Tags : 爱上海WN

first_imgMore than half of federal transportation spending in fiscal year (FY) 2008 was directed to programs that contain subsidies, according to Subsidyscope, an initiative of Pew’s Economic Policy Group. The analysis comes from a new comprehensive online database on all spending on subsidy programs in the transportation sector. While Vermont received the lowest total amount, it ranked seventh in per capita funding, which was the highest in the Northeast.The project collected and aggregated data from USAspending.gov and other sources and built a searchable database of federal transportation spending; users can query by grant recipient, state, government program and many other parameters. The database includes information from 2000-2008.”Federal transportation subsidies cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars each year and are surprisingly hard to uncover,” said Subsidyscope project director Marcus Peacock. “At a time when lawmakers are concerned about the growing budget deficit, this information will help leaders make informed choices and set spending priorities.”In addition to creating the public database, Subsidyscope has produced several analyses of the sector. Some of the findings include:More than $45 billion of federal transportation spending in FY2008 was directed to programs that contain subsidies, an increase of around 20 percent since FY2000. The types of subsidies can be broken down into four categories: direct expenditures; tax expenditures; risk transfers; and contracts. Comparing direct expenditures by transportation mode, in FY2008, $30 billion was spent on highways, nearly $9 billion on mass transit, nearly $3 billion on aviation, $1 billion on rail, $387 million on maritime and $126 million was spent on other programs such as pipelines and recreational trails. Spending on tax expenditures and risk transfers totaled less than $4 billion.From fiscal years 2000 through 2008, California received the most transportation funding of any state – more than $38 billion. Vermont received the least, $1.5 billion (7th in per capita at $2,444). However, California received the least transportation aid per resident — $1,038. Alaska received the most money per capita, $8,183, almost eight times higher than California and nearly twice the next highest state (Wyoming $4,552). Higher subsidies per capita were generally found among the least populated states.The biggest transportation tax break is to employees for parking costs. In fiscal year 1998 the government lost an estimated $1.5 billion in revenue through this benefit. By fiscal year 2008, the number almost doubled to nearly $3 billion. By fiscal year 2014, it’s expected to reach almost $4 billion.Over the next several months, Subsidyscope will release spending and subsidy information on additional transportation-related programs, many of which have received little public scrutiny.Please visit www.subsidyscope.org(link is external) for access to all available databases as well as further information on federal subsidies.Subsidyscope is an initiative of Pew’s Economic Policy Group. The project aggregates information on federal subsidies from multiple sources and offers a comprehensive, searchable, open-source database of direct expenditures, which serves as a gateway for press, policymakers, advocates and the public. The project is guided by a broad and bipartisan advisory board of budget, fiscal and transparency experts and is assisted by its technology partner, the Sunlight Foundation.The Pew Charitable Trusts (www.pewtrusts.org(link is external)) is driven by the power of knowledge to solve today’s most challenging problems. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life. We partner with a diverse range of donors, public and private organizations and concerned citizens who share our commitment to fact-based solutions and goal-driven investments to improve society.Source: Pew Charitable Trust. WASHINGTON, Sept. 28, 2009 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —last_img read more

first_imgA coalition of civil society groups has called on the House of Representatives to repeal problematic articles in the revision to the Constitutional Court (MK) Law, alleging they contain conflicts of interest that can harm the Court’s impartiality.Among the coalition members are West Sumatra’s Andalas University’s Constitution Study Center (PUSaKO), Indonesia Center for Law and Policy Studies (PSHK), Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) and judicial watchdog KoDe Inisiatif.”The House and the government must drop the article that increases the minimum age of justices to 60 years and it should not scrap the existing regulation that justices can serve for only five years and must be reelected for another term,” Hemi Lavour of Pusako said in an online press conference on Friday. “The articles would only benefits a few justices.”The coalition said that if passed, most Constitutional Court judges who were currently in office would keep their position until they were 70 years old, 10 years longer than the maximum age for justices set in the existing 2011 Constitutional Court Law. The coalition also noted that only one judge could not continue the term because he has not reached the age of 60 at the end of his service.Read also: Constitutional Court rejects judicial review request on tenure of its own judgesAgil Oktrayal of the PSHK lambasted the government and the House, saying the revisions were a constitutional setback, especially because the House never included the bill in the 2020 priority list (Prolegnas) “The House never came up with the academic rationalization related to the amendments,” Agil said.He also raised suspicions that the bill was being used as a “political swapping” tool as many controversial laws were currently being challenged at the Court, such as the state spending and financial relief law, the mining law, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law and the omnibus bill on job creation.Agil further criticized the swift deliberation of the bill, which was conducted behind closed doors between the House and the government during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.“The deliberation process was very quick and closed [to the public]. This goes against the spirit of reform; in the Reform era of 1998, people wanted to have a Constitutional Court,” he said.The court was officially established in 2003 following mounting support from the public who demanded an institution that would allow them to challenge laws or election results. The House Commission III overseeing legal affairs began deliberating the bill on Monday. The government then submitted the problem inventory list (DIM) of the bill on and formed a working committee with the House on Tuesday.On Wednesday and Thursday, the government and the House discussed the bill twice in closed-door hearings.Read also: House starts deliberating Constitutional Court Law revisionCommittee member Sarifuddin Sudding said the commission and the government had agreed on several changes in the bill, such as the extension of the minimum age limit to become a Constitutional Court justice, as well as the terms of office for chief justice, deputy chief justice and justices.If the House and the government can agree on all the revisions, the commission will pass the revision into law.“After that, we will bring the revised draft to a plenary session for the second level of deliberations,” the National Mandate Party (PAN) politician said.Constitutional justice Enny Nurbaningsih denied that the Court had any interest in the revision of the MK law.Enny said the justices would always uphold the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, which identify six core values of the judiciary, namely independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, equality, competence and diligence.“The Constitutional Court justices will carry out their tasks independently. This is a non-negotiable principle,” she told The Jakarta Post on Friday.Topics :last_img read more

first_imgOn average, Swiss pension funds are off the mark when it comes to contributing to reducing global warming.A government-backed survey of investment portfolios found that strategies were on average in line with the global climate warming by 6°C by the end of this century, rather than the 2°C maximum set by the Paris Agreement on climate change.“Collectively, the financial flows underlying the corporate bonds and listed equity portfolios of Swiss pension funds are currently on a 6°C pathway,” a report on the survey stated.However, the authors emphasised there were “significant differences” between portfolios of the participating pension funds. In spring this year, Swiss government authorities offered the country’s pension funds and insurers an opportunity to test their equity and corporate bond portfolios to check their compatibility with this climate goal, as reported by IPE.In total, 87 investors participated, among them 66 pension funds with CHF177bn (€151.8bn) in total assets – well over half of the total assets in the market.The survey found two main factors contributing to this misalignment with the 2° goal. On the one hand, “companies in these portfolios are currently investing to increase production across all high-carbon technologies”, the report said.In addition, “investment in low-carbon alternatives is lacking”, it said.Researchers also noted a 5-15% increase in coal-fired power capacity scheduled for the next five years by the companies held by Swiss pension funds and insurers.“This is primarily driven by investments in non-OECD countries,” the report stated.Each participant was provided with an analysis of their portfolio providing them with a “basis for improving their alignment” and to “increase awareness” of possible climate-related risks to the portfolio.The researchers said: “The analysis presented here can also potentially in the future be used by the Swiss government to report on article 2.1c of the Paris Agreement.”This was a reference to the agreement’s aim to make financial flows “consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development”.The results chimed with a report issued earlier this year by asset manager Schroders, which warned that the world was on course for a long-term temperature rise of 4°C.last_img read more

first_imgSOUTH AFRICA innings Amla c Sharma b Bumrah 6 de Kock c Kohli b Bumrah 10 du Plessis b Chahal 38 van der Dussen b Chahal 22 Miller c & b Chahal 31 Duminy lbw b Kuldeep Yadav 3 Phehlukwayo stp. Dhoni b Chahal 34 Morris c Kohli b Kumar 42 Rabada not out 31Imran Tahir c Jadhav b Kumar 0Extras: (b-1, lb-3, w-6) 10Total: (9 wkts, 50 overs)   227Fall of wickets: 1-11, 2-24, 3-78, 4-80, 5-89, 6-135, 7-158, 8-224, 9-227.Bowling: B. Kumar 10-0-44-2, J. Bumrah 10-1-35-2, H. Pandya 6-0-31-0, Kuldeep Yadav 10-0-46-1, Y. Chahal 10-0-51- 4, K. Jadhav 4-0-16-0.                INDIA innings (target: 228 runs from 50 overs) Dhawan c de Kock b Rabada 8 Sharma not out 122 Kohli (c) c †de Kock b Phehlukwayo 18 Rahul c du Plessis b Rabada 26MS Dhoni † c & b Morrisn 34 Pandya not outExtras: (lb-3, w-4) 7Total: (4wkts, 47.3 overs) 230Fall of wickets: 1-13, 2-54, 3-139, 4-213. Bowling: Imran Tahir 10-0-58-0, K. Rabada 10-1-39-2, C. Morris 10-3-36-1, A. Phehlukwayo 8.3-0-40-1, T. Shamsi 9-0-54-0. SCOREBOARD SOUTHAMPTON, England (Reuters) – Opener Rohit Sharma scored a composed unbeaten century as India got their Cricket World Cup campaign off to a solid start with a six-wicket victory over a sloppy South African side at a vibrant Rose Bowl yesterday.After winning the toss and electing to bat, South Africa posted a below-par 227 for nine in their 50 overs as wily wrist-spinner Yuzvendra Chahal returned figures of 4-51, following a superb opening burst from seamer Jasprit Bumrah (2-35).India were cautious in their reply and the game was in the balance when Virat Kohli (18) was brilliantly caught by wicketkeeper Quinton de Kock with the score on 54 for two in the 16th over.But Rohit (122 not out from 144 balls) punished the South African bowlers after being dropped on one and scored his 23rd ODI century.He attacked South Africa’s leg-spinners Imran Tahir and Tabraiz Shamsi as India reached 230 for four from 47.3 overs, condemning the ailing Proteas to a third successive loss to leave their World Cup hopes in disarray.“There was something in it for the bowlers throughout and I could not play my natural game,” Sharma said at the post-match presentation.“I had to play close to my body and try and leave as many balls as possible. It was a small target, but we had to build partnerships as there was always something in it for the bowlers.“I had to play out the overs to make sure the job got done.”Rohit rode some early luck when he was dropped from a difficult chance by Faf du Plessis off the bowling of the unfortunate Kagiso Rabada (2-39).South Africa created opportunities in the field, but, as has been the case throughout the World Cup so far, were uncharacteristically sloppy.India were able to milk singles through the middle part of the innings, which held the run-rate steady and kept them on course for victory with few alarms.“It was important to start on the right note,” India captain Kohli said. “If you look at how the pitch played, it was challenging, so hats off to Rohit. It was a special innings.”Chahal had earlier restricted South Africa’s total with four wickets, continuing his excellent form against the Proteas in recent years.Seamer Bumrah found prodigious movement in both directions to remove openers Hashim Amla (6) and Quinton de Kock (10) inside the first six overs.du Plessis (38) and Rassie van der Dussen (22) put on a patient 54 in 80 balls in a bid to rebuild the innings, but after the latter was bowled trying a reverse-sweep off Chahal, wickets fell at regular intervals.Chris Morris (42) and Rabada (31 not out) put on 66 for the eighth wicket to ensure the side posted a score that at least gave them a chance.“I thought India were magnificent on a tough pitch. They have spinners through the middle who always get wickets,” South Africa captain du Plessis said.“Rohit did what we didn’t do; he got a hundred and saw his team through.“It is a changing room that is hurting. We are trying to make sure we are still fighting, but we keep making mistakes.last_img read more