In the constitution of the Legislative Council it would be observed that the principle which now obtained in Canada, of electing be members of that branch, was proposed to be done away with and that we would again revert to nomination by the Crown.
§.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
to the form of government which should be adopted for the administration of the general affairs of the whole union, and that form was copied almost literally from the system existing in the several Provinces.
Preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867.
having decided that the Federative plan, as he had briefly endeavored to explain it, was the one which ought to be adopted, was whether they ought to adopt the mode of government which they now saw in use in the United States, or whether they should endeavor to incorporate in the Union the principles under which the British Constitution had been for so many years happily administered ; and upon this point no difference of opinion arose in the Conference. They all preferred that system which they had enjoyed for the last eighteen years, by which the Crown was allowed to choose its own advisers ; but those advisers must be in harmony with the well understood wishes of the country as expressed by its representatives in Parliament.
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
It was therefore proposed, that in the Federation of the British North American Provinces the system of government best adapted under existing circumstances to protect the diversified interests of the several Provinces and secure efficiency, harmony and permanency in the working of the Union, would be a General Government charged with matters of common interest to the whole country, and Local Governments for each of the Canadas and for the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, charged with the control of local matters in their respective sections, provision being made for the admission into the Union on equitable terms of Newfoundland, the North-west Territory, British Columbia, and Vancouver.
Preamble, §§. 91, 92 and 146 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
a Governor General, who should be appointed by our Gracious Sovereign.
§.10 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
They were unanimously of the opinion that this system was more likely to operate for the benefit of the people than any attempt to introduce the American system of Government. They certainly believed that they enjoyed more practical freedom under the British Sovereign than they could under a dictator who was chosen for only four years. He believed that the administration of the country could be carried on with more advantage to the people and more in harmony with their wishes if that administration was obliged constantly to retain the confidence of the people ; and if the moment the people ceased to have confidence in those in power, they must give place to others who would be able to govern the country more in harmony with their wishes. The secret of the freedom of the British nation from revolution and disturbance was that the people had at any time the power of making the Government harmonise with their wishes, —it was, in fact, the greatest safeguard the British Constitution gave. No government In Canada could venture to set public opinion at defiance. No government could exist, except for a few short months, unless they had the people at their back ; for although parliamentary majorities could be preserved for a short time against the wishes of the majority of the people still it was impossible to deny that public opinion was, in a complete sense, represented by the opinion or the members of the Legislature. They all knew perfectly well that their representatives were chosen from amongst themselves, and he trusted that we should never in this country lose that control which had been so happily exercised by the people over the government of the day. It was, therefore, concluded that in forming an Union of these Provinces it was desirable, in the interest of the people at large, that the system of responsible government now in force should be maintained.
Preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867.
each Legislature, and especially each Local Legislature—acting within the bounds prescribed by the Imperial Parliament and kept within these bounds by the Courts of Law if necessity should arise for their interference—would find in the working of the plan of Federation a check sufficient to prevent it from transcending its legitimate authority.
Preamble, §§. 91, 92 and 101 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
in laying a basis for the union of these Provinces, it was not proposed that the General Government should have merely a delegation of powers from the Local Governments, but it was proposed to go back to the fountain head, from which all our legislative powers were derived—the Imperial Parliament—and seek at their hands a measure which should designate as far as possible the general powers to be exercised by the General Legislature, and also those to be exercised by the Local Legislatures, reserving to the General Legislature all subjects not directly committed to the control of the Local bodies.
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
that the reservation of what were popularly known as State rights had been to a great extent the cause of the difficulties which were now agitating that great country.
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
liar. But it must not be supposed, on account of the use of that term, that in the Union now proposed to be established it was intended to imitate the Federal Union which we had seen existing in the United States. In the United States, the general Government exercised only such powers as were delegated to it by the State Governments at the time the Union was formed. Each State was regarded as a sovereign power, and it chose for the common interest to delegate to the general Government the right of deciding upon certain questions, which were expressly stated All the undefined powers, all the sovereign rights, remained with the Governments of the several States
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
having unfortunately for our common interests comparatively little intercourse with each other, the difficulty was felt that, if we attempted to make a Legislative Union of these Provinces in the first instance, the dread, in the case of the Lower Provinces and probably of many among ourselves that peculiar interests might be swamped and certain feelings and prejudices outraged and trampled upon, was so great that such a measure could not be entertained and we were compelled to look for what was sought in a form of government that would commit all subjects of general interest to a general Government and Legislature, reserving for local Legislatures and Governments such subjects as from their nature required to been trusted to those bodies. (Cheers.) The term Federation was used with reference to the proposed Union, because it was that with which the public mind was most fami
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
to determine whether it should be a Federal or a Legislative Union. A Legislative Union, as they were all aware, had certain advantages over one based on the Federal system. It was a more complete union, and implied a more direct action and control of the government over the interests of the people at large. And, where a people were homogeneous, and their interests of such a character as to admit of – niformity of action with regard to them, it could not be doubted that a government on the principle of a Legislative Union was the one which probably operated most beneficially for all
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
the Hon. Mr. Brown and two other gentlemen representing the Liberal party of Upper Canada had entered, to address themselves to the preparation of a measure that would partake of a federal character as far as necessary with respect to local measures, while it would preserve the existing union in respect to measures common to all ; that they would endeavor, if necessary, to strike out a federal union for Canada alone, but that at the same time they would attempt, in considering a change in the Constitution of this country, to bring the Lower Provinces in under the same bond, as they were already under the same Sovereign. It was highly proper that, before touching the edifice of Government that had been raised in Canada they should address the statesmen of the Lower Provinces, and try to induce them to form a common system If it were found impossible to have a legislative union of all the British American Provinces, then they could reserve to the local governments of the several Provinces the control of such subjects as concerned them, while the rest should be committed to the cue of the General Government
Preamble, §§. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
It was adopted by the Imperial Legislature with the view of remedying difficulties which then existed between the two Provinces. The inherent defect in the Imperial Act for the Union of the two Canadas was this : it attempted to combine the federal principle with unity of action. It endeavoured to give equal representation to the two sections of the Province, while it brought them together for the purpose of dealing as one with all subjects both (general and local,
§§. 3 and 12 of the Union Act, 1840.
Those claims were in themselves undoubtedly founded in justice— but at the same time there was great reason in the objections taken to them—they involved an interference with the Federal principle recognized in the Union Act, an interference which amounted to an entire change in the principles on which the Government of the country was to be administered, and could not be received otherwise than with dread by a large class, if not by the whole of the population of Lower Canada.
§§. 3 and 12 of the Union Act, 1840.
should have been a concession to Upper Canada, of additional members in proportion to its population, but that concession would, as be had already remarked, have been an invasion of the Federal principle, contained in the Union Act, and would unquestionably have been represented to the uttermost by a large proportion if not by the whole of Lower Canada.
§§. 3 and 12 of the Union Act, 1840; §§. 51 and 52 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
indeed, extend them in such a way as to promote the peace contentment, and prosperity of the people, at the same time preserving in the new constitution those rights they were afraid would be subjected to injustice.
Preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867.
vending zone” means an area or a place or a location designated as such bythe local authority, on the recommendations of the Town Vending Committee, for thespecific use by street vendors for street vending and includes footpath, side walk,pavement, embankment, portions of a street, waiting area for public or any such placeconsidered suitable for vending activities and providing services to the general public.
Used in the booklet on Pg 19 as: " The BBMP too cannot evict street vendors. The law is clear that BBMP has to first conduct a survey of all street vendors, and then issue ID Cards. Till then, no one can be evicted ir relocated. The BBMP has also issued a note about this. While clearing footpaths, the BBMP cannot violate the Street Vendors Act. Any move to evict is thus against the law!"
No street vendor shall be relocated or evicted by the local authority from the placespecified in the certificate of vending unless he has been given thirty days’ notice for thesame in such manner as may be specified in the scheme.
Used in the booklet on Pg 17 as: "What if shopkeepers or residents threaten to move us out of the footpath?"
Also as
Used in the booklet on Pg 17 as: "Shops and houses have the right to ensure that access to their house or gate is not blocked" said Neela. If we don't block that, we are not doing any wrong. Discuss problems amicable. If they insist you vacate for no reason, tell them that only BBMP can regulate vending and talk to the union. Sometimes the police files a petty case against vendors - under Section 92 (G) of Karnataka Police Act or Section 283 of IPC. If this happens, just don't pay the fine - if you pay it is as though you are guilty. Street Vending is not a crime - it is pakka legal. Tell the police that you would like to challenge the case in court and talk to the union. In fact, the office of the police commissioner has issued a circular ordering its officers to learn about the act."
The appropriate Government may constitute one or more committees consistingof a Chairperson who has been a civil judge or a judicial magistrate and two other professionalshaving such experience as may be prescribed for the purpose of deciding the applicationsreceived under sub-section (2)
Used in the booklet on Pg 17 as: "Shops and houses have the right to ensure that access to their house or gate is not blocked" said Neela. If we don't block that, we are not doing any wrong. Discuss problems amicable. If they insist you vacate for no reason, tell them that only BBMP can regulate vending and talk to the union. Sometimes the police files a petty case against vendors - under Section 92 (G) of Karnataka Police Act or Section 283 of IPC. If this happens, just don't pay the fine - if you pay it is as though you are guilty. Street Vending is not a crime - it is pakka legal. Tell the police that you would like to challenge the case in court and talk to the union. In fact, the office of the police commissioner has issued a circular ordering its officers to learn about the act."
Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force,no street vendor who carries on the street vending activities in accordance with the termsand conditions of his certificate of vending shall be prevented from exercising such rights byany person or police or any other authority exercising powers under any other law for thetime being in force
Used in the booklet on Pg 17 as: "Asking for hafta is illegal. Even the Supreme Court lamented this injustice. This is what the court said: 'Street Vendors are harassed a lot and are constantly victimized by the officials of local authorities, the police etc. who regularly target them for extra income and treat them with extreme contempt. Perhaps these minions in the administration have not understood the meaning of the term 'dignity' enshrined in the preamble of the constitution."
Each Town Vending Committee shall consist of
Used in the booklet on Pg15 as: "To conduct the survey, BBMP will create a town vending committee, with at least 40% members as street vendors, and rest from the Municipality, police, NGOs, RWAS wtc. Therefore according to the law atleast 40% members should be street vendors"
The Town Vending Committee shall, within such period and in such manner asmay be specified in the scheme, conduct a survey of all existing street vendors, within thearea under its jursidiction, and subsequent survey shall be carried out at least once in everyfive years.
Used in the booklet on Pg15 as: "The BBMP has to first conduct a survey of all the street vendors in the city."
act like the heroes that they love by acting for a better world.
I feel so inspired by these words. It reminds me of the those posters that say change begins with you, Words that if you woke up to in the morning you wouldn't feel mad that you woke up early and inspire for greatness.
But true it is. From France there comes a power Into this scattered kingdom
I believe that the understatement of the French invasion of England in the folio is a flaw. To understand the direction of the plot, the statement that France is mobilizing against the armies of Goneril and Regan is important for when one reads the battle scenes. Though the folio mentions French spies, neglecting to mention the mobilization of France makes the dissent against Goneril and Regan appear more ambiguous.
No, he's a yeoman that has a gentleman to his son, for he's a mad yeoman that sees his son a gentleman before him.
In the folio, the Fool more directly answers his own question regarding "whether a madman be a gentleman or a yeoman," and it is significant that the Fool negates and corrects Lear's answer of "A king, a king" with "No." When the Fool corrects Lear's 'wrong' answer, it could bias the reader's understanding of Lear's mental state to think of Lear as mad and wrong.
I tax not you, you elements, with unkindness.
I find it interesting that in the quarto, Lear says, "I task not you, you elements, with unkindness," while in the folio, Lear says, "I tax not you, you elements, with unkindness." Using "task" implies that the elements are given an obligation to Lear (imposed by Lear), while "tax" implies that the elements most certainly owe Lear (and are obligated by a greater force to comply, such as a legal one, compared to the self-imposed obligation to Lear implied by the word "task").
all germens spill at once That makes ingrateful man.
The fact that the line "That makes ingrateful man" stands on its own line in the folio version of the play makes the line that much more powerful when Lear ends the first part of one of his great speeches in the heath. The image conjured up by "all germens spill at once" is very strong, because the spilling of seed in this place of nothingness reminds us of the sub-theme of infertility in the play. The result of this spilling of seed--"That makes ingrateful man"--seems much more significant when it stands on a line of its own in the folio. The spilling of fertile seed into nothingness can only bring forth ingrateful [sic] offspring or make the parent figure ingrateful [sic] as well. The image is stronger when it stands on its own line to end this section of Lear's rambling speech.
What's here
It is significant that Kent asks "What's here" in the quarto edition compared to "Who's there" in the folio. The "who" indicates that Kent is inquiring about the identity and whereabouts of a person, while the "what" indicates that the unknown presence in the scene could be more ambiguous--such as a natural force or something that potentially has an inhuman quality. A human stripped down to its base nature, like Lear or Poor Tom in the scenes containing their madness and nakedness, could also be considered a "what." Therefore, I think it is powerful that, in the quarto, Kent presents this possibility of a stage presence with an ambiguous quality existing in the scene, because it fits in with Shakespeare's thematic use of chaos and perverted human nature in the play.
Tears his white hair, Which the impetuous blasts with eyeless rage Catch in their fury and make nothing of; Strives in his little world of man to outscorn The to-and-fro-conflicting wind and rain. This night, wherein the cub-drawn bear would couch, The lion, and the belly-pinched wolf Keep their fur dry, unbonneted he runs, And bids what will take all.
This section of the gentleman’s answer to Kent’s question regarding the whereabouts of King Lear only exists in the quarto. These eight and a half lines constitute one of the largest differences between the quarto and folio versions of Act III. The gentleman gives us a preview of Lear’s madness in the heath—telling us how the storm strikes Lear and how he attempts to fight back against it—and then relates the scene to dangerous predatory animals that would usually hunt in the night and in the elements. He essentially says that even such fierce creatures are taking cover from the storm, yet Lear still runs in it, rages against it, and thinks the storm will listen and react to his words. The shorter response of the gentleman in the folio neglects to provide us with this in-depth preview of Lear’s actions in the storm.
Contending with the fretful elements; Bids the wind blow the earth into the sea, Or swell the curlèd waters 'bove the main That things might change or cease.
In the folio, the gentleman answers Kent’s question about Lear’s whereabouts in a simpler manner. He just essentially discusses how Lear fights against the storm and entreats it to behave in a certain way. The four succinct lines set up the following scene (III.2) in which Lear both encourages and rages against the storm. These lines are also in the quarto, but in the folio, the word “element” in the quarto becomes plural as “elements,” and this small, one-letter change to make the word plural causes the storm to seem even bigger, stronger, and harsher. Without the next eight and a half lines that are only included in the quarto, the audience does not get an in-depth preview of Lear’s chaotic raging, and so the next scene, featuring Lear, is slightly more of a shock for the audience.
Tears his white hair, Which the impetuous blasts with eyeless rage Catch in their fury and make nothing of
These first few lines in the gentleman's reply that are not in the folio are especially powerful in incorporating major themes that continue throughout the play. The reference to Lear's "white hair" shows the theme of age in the play that is often connected to Lear's madness, and the "impetuous blasts" foreshadow the apocalyptic language and scenes that personify Lear's madness as the great chaos of the storm. The adjective "Eyeless" to describe "rage" brings in the theme of seeing and not seeing--as well as of deception. The "eyeless rage" also just literally shows that the storm has no human or animalistic features and so obviously cannot respond to Lear's entreating. The use of the word "nothing" continues the theme of nothingness throughout the play, and the storm makes Lear's hair into nothing--just as almost everything in the play is reduced to nothing. Unfortunately, the folio version does not contain these lines and thus does not have these immense connections to the play's major themes.
Here's a night pities neither wise man nor fool
It is interesting that, in the quarto version, the fool says "Here's a night pities neither wise man nor fool," while, in the folio version, the fool's sentence becomes plural: "Here's a night pities neither wise men, nor fools." When the sentence says "wise man nor fool," it seems that the fool implies that, of Lear and himself, one is a wise man and one is a fool--even though which character is the wise man or fool is not specified. When the sentence says "wise men, nor fools," it seems that the fool implies that, of Lear and himself, one could be wise, one a fool, or both characters could be wise men or fools. The situation seems a bit more vague. The answer to this question of characterization as wise or foolish is never explicitly answered in the quarto and folio versions of the play.
smite
I think the difference between "smite" in the quarto and "Strike" in the folio is significant because "smite" has a much more severe connotation than "Strike." The quarto version of "smite" fits in better with the apocalyptic language used by the characters in the heath and with Lear's mental apocalypse in Act III--where Lear's madness is even personified in the absolute chaos around him. "Smite" also incorporates a biblical connotation that fits in with the hellish chaos of the storm when Lear is on the heath.
thou, all-shaking thunder
Though simply a difference of line placement and a single comma, it is still significant that, in the quarto, a comma comes after "thou." The fact that there is a comma before and after "all-shaking thunder" in the quarto makes it an appositive phrase, and clarifies that Lear is directly addressing the thunder--an entity that has no ability to listen and react to him--thus more strongly showing Lear's mental degradation. The folio version does not use an appositive phrase, so the direct address of the thunder is not as clear.
True, my good boy
It is interesting that Lear calls the fool "my good boy" in the quarto, while he simply calls the fool "boy" in the folio. Calling him "my good boy" in the quarto denotes ownership, affection, and familiarity that it is not explicitly expressed in the folio version of this line.
In such a night To shut me out?
The folio differs in this sentence by Lear stressing the gravity of the storm and that his daughters abandoned him by reminding the audience that his daughters "shut me out" in "such a night as this." The quarto does not go through the extra trouble of once again reminding us how Lear's daughters shut him out.
This is a brave night to cool a courtesan. I'll speak a prophecy ere I go. When priests are more in word than matter, When brewers mar their malt with water, When nobles are their tailors' tutors, No heretics burned but wenches' suitors; When every case in law is right, No squire in debt, nor no poor knight; When slanders do not live in tongues, Nor cut-purses come not to throngs; When usurers tell their gold i'th'field, And bawds and whores do churches build; Then shall the realm of Albion Come to great confusion. Then comes the time, who lives to see't, That going shall be used with feet. This prophecy Merlin shall make, for I live before his time.
The Fool's prophecy that ends Act III.2 in the folio version of the play is one of the main, most striking differences between the quarto and folio in Act III. The Routledge Parallel Text Edition of King Lear attributes much of the prophecy to a Chaucerian parody where the land of Albion (England) shall come to great confusion and chaos, and the footnote interpretation of the Fool's words states that, intellectually despairing, he means "that both the world as it is and the world as it ideally should be are equally confusing and meaningless" (p. 204). The Fool's metatheatrical performance here in the folio directly addresses the audience by breaking the fourth wall, and indicates that the Fool is significant beyond the realm of the play. The Fool expresses that he even predates Merlin--an English legendary figure which no other character in the play is aware of. In addition, bringing in this idea of life becoming meaningless and chaotic in the realm of Albion would play to the contemporary audience's fears about the kingdom(s) and the succession during the reign of King James and continue the theme of political chaos brought about by Lear dividing the kingdom--an action that would horrify the paranoid contemporary English audience. I believe that this prophecy is an exceptionally important and powerful speech during the play, and it is unfortunate that it only appears in the quarto.
I'll pray, and then I'll sleep.
It is interesting that Lear's line regarding prayer only appears in the folio version. At first I thought that in a pre-Christian play one might not expect Lear to announce that he would go off to pray, but then I remembered that pagans and other pre-Christian peoples still prayed to certain deities or figures, and Lear has previously addressed Nature and other storm forces as if praying. However, he has not retired to go pray before. This line, only appearing in the folio version, could be interpreted in multiple ways: it could simply be a filler line, or it could show that Lear has so strongly internalized the betrayals and harm done to him that he has resorted to prayer as a comfort with which to deal with his hurt emotions or as a cry for help in his degraded state of nothingness.
Democracy Act
A good editorial from NJ.com outlining why the Democracy Act was needed for NJ voting.
Clayton Act
"Clayton Antitrust Act, 1914, passed by the U.S. Congress as an amendment to clarify and supplement the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. It was drafted by Henry De Lamar Clayton. The act prohibited exclusive sales contracts, local price cutting to freeze out competitors, rebates, interlocking directorates in corporations capitalized at $1 million or more in the same field of business, and intercorporate stock holdings. Labor unions and agricultural cooperatives were excluded from the forbidden combinations in the restraint of trade. The act restricted the use of the injunction against labor, and it legalized peaceful strikes, picketing, and boycotts. It declared that "the labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce." Organized labor was as heartened by the act as it had been dejected by the doctrine of the Danbury Hatters' Case, but subsequent judicial construction weakened the act's labor provisions. The Clayton Antitrust Act was the basis for a great many important and much-publicized suits against large corporations. Later amendments to the act strengthened its provisions against unfair price cutting (1936) and intercorporate stock holdings (1950)." Sourced from The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press as cited by InfoPlease.com
However, it will take time to inform FBI field offices of the new guidance, and there are certain types of information that it won't be able to get.
Yes, that's the whole freaking point. They shouldn't be able to get this information.
a never-used program to monitor potential "lone wolf" suspects who haven't been tied to terrorist groups
How are we supposed to believe this hasn't been used when the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is widely regarded by the public to have lied to Congress under oath about surveillance programs?
Congress needs to start over from a blank sheet of paper, "knowing what we know now", as they say.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _________________ No. 11 – 697
These rights are quali- fied, however, by the application of various limitations set forth in the next several sections of the Act, §§107 through 122. Those sections, typically entitled “Limitations on exclusive rights,” include, for example, the principle of “fair use” (§107), permission for limited library archival reproduction, (§108), and the doctrine at issue here, the “first sale” doctrine (§109)
Section 106 of the Copyright Act grants “the owner of copyright under this title” certain “exclusive rights,” including the right “to distribute copies . . . of the copy- righted work to th e public by sale or other transfer of ownership.” 17 U. S. C. §106(3)
I t i s t h i s b e d r o c k p r i n c i p l e o f c o p y r i g h t t h a t m a n d a t e s t h e l a w ' s s e e m i n g l y d i s p a r a t e t r e a t m e n t o f f a c t s a n d f a c t u a l c o m p i l a t i o n s . " N o o n e m a y c l a i m o r i g i n a l i t y a s t o f a c t s . " I d . , § 2 . 1 1 [ A ] , p . 2 - 1 5 7 . T h i s i s b e c a u s e f a c t s d o n o t o w e t h e i r o r i g i n t o a n a c t o f a u t h o r s h i p . T h e d i s t i n c t i o n i s o n e b e t w e e n c r e a t i o n a n d d i s c o v e r y : T h e f i r s t p e r s o n t o f i n d a n d r e p o r t a p a r t i c u l a r f a c t h a s n o t c r e a t e d t h e f a c t ; h e o r s h e h a s m e r e l y d i s c o v e r e d i t s e x i s t e n c e . T o b o r r o w f r o m B u r r o w - G i l e s , o n e w h o d i s c o v e r s a f a c t i s n o t i t s " m a k e r " o r " o r i g i n a t o r . " 1 1 1 U . S . , a t 5 8 . " T h e d i s c o v e r e r m e r e l y f i n d s a n d r e c o r d s . " N i m m e r § 2 . 0 3 [ E ] .
No one may claim originality to facts because facts do not owe their origin to an act of authorship. The distinction is one between creation vs discovery.
i t i s b e y o n d d i s p u t e t h a t c o m p i l a t i o n s o f f a c t s a r e w i t h i n t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f c o p y r i g h t . C o m p i l a t i o n s w e r e e x p r e s s l y m e n t i o n e d i n t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t o f 1 9 0 9 , a n d a g a i n i n t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t o f 1 9 7 6
The academic publisher Elsevier has contributed to many U.S. Congressional representatives, pushing the Elsevier-supported Research Works Act, which among other things would have forbidden any effort by any federal agency to ensure taxpayer access to work financed by the federal government without permission of the publisher.
What other legislation has Elsevier pushed?