When making public policy decisions about new technologies for the Government, I think one should ask oneself which technologies would best strengthen the hand of a police state. Then, do not allow the Government to deploy those technologies.
The only realistic view is that a human life arises gradually, which is not much help in making personal decisions or devising public policy.
American public policy is run on a myth.
I do believe that, under the law, under the Constitution of the United States, and under our public policy, that women deserve and should have a right to enjoy equal employment opportunity.
Thus, the controversy about the Moral Majority arises not only from its views, but from its name - which, in the minds of many, seems to imply that only one set of public policies is moral and only one majority can possibly be right.
Far too many people have been swept into the post-9/11 system of fear that is the basis of all public policy these days.
It's important in our role as leaders that we use the platform to address issues, to address barriers, to identify best practices for overcoming these challenges with businesses small and large. Maybe there are some public policy issues that we need to address. Maybe some of them are at the federal level and some are at the state or local level.
. . when the target of crime is armed, there is more law present, more public policy present, and more public interest served than by all 20,000 gun laws in force.
To its committed members (the Democratic Party) was still the party of heart, humanity, and justice, but to those removed a few paces it looked like Captain Hook’s crew–ambulance-chasing lawyers, rapacious public policy grants persons, civil rights gamesmen, ditzy-brained movie stars, fat-assed civil servant desk squatters, recovering alcoholics, recovering wife-beaters, recovering child-buggers, and so forth and so on, a grotesque line-up of ill-mannered self-pitying, caterwauling freeloaders banging their tin cups on the pavement demanding handouts.
Once and for all, people must understand that addiction is a disease. It’s critical if we’re going to effectively prevent and treat addiction. Accepting that addiction is an illness will transform our approach to public policy, research, insurance, and criminality; it will change how we feel about addicts, and how they feel about themselves. There’s another essential reason why we must understand that addiction is an illness and not just bad behavior: We punish bad behavior. We treat illness.
I think the understanding of the role of markets has really helped advance the values of entrepreneurship. Its helped shape public policy discussions in a whole variety of ways.
I probably got from my mom a passion for public policy and and civic involvement.
Donald Trump has done more for getting people to understand the importance of public policy that respond to public needs in an affirmative way than anything we could have done on our own.
Donald Trump is an entertainer. Okay. He goes on shows like Howard Stern's to get people to watch his program. "The Apprentice" or buy his books or whatever. When he goes in there, he back then when it happened was basically trying to entertain. All right. So he had no public policy on his mind, none of that. All right. He's an entertain.
I can't expect rappers to be politicized when Americans are not socially motivated enough to care about their own lives and public policy as much as they were even 20 years ago. But I'm compelled to make the music I make regardless.
What President Obama has done so masterfully of late is to say, in so many words, "I'm signing this executive order permitting federal funding for stem cell research, but I realize that many good, moral people are opposed to this, and I don't take that lightly." I think we can be more civil and empathetic in our discussions of public policy, and I hope my book can be a contribution to that tone.
Obama wanted to offer his support to birth control activist Sandra Fluke. He wanted to express his disappointment that she has been the subject of inappropriate personal attacks and thank her for exercising her rights as a citizen to speak out on an issue of public policy.
I believe in an America ... where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source.
The extra curricular activity in which I was most engaged - debating - helped shape my interests in public policy.
Aside from the occasional genocide, oppression, evil and torture, etc., it is inarguable that public policy could be implemented more rapidly in an autocracy.
It's fashionable to speak about vulnerable populations in medicine and public policy, but it's harder to find a more vulnerable population than those who are dying.
I was interested in the question of the power of religious organizations to effect public policy in a negative way. When I was in college, and I found out at that time the Catholic Church was in such control of everything in communities, including in progressive places like New York - that a roommate of mine was not able to obtain an abortion with his girlfriend, even in places like New York. What I learned at that moment was the extraordinary clout that religious organizations can have to impose their theological views on others. And I found it exasperating and dangerous.
I think there was something started under my father that I appreciate that it's time to end, and I like the symmetry of me being the person who actually turns the clock back so that we can have a Prime Minister's Office and, indeed, a democracy, that actually respects what voters say and is open and transparent. Because, not only does it matter to gain people's trust, but it matters for quality public policy and governance, and that's why we're committed to open and transparent government.
Once a term like "open source" entered our vocabulary, one could recast the whole public policy calculus in very different terms, so that instead of discussing the public interest, we are discussing the interests of individual software developers, while claiming that this is a discussion about "innovation" and "progress," not "accountability" or "security."
Clipper took a relatively simple problem, encryption between two phones, and turned it into a much more complex problem, encryption between two phones but that can be decrypted by the government under certain conditions and, by making the problem that complicated, that made it very easy for subtle flaws to slip by unnoticed. I think it demonstrated that this problem is not just a tough public policy problem, but it's also a tough technical problem.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: