Search

The proliferation of digital advancements and emerging technologies has led to robust digital transformation across all sectors of the economy. However, regulatory standards in the US have not advanced enough to accommodate artificial intelligence (AI) developments. This study examines the readiness of regulatory structures in the US by assessing the legislative landscape at the state level. We question whether a comparative analysis of state regulations reveals patterns that distinguish effective regulatory frameworks and how these patterns inform the development of successful legislation. We evaluate AI legislative bills in 50 states over four years (n=259) from 2019-2023 to identify commonalities in successful bills and notable disparities in unsuccessful bills. The results underscore the exigency to strengthen AI regulatory frameworks, foster greater transparency and accountability in AI innovation, and encourage cohesiveness among state governments. These findings underscore the need for nuanced regulatory structures to ensure AI systems' ethical and responsible development and deployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explores the veracity and reliability of existing approaches to conducting disparity studies by methodologically drawing on a 54-city, nine-firm analysis, with over 900 diverse businesses surveyed. Despite efforts to initiate systemic development opportunities for diverse businesses, disparity studies merely alert society to obstinate challenges that hinder access to government contracts for diverse businesses. The intended rationale for a disparity study is to provide a "strong basis on the evidence" to support race-conscious remedial tools in government procurement. They establish evidence of discrimination that affects businesses, however, the nature of their content and structural form limits their potential for economic reform. This inefficiency presents questions on methods used to procure these studies, implies criticism of the industry that produces these studies, and suggests questions on whether localities are remedying discriminatory practices. A large portion of disparity studies do not adequately address the historical context, challenges to inclusive procurement, or contextual understanding of the communities affected. While some studies have policy chapters that address these issues, this material is not standardized. The tendency towards isomorphism reaffirms past practices for these studies while ignoring the present, enervating challenges faced within these communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration policy continues to stir heated debate at all levels of discussion from Congress to community service providers, from academics and practitioners to citizens throughout the United States. Much of the debate centers around the fiscal impacts of immigration on the public coffers--specifically, do immigrants use more in public services than they contribute in taxes (Auerbach & Oreopoulos, 1999; Simon, 1984, 1985)? A number of elected officials, public managers, and citizens voice concern that a majority of immigrants enter the United States to take advantage of public programs--from welfare to education--without contributing their fair share through taxes (Greenwood, McDowell, Waldman, & Zahniser, 1999). The Personal Responsibility and Work Reconciliation Act of 1996, which denied a number of public services to immigrants regardless of citizenship status (Hing, 1998), is only one in a lineage of immigration policies enacted throughout U.S. history. Many contend that these policies are needed to comb at the growing number of immigrants entering this country (Edwards & Hughes, 1998; Lapinski, Peltola, Shaw, & Yang, 1997). While Federal policymakers have the most direct impact in terms of immigration policy and implementation, local communities live with the consequences of that policy on a daily basis (Loveless, McCue, Surrette & Norris-Tirrell, 1996). Some communities, including Miami, New York, Houston, and Los Angeles, possess a long history of serving as host or gateway communities for immigrants and have with varying levels of success institutionalized their responses, such as providing bilingual and trilingual public information, creating special departments for immigrant affairs, sponsoring community-based services for specific immigrant populations, and hiring multilingual public employees. However, for the many communities that have only recently experiencing a growth in their immigrant populations, or for those host communities who are experience demographic shifts in their immigrant populations, the issues that emerge are not just new, but of a different dimension bringing increased complexity to the existing econo mic, social, and political order (Simon, 1984). Without a full articulation of the impacts that immigrants have on the provision of public services and on the communities in which they reside, policymakers rely on outspoken segments of the citizenry to drive policy debate (Hing, 1998; Simon & Lynch, 1999). This symposium presents an examination of the impacts of immigration at the local level, a perspective essential to inform the national and subnational debate., An Overview of Immigration Policy and Research The first immigration policies in the United Sates were introduced by port colonies, including New York and Boston, which imposed head taxes on [...]

This article examines the contemporary political gender gap in the United States in which women tend to lean toward liberal political policies than men. The authors focus on empathy in their studies and conclude that women are more empathetic than men, a trait that contributes to women's liberal political views.

Public procurement across the European Union (EU) accounts for approximately 14% of GDP. The EU reports member states' procurement execution through the Single Market Scoreboard. One of these performance measures quantifies procurement decision speed, which assumes if member states reduce the time it takes to select vendors, there will be a reduction in transaction costs (increased efficiency). This research empirically evaluates procurement decision speed across a variety of government settings and procurement procedures to determine if decision speed, as defined by the Scoreboard, is a valid measure of performance. Findings suggest that decision speed as an efficiency performance measure lacks informational context; masks important underlying variation; and structurally omits the influence of important variables that contribute to variations in decision speed. Consequently, the utility of the Scoreboard measures of performance is called into question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]