|
|
 |
|
|
April 2009 - Posts
-
|
Conventional wisdom is that the health care sector, particularly pharmaceutical companies, may be able to withstand the global economic downturn because they supply necessary consumer services and products. Biotechnology companies that provide some of the more medically promising technologies, however, will only continue to grow if we provide them with the economic incentive to incur massive developmental and regulatory approval costs and to tolerate lengthy periods of testing and the substantial risk of failure.
|
-
|
The G-20's recent London Summit was not the bust that some had feared. The leaders made some progress by agreeing to tackle global financial regulation and pledging more money to the IMF. But they missed the chance to take collective, international action to stem the demise of their inextricably linked banking and financial sectors. How can intergovernmental cooperation help? The same nations that founded the World Bank could set up a banking facility, an International Fund for Revitalization and Recovery.
|
-
|
Nonprofit organizations — already stretched thin by tight budgets and small staffs — have been hammered by increasing demand for their services from growing segments of the public. At the same time they face a dwindling supply of the financial support, services and resources they need to ensure continued support for their underprivileged clients. In this trying climate, it is crucial that corporate law departments and law firms redouble their dedication to furnishing free legal aid to nonprofits of all sizes.
|
-
|
The IRS recently announced a program to lure holders of stealth offshore bank accounts to come forward, bare their assets and cough up six years of back taxes, interest and penalties. Will it succeed? It likely will not attract a significant number of eligible taxpayers. And if it doesn't, the IRS will likely not be able to deal with 52,000 UBS tax scofflaws, not to mention all the others. Also, the IRS shouldn't proceed unilaterally. There should be parallel diplomatic intervention by the Swiss government.
|
-
|
Court secrecy is an issue that has been around for a long time. But corporations are now using secrecy agreements to hide their negligence when their products have harmed and even killed unwary consumers. The dangerous practice allows irresponsible corporations to keep their products on the market at the expense of consumer safety. In Congress, legislation introduced last month called the Sunshine in Litigation Act is an important step in helping reform the broken system of court enforced secrecy.
|
-
|
Once in a while, a trial judge makes a mistake that will do irreparable damage unless it is fixed immediately. That is one rationale behind the "collateral order doctrine," a narrow exception to the final judgment rule that allows federal appeals courts to review certain trial court decisions before final judgment. The doctrine recognizes that some protections ? sovereign immunity and double jeopardy, for example ? can be effectively preserved only if immediate appellate review is allowed. It is time the U.S. Supreme Court added decisions denying claims of attorney-client privilege to the list of immediately appealable collateral orders ? something it will have occasion to do this term.
|
-
|
In 2005, then-U.S. senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton introduced legislation inspired by "Sorry Works," a grassroots movement based on the intriguing idea that, if health care providers honestly acknowledge and apologize for mistakes, patients who otherwise feel insulted as well as injured are less likely to file a lawsuit. It is an evolving concept that quite appropriately remains a topic of significant interest and discussion ? not just for health care professionals, but for any substantial business organization seeking alternatives to the mounting burdens of litigation. It is time for the broader business community to at least begin considering the idea.
|
-
|
The Supreme Court is poised to scrap the most effective piece of civil rights legislation in U.S. history. At issue is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires that certain regions (those with a history of racial bias in voting) obtain approval from the U.S. government before changing local voting rules. Opponents say Obama's election proves the requirement is obsolete; supporters say his victory confirms its continued importance. The court should refuse to engage in this debate — at least for now.
|
|
|
|