105 – 178, §1212(a)(2)(A)(i), substituted “State transportation department” for “State highway department”. 1991 — Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 102 – 240 substituted “106(c), 120,” for “120” and struck out at end “Payments for construction engineering on any project financed with Federal - aid highway funds shall not exceed 15 percent of the Federal share of the cost of construction of such project after excluding from the cost of construction the costs of rights - of - way, preliminary engineering, and construction engineering.” 1987 — Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 100 – 17 substituted “15 percent” for “10 per centum” and struck out at end “However, this limitation shall be 15 per centum in any State with respect to which the Secretary finds such higher limitation to be necessary.”

  8. Page 8
    Read page 8 as text

    1976 — Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 94 – 280 substituted “Federal - aid highway funds” for “Federal - aid primary, secondary, or urban funds” and struck out 10 per centum limitation provision for any project financed with interstate funds. 1973 — Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 93 – 87 authorized payments to be made for materials not in the construction vicinity where the Secretary determines that because of required fabrication at an off - site location the materials cannot be stockpiled in such vicinity. 1963 — Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 88 – 157 substituted “any project financed with Federal - aid primary, secondary, or urban funds” for “any one project” and provided for limitation, on payments for construction engineering on projects financed with Federal - aid primary, secondary, or urban funds, of 15 percent of Federal share of cost of construction of the project where found by the Secretary to be necessary and for 10 – percent limitation on projects financed with interstate funds. Effective Date of 1991 Amendment Amendment by Pub. L. 102 – 240 effective Dec. 18, 1991, and applicable to funds authorized to be appropriated or made available after Sept. 30, 1991, and, with certain exceptions, not applicable to funds appropriated or made available on or before Sept. 30, 1991, see section 1100 of Pub. L. 102 – 240, set out as a note under section 104 of this title. Submission of Recommendations to Congress for Reimbursement of States for Certain Highways Pub. L. 85 – 845, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 1083, required Secretary of Commerce, within ten days after first day of first session of Eighty - sixth Congress, to submit to Congress recommendations for legislation for purpose of assisting Congress to determine whether or not to

  9. Page 9
    Read page 9 as text

    reimburse each State of any portion of a toll or free highway (1) which was on National System of Interstate and Defense Highways [now Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways], (2) which met standards required by Federal - Aid Highway Act of 1956 for such System of Interstate and Defense Highways, and (3) construction of which had been completed since Aug. 2, 1947, or which had been in actual use or under construction by contract, for completion, awarded not later than June 30, 1957. 4. The federal joint regulation of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Department of Commerce, identifying the factors for listing, delisting, or reclassifying endangered species. Laws & Policies | Regulations and Policies | Interagency Policy for the Ecosystem Approach to the Endangered Species Act [From The Federal Register for Friday, July 1, 1994 (Vol. 59), p. 34274] DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Notice of Interagency Cooperative Policy for the Ecosystem Approach to the Endangered Species Act AGENCIES: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior, and National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

18 more pages in the full document

Unlock it once and it stays in your library, ready to chat with or turn into flashcards.

Unlock the full document

More Political Science study materials

See all

Study this document with CramX

Once it is in your library, every tool can work from it.