Factors that Shape US Energy Policy for Central Asia

Factors that Shape US Energy Policy for Central Asia Many factors influence the formulation of US energy policy. This chapter lays out the comprehensive description of the institutions which shape US energy policy towards Central Asia in general. Further this chapter would look into the international scenario, which has made US Congress, Federal Bureaucracy and Interest Groups in shaping Energy Policy towards Kazakhstan. And Turkmenistan Throughout the 1980s and before US experienced a major sorting out process, determining who would participate in energy policymaking and what the organisational arrangements for citizen involvement would be, though by 1980 the President and the Congress had been able to reach compromises on the basic issues faced by them following the onset of the energy crisis. With decisions on these basic issues the foundation for a stable national energy policy system appeared to be in place. The rudimentary energy policy system that was in place by 1980, provided the framework necessary to manage both energy supply and demand and to develop new resources (Barkenbus: 1982:413-414). Before going into the detailed focus on the role of iron triangle towards Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan in particular a brief understanding of how the policy is influenced by the Congress, Interests Groups and the Bureaucracy would be appropriate. Congress: Decision making in Congress where law is formulated, differ from decision making in the bureaucracy, where it is implemented. The institution setting greatly influences the policy outcome.[1] If not sovereign, Congress is considered to be prominent in formulating national energy policy. The president may mandate or oppose energy programs. But he is usually dictated by the Congress. It is the congress who can legislate on energy policy and raise the resources to underwrite it. The presidents freedom to act independently of congress on energy matters is limited severely by law, custom and political circumstances. Policy may be formulated by judges or administrators by interpreting or implementing a congressional enactment. But policy making by them is limited by congressional guidelines and over shift (Cowney: 1985: 82-86). Congress is characterized as house divided and authority dispersed between its two chambers. Its members are even torn by conflicting claims of local and national interest. Although congress is fragmented, it cant be denied that there is opportunity for policy innovation. From the apparent authority of the congress, it becomes clear that congress often reveals not power exercised but power dissipated, not policy made but policy paralysed(Victor:1984:313) The number of committees and subcommittees with energy as their title grew steadily from two in the 92nd Congress (1970-1972) to numerous in the110th Congress In the 96th Congress jurisdiction over some aspect of energy policy was claimed by more than 38 committees of the House of Representatives. The Senate traditionally has fewer committees than the House. Nevertheless it had at least ten major committees and several dozen subcommittees exercising some authority over energy legislation. The committees are proposed by the legislators desire to exercise some authority over major public issues. There also perpetuates jealously and competition between subcommittees and their leaders in energy policy making. Vigorous conflict over energy policy produced by each chambers over squabbling committees is intensified by rivalries between House and Senate energy committees. Such competitions are due to traditional differences between the two chambers, their divergent constituencies, constitutional responsibilities, institutional histories, conflicting personalities and committees aspirations. Moreover, the various energy committees within and between the two chambers, often respond to different energy interest (Raycraft and Kash: 1984:239-249). The fragmentation of power in the Congress is not only due to the formal division of authority among committees. There are other significant causes as well such as there are five hundred and thirty five geographical units the states and the congressional districts. These numerous factors constitute a vast array of diverse parochial interests with powerful influence in the legislative process. The Senator and the Representatives ambassador to Washington are regarded by the constituents as the guardian of the local interest. The Senator and the ambassadors are supported to play the role of energy provider and protector (Chubb: 1983:30-56). Bureaucracy: The executive branch of the federal government is a constitutional unit. Within the executive branch there are thirteen cabinet departments, fifty two independent agencies, five regulatory commissions and numerous lesser entities. More than 2.8 million employers divide their loyalties among these institutions. When closely observed, the executive branch is found to be a mosaic of disparate bureaucratic interests, each zealous to achieve its special mission. It is very challenging for the president to bring these different interests into accord with his own administrative programs. Its success depends upon his personality to a greater extent. The designs for the administrative management by the White House are continuously impeded by the political obstacles. In order to unite the bureaucracy, the president must constantly fight for the competing claims of agencies self interest, the political pressures upon the agencies from Congress and the pressure from an agencys own clientele. The federal bureaucracy is a plurality of institutional interests. They are always active in shaping the policies which will be administered by them. The bureaucracy is governments interest lobby (Chubb: 1983:30-56). Interest Group: The number of interest group striving to impress their will upon government is legion. Among one hundred thousand nationally organised interest groups in the United States, high proportions are involved in politics. When the politically active state and local groups are added to the already existing numerous interest groups, it becomes obvious that the interest groups are pervasive in the United States governmental system. They represent virtually every major social group with some claims upon government (Barkenbus: 1982:413-414). The formations of new groups are often triggered by the rise of new issues on the governmental agenda. And conversely, new issues on the agenda reflect the growing political influence of new interests. The number of interest groups in national energy policy increased significantly after 1973 oil shock. Oil companies have been the major interest groups in terms of energy policy formulation. While analysing the role of oil companies it can be said that they are playing the role of nongovernmental bodies. They have added a degree of variety to international political relationship. Sometimes they have even made the international relationships complicated which might otherwise have been quite harmonious. But in reality oil industries are primarily economic institutions. One of the characteristics of the economic actors is that so long as they can function reasonably well, they generally accept the status quo. No industry can sacrifice its profit for the sake of political principle. None of the oil industry can turn down the chance of developing important new deposits. Of course companies have to choose between possible ventures. The political climate of the countries in which these ventures fall is the only one of the factors taken into account. The political tactics available to compan ies for gaining access to promising markets are limited (Scott: 2005:12-149). The strategies adopted by the oil company are usually predictable but along with the strategies, the leadership of the company also matter to a greater extent. The underlying economics of the industry make it possible to predict the general direction in which companies will move. The development of oil companies can be stimulated by ease of access of the various oil deposit the source of existing oil production the size development and location of the worlds leading economies some facts about the motivation of the imperial powers some assumptions about the behavior of companies in an international oligopoly Some information about the level of government experience in most of the potential producing countries. The sheer size of the US market and the fact that there was a significant oil industry in existence in USA meant that American oil companies where bound to play a dominant role. As an analyst has noted that US had no history of significant engagement with the Central Asian Region before 1990s. It is the discovery of energy resources of the Caspian Sea that made the region important of the US foreign policy makers. The Central Asia and the Caspian Region is blessed with abundant oil and gases that can enhance the lives of the regions resident and provide energy for growth in both Europe and Asia. The impact of these resources on US commercial interests and US foreign policy is very significant. The United States first official foray into the Caucasus and Central Asia came in 1991 during the Bush administration. But it was not until major oil contracts were signed between US oil companies and the government of Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan in 1993-1994 that the region really began to register on the radar screen of the American public. The commercial interests of US oil companies in exploiting new energy reserves gave US policymakers a specific interest to protect in the Caucasus and Central Asia the US has come to see Caspian resources as one of the few prospects for diversifying world energy supply away from the Middle East. The role of the iron triangle in formulating US energy policy towards Central Asia can be understood by 1998 Congressional Hearing. In this hearing the subcommittee on Asia and Pacific examined the US interest in the region. It was acknowledged by the US Congress that Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan possess large reserves of oil and natural gas. It was further observed that Uzbekistan has oil and gas reserves that may make it self sufficient in energy and gain revenue through exports (Congressional Hearings: 1998). According to Mr. Bereuter the president of the Subcommittee on Asia and Pacific stated that US policy goals regarding energy resources in the region were based on the following factors- Independence of the states and their ties to the West. Breaking Russias monopoly over the oil and gas transport routes. Promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers encouraging the construction of East West pipeline and, Isolating Iran. In addition it was stated by the then Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot, that the United States sought to discourage any one country from gaining control over the region, but rather urged all responsible States to cooperate in the exploitation of regional oil and resources. It was noted that the Central Asian Region has emerged as one of the significant opportunities for investment opportunities for a broad range of American companies. This in turn will stimulate the economic development of the region. Debates in the Congress According to the Department of Energy, US has following interest in the region- Energy security Strategic interest and Commercial interest in promoting Caspian region energy development. It is further observed that US has an interest in strengthening global energy security through diversification, and the development of these new sources of supply. Caspian export would diversify rather than concentrate world energy supplies. This will help in avoiding the over reliance on the Persian Gulf. It was agreed in the Congress that United States has strategic interests in supporting the independence, sovereignty, and prosperity of the Newly Independent States of the Caspian Basin. And it was desired to assist the development of these States into democratic, sovereign members of the world community of the nations, enjoying unfettered access to world markets without pressure or undue influence from the region. In other words, it can be observed that the iron triangle i.e., Congress, Bureaucracy and the Interest Group have following four objectives with regard to Central Asia: Promoting Multiple Export Route-The administrations policy is centered on rapid development of the regions resources and the transportation and sale of those resources to hard currency markets to secure the independence of these new countries. The US government has promoted the development of multiple pipelines and diversified infrastructure networks to open and integrate these countries into the global market and to foster regional cooperation. It was decided to give priority to support efforts by the regional governments and the private sector to develop and improve east-west linkage and infrastructure networks through Central Asia and the Caucasus. A Eurasian energy transport corridor incorporating a trans-Caspian segment with a route from Baku, Azerbaijan, through the Caucasus and Turkey to the Mediterranean port was included. Emphasizing on Commerciality-It was realized that the massive infrastructure projects must be commercially competitive before the private sector and the international financial community can move forward. Keeping this in mind the Baku-Ceyhan pipelines was most endorsed. Cooperating with Russia-It was decided to support the continued Russian participation in Caspian participation in the Eurasian corridor was also encouraged. For this purpose US companies are working in partnership with the Russian firms in the Caspian. Isolating Iran- the US Government opposes pipelines through Iran because development of Irans oil and gas industry and pipelines from the Caspian Basin through Iran will seriously undercut the development of East-west infrastructure, and give Iran improper leverage over economies of the Caucasus and Central Asian States. Similarly, John Maresca, Vice President of International Relations, Unocal Corporation, focused on three issues with regard to Central Asia- The need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources. The need for US support for international and Regional efforts to achieve balanced reforms and development of appropriate investment in the region. While emphasising these issues, argued for the repeal or removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, because this section unfairly restricts US Government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits US influence in the region. Unocal and other American companies are ready to develop cost-effective export routes for Central Asian resources. So, after this analysis of the iron triangle in terms of the Central Asian Region it can be concluded that the Cooperation of power, federalism, interest group pluralism and other checks and balances in the constitutional architecture of the United States political system created a strong bias towards bargaining, compromise and instrumentalism in energy policy making today. the electoral cycle often compels energy policy to conform to the economic and political bias of legislative constituencies charged with implementing energy policies, attempt to impose upon those policies their own bureaucratic values, their unique political per spective growing from their several missions and many other institutional concerns sub government and the public opinion also influence policy. These elements in the policy process have long been recognized. They emphasise a truth often ignored in discussions of US public policy. The United States and the rest of the world are facing energy problem. The era of abundant, reliable, low-cost energy is in the past. Currently the condition will be that of scarcity and the continuing need to manage the complex and difficult issues associated with the use, supply, pricing and trading of energy to prevent economic, political, environmental and military crisis. Imported oil is the heart of energy problem. As mentioned earlier the economic growth and the consequent growth in energy demand requires increased need for imported oil. To understand the full scope of Congressional perception focus on Energy Security act-S.932 of 1980 is essential. Energy Security Act S. 932 Representative Christopher J. Dodd on June 25, 1980 observed that with respect to the energy act it represented a long overdue commitment of federal dollars to promote energy independence for America. He acknowledged the growing dependency of United States on imported oil. The Energy Security Act provides 25 billion for exploration of a variety of energy alternatives including synthetic fuels renewable resources, conservation, and gasohol. It mandated two actions -the filling of our strategic petroleum reserves and the study of acid rain problem. Though the historical energy security act comprehensively dealt with the synthetic fuel but it was not entirely about the synthetic fuel bill. This act also provide $3.1 billion to establish conservation and solar banks that will offer federal subsidies in the form of below market loans, loan guarantees and grant to finance solar and conservation work in homes, apartments and small business. Christopher J. Dodd argued that $ 3 billion includ ed in this bill to the energy bank was not enough to release the full potential of conservation and solar energy. But this funding was perceived to be a good beginning, and believed that the experience of the coming years will prove the worth these alternatives to continue oil imports. He further argued that the United States government must devise an effective national strategy to break the hold of OPEC and energy conservation in our homes and business should be taken as a vital part of that strategy (Congressional Hearings: 1980) The former Clinton Administration stressed that U.S. support for free market reforms directly served U.S. national interests by opening new markets for U.S. goods and services, and sources of energy and minerals. U.S. private investment committed to Central Asia had greatly exceeded. U.S. energy companies have committed to invest billions of dollars in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. U.S. trade agreements have been signed and entered into force with all the Central Asian States. By focusing on Congressional debates on Energy Policy with particular focus on Central Asia, the complexity of policy formulation can be understood. Further the various Hearings held by the Congress have also provided significant evidence that explains the changed nuances of Central Asia policy. It also helps to illustrate the argument that the Congress considered the Central Asian Region very important for US interest. In particular Congressional understanding of the Enormous Energy Export Potential that could ease Americas energy problem went a long way in shaping US policy towards Central Asia. For instance, despite concern on human right violent political movement, US government virtually supported the US government decision to promote a new pipeline from Kazakh to Azerbaijan and from Ceyhan to Turkey. Some analysts have noted that there has been different emphasis on the level of US involvement in the CAR. According to some there have been linkages between the adequate progress in democratisation and improving the human rights. The importance of energy resources to US has been disputed in early phase of 1990. However, the Congressional interest in Central Asia was reflected in the passage of Silk Road in late 1999 which enhanced US policy alteration, humanitarian needs, economic development (including energy pipelines) and communications, democracy and the creation of civil societies in the South Caucasian and Central Asia. The Bush energy policy was directed towards securing cheap oil because US oil consumption was below projected to increase by one-third over the next two decades. The white House during Bush Administration also had for greater domestic drilling and wants to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to the oil industry. The Administrations National Energy Policy Development Group, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, acknowledged in a May 2001 report that US oil production will fall 12% over the next 20 years. As a result US dependence on imported oil which has risen to a great extent (CRS Report: 2005). September 11 brought with it a dramatic reconfiguration of the entire international security environment as well as a fundamental shift in the ranking of American foreign and security priorities. Virtually every other foreign policy priority was now subordinated to the effort to create an anti-terrorist coalition (Chenoy: 2001:149-160). It is observed that the September 11 attack on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon has underlined the connection between oil and politics. When it became confirmed that the most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, it impacted on the oil market to a great extent. Since Saudi Arabia constitutes one fourth of the total petroleum reserves, United States had to look for some other alternative sources in order to fulfill its energy requirement. United States is dependent on foreign oil for its 58% of energy requirement which is likely to increase up to 65% by 2020 (Chenoy: 2001:149-160). The counterstrike of September 11 shattered the old barriers and opened new horizons. The United States Congress acknowledged the importance of the Central Asian republic for the fulfillment of its oil requirement in the 107th Congress. It was acknowledged that the Central Asian Region is inflicted with terrorist activities and hence consequently political instability. The support from the Congress and the administration was urged. It was argued that the US assistance in developing these new economics will be crucial to business success. A strong technical assistance progress throughout the region was endorsed. After September 11 Washingtons approval of more than US$1.4 billion for the economic recovery of barren and battle scarred Afghanistan provides the Bush administration with possible insurance for deepening its petro-political sphere of influence along Russias boarder in the form of revived Trans-Afghan pipeline. Further it was realized by the US energy analysts that the vast reservoir of oil and gas can be protected by the deployment of US special operations forces to Georgia because it will neutralize Russias influence in the region. It is noteworthy that the Vice president Dick Cheney, former CEO of the oil services company Halliburtons also a veteran of the American oil industrys presence in the Caspian Basin is sufficient to manifest the US presence in the region With almost $30 billion already invested by US oil companies in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan, the suggested Afghan route would cost only one-half the amount of the other alternative which would run through Georgia to Turkeys Mediterranean coast ( Alam :2002:5-26). The Caspian Sea region is widely viewed as important to world markets because of its large oil and gas reserves. Most Energy Company regards the Caspian Basin as the Persian Gulf of the 21st century. In Central Asia and elsewhere, America found new friends in hour of need. It can be said that the Sept. 11 have awakened many Americans to the interdependence to the even -smaller world, to their vulnerability especially in energy. The growing American stake in Central Asia is one response to that. It can be said that the American war against terrorism has also become a battle to control the energy resources of the Central Asian Region. Since Central Asian region can offer the United States a rare opportunity to diversify world oil supply, it could be one of the most important areas of US foreign policy. However, in Washington D.C., and especially in the US congress, foreign policy tends to be an elitist sport. Few members of the Congress focus on foreign policy and accepted by the most of the Americans. As a result, few members of the congress view foreign policy and the Caspian region in strategic terms. The Central Asian Region is viewed by the most members of the congress through one or more of the following perspectives- The Azerbaijan- Armenia issue US policy towards Iran US policy towards Russia Partition and domestic politics. Among the four factors mentioned above, the fourth one i.e. that is partition and domestic politics is perhaps the most important. Members of the Congress tend to be overly responsive to their domestic constituents and some even support certain ethnic groups as a way to raise campaign contribution. This leads to a phenomenon termed ethnic politics. Critics argued that ethnic politics have driven US policy towards both Azerbaijan and Iran (Congressional Hearing: 2001). In order to understand the attitude of Congress towards the Central Asian Region in the aftermath of Sept. 11 attack on World Trade Centre (WTC) and Pentagon, the congress role towards Azerbaijan-America issue, Iran, and Russia requires a brief consideration. The Azerbaijan-Armenia issue On the Azerbaijan Armenia issue, congress tends to favour Armenia and uses foreign aid legislation as a means of exerting pressure on Armenias neighbors particularly Azerbaijan and Turkey. The most obvious example of this is the section 907 at the Freedom Support Act which prohibits US government aid to the government of Azerbaijan. Concern over the plight of Azeri refugee and the increasing importance of United States investment in the Azeri oil sectors; have led Congress to adjust section 907 incrementally each year since it took effect in January 1993. Nevertheless, Congressional attitude towards the region began to change significantly in 1997. The changes occurred for several reasons: The presidential elections in Armenia appeared to be less than free and fare this damaged Armenias image on Capitol Hill and embarrassed lawmaker who had clouted Armenia as the democratic ideal for the region. Some members of the congress thought the Armenia lobby had gone too far and was out of step with the realities on ground. The Armenian lobby was pushing for what some members of Congress thought was excessive legislation. As the deadline for a decision on the main export pipeline route approaches Congressional interest has continued to rise. There was the increased number of Congressional delegation traveling in the region. At least five delegations visited the region in 1997 including one led by senator McConnell. However, since his trip he has taken a more balanced approach to the region. This is noteworthy because McConnell is the chairman of the Senate appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations, the subcommittee which has jurisdiction over section 907. The House of Representatives, however, continued to reject attempt to weaken section 907. Congress tends to be an incremental body and the facts demonstrate that there is momentum towards making further revisions in section 907. As a result of this increasing momentum it is believed that the US Senate is now positioned to make substantial changes in 907. Senate headway will be critical because progress will have to be made in a House-Senate c onference committee and the House of Representatives continues to be solidly on the side of Armenia and is likely to support a significant softening or repeal of S.907. A major problem especially in the House is that section 907 is not on the radar screen for most Representatives since 907 is usually inserted into the foreign operations appropriations legislation at the subcommittee level, only 13 House member-less than 3% have an opportunity to vote up or down on 907 each year (Congressional Hearing:1997). Congressional attitude towards Iran: Iran is the most stable country politically and economically bordering the Caspian, and offers the most attractive pipeline routes: it is important to understand congressional attitude towards that country. Congress is opposed to Iran and has limited the Clintons administrations flexibility in dealing with it. In this respect, Congress has played a significant role. In the opinion of Congress no country undermines American interest more than Iran. Since the Iranian revolution the United States has sought to isolate Iran diplomatically and politically and more recently economically. Congress has passed the Iran-Libya Sanction Act (ILSA). This act was passed without a single member of congress voting against the sanctions. Congress has rarely adopted any controversial piece of legislation unanimously which have a wide range of implications. This law is causing problem for the companies trying to move Caspian oil to market. US companies are prohibited from partnering with Iranian firms in the Caspian (CRS Report: 2003). US Policy towards Russia Another regional issue clouding Congress view of the region is US policy towards Russia. Congress is skeptical of Russia, and its relations with Iran. For many members of Congress opposing the Soviet Union was a major pillar in their political philosophy during 1980s. Today there are still resident effects of this cold war attitude especially Republican party. In 1997 dozens of bills were introduced seeking to impose sanctions on Russia. Congress has consistently opposed Russian efforts of nuclear cooperation with Iran. Congress views the possible pipeline alternative through Russia, southern route through Iran, eastern route through Afghanistan and western rout through Georgia and Today Congressional view of the pipeline can be summed up in three ways: congress is opposed to pipelines routes through Iran, Congress is skeptical of routes through Russia, and is dubious of routes through Afghanistan. Turkey and Georgia are the only options in view of the Congress. Therefore, it is obvious why Congress has expressed support for pipeline along an east-west axis. This also helps to explain why the US government (Congress and the administration) are increasingly calling the Baku Ceyhan route the preferred route because it belongs NATO, ally, and avoid Iran and Russia. During 1998, Congress continued to advocate isolation of Iran and continue the incremental progress in US relations with Azerbaijan. While formulating energy policy for the United States, Congress is the preeminent force. But congress is a house divided. Its authority is dispersed between the two chambers. It is due to the fact that its members are usually torn by the conflicting claims of local and national interest. In spite of having fragmented opportunity it can be expected for policy innovation. On the brighter side, the United States has important energy interests in Central Asia. With its recent energy resources, Kazakhstan could become one of the largest oil exporters in the world. The United States has a strong interest in this oil getting to the world market at reasonable prices via multiple pipelines (Congressional Hearings: 1998). The 107th Congress supported governments efforts to promote a new pipeline from Kazakhstan to Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey, the gateway to the entire Western oil market. It was also acknowledged that in addition to energy interests, the United States also has a strong interest in working with the existing Central Asia governments on combating drugs and on divesting themselves of their weapons of mass destruction materials ( Congressional Hearings:2001). Finally, domestic security concerns for the Central Asian region particularly about violent political movements also got due consideration. The world gets nearly hal Factors that Shape US Energy Policy for Central Asia Factors that Shape US Energy Policy for Central Asia Many factors influence the formulation of US energy policy. This chapter lays out the comprehensive description of the institutions which shape US energy policy towards Central Asia in general. Further this chapter would look into the international scenario, which has made US Congress, Federal Bureaucracy and Interest Groups in shaping Energy Policy towards Kazakhstan. And Turkmenistan Throughout the 1980s and before US experienced a major sorting out process, determining who would participate in energy policymaking and what the organisational arrangements for citizen involvement would be, though by 1980 the President and the Congress had been able to reach compromises on the basic issues faced by them following the onset of the energy crisis. With decisions on these basic issues the foundation for a stable national energy policy system appeared to be in place. The rudimentary energy policy system that was in place by 1980, provided the framework necessary to manage both energy supply and demand and to develop new resources (Barkenbus: 1982:413-414). Before going into the detailed focus on the role of iron triangle towards Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan in particular a brief understanding of how the policy is influenced by the Congress, Interests Groups and the Bureaucracy would be appropriate. Congress: Decision making in Congress where law is formulated, differ from decision making in the bureaucracy, where it is implemented. The institution setting greatly influences the policy outcome.[1] If not sovereign, Congress is considered to be prominent in formulating national energy policy. The president may mandate or oppose energy programs. But he is usually dictated by the Congress. It is the congress who can legislate on energy policy and raise the resources to underwrite it. The presidents freedom to act independently of congress on energy matters is limited severely by law, custom and political circumstances. Policy may be formulated by judges or administrators by interpreting or implementing a congressional enactment. But policy making by them is limited by congressional guidelines and over shift (Cowney: 1985: 82-86). Congress is characterized as house divided and authority dispersed between its two chambers. Its members are even torn by conflicting claims of local and national interest. Although congress is fragmented, it cant be denied that there is opportunity for policy innovation. From the apparent authority of the congress, it becomes clear that congress often reveals not power exercised but power dissipated, not policy made but policy paralysed(Victor:1984:313) The number of committees and subcommittees with energy as their title grew steadily from two in the 92nd Congress (1970-1972) to numerous in the110th Congress In the 96th Congress jurisdiction over some aspect of energy policy was claimed by more than 38 committees of the House of Representatives. The Senate traditionally has fewer committees than the House. Nevertheless it had at least ten major committees and several dozen subcommittees exercising some authority over energy legislation. The committees are proposed by the legislators desire to exercise some authority over major public issues. There also perpetuates jealously and competition between subcommittees and their leaders in energy policy making. Vigorous conflict over energy policy produced by each chambers over squabbling committees is intensified by rivalries between House and Senate energy committees. Such competitions are due to traditional differences between the two chambers, their divergent constituencies, constitutional responsibilities, institutional histories, conflicting personalities and committees aspirations. Moreover, the various energy committees within and between the two chambers, often respond to different energy interest (Raycraft and Kash: 1984:239-249). The fragmentation of power in the Congress is not only due to the formal division of authority among committees. There are other significant causes as well such as there are five hundred and thirty five geographical units the states and the congressional districts. These numerous factors constitute a vast array of diverse parochial interests with powerful influence in the legislative process. The Senator and the Representatives ambassador to Washington are regarded by the constituents as the guardian of the local interest. The Senator and the ambassadors are supported to play the role of energy provider and protector (Chubb: 1983:30-56). Bureaucracy: The executive branch of the federal government is a constitutional unit. Within the executive branch there are thirteen cabinet departments, fifty two independent agencies, five regulatory commissions and numerous lesser entities. More than 2.8 million employers divide their loyalties among these institutions. When closely observed, the executive branch is found to be a mosaic of disparate bureaucratic interests, each zealous to achieve its special mission. It is very challenging for the president to bring these different interests into accord with his own administrative programs. Its success depends upon his personality to a greater extent. The designs for the administrative management by the White House are continuously impeded by the political obstacles. In order to unite the bureaucracy, the president must constantly fight for the competing claims of agencies self interest, the political pressures upon the agencies from Congress and the pressure from an agencys own clientele. The federal bureaucracy is a plurality of institutional interests. They are always active in shaping the policies which will be administered by them. The bureaucracy is governments interest lobby (Chubb: 1983:30-56). Interest Group: The number of interest group striving to impress their will upon government is legion. Among one hundred thousand nationally organised interest groups in the United States, high proportions are involved in politics. When the politically active state and local groups are added to the already existing numerous interest groups, it becomes obvious that the interest groups are pervasive in the United States governmental system. They represent virtually every major social group with some claims upon government (Barkenbus: 1982:413-414). The formations of new groups are often triggered by the rise of new issues on the governmental agenda. And conversely, new issues on the agenda reflect the growing political influence of new interests. The number of interest groups in national energy policy increased significantly after 1973 oil shock. Oil companies have been the major interest groups in terms of energy policy formulation. While analysing the role of oil companies it can be said that they are playing the role of nongovernmental bodies. They have added a degree of variety to international political relationship. Sometimes they have even made the international relationships complicated which might otherwise have been quite harmonious. But in reality oil industries are primarily economic institutions. One of the characteristics of the economic actors is that so long as they can function reasonably well, they generally accept the status quo. No industry can sacrifice its profit for the sake of political principle. None of the oil industry can turn down the chance of developing important new deposits. Of course companies have to choose between possible ventures. The political climate of the countries in which these ventures fall is the only one of the factors taken into account. The political tactics available to compan ies for gaining access to promising markets are limited (Scott: 2005:12-149). The strategies adopted by the oil company are usually predictable but along with the strategies, the leadership of the company also matter to a greater extent. The underlying economics of the industry make it possible to predict the general direction in which companies will move. The development of oil companies can be stimulated by ease of access of the various oil deposit the source of existing oil production the size development and location of the worlds leading economies some facts about the motivation of the imperial powers some assumptions about the behavior of companies in an international oligopoly Some information about the level of government experience in most of the potential producing countries. The sheer size of the US market and the fact that there was a significant oil industry in existence in USA meant that American oil companies where bound to play a dominant role. As an analyst has noted that US had no history of significant engagement with the Central Asian Region before 1990s. It is the discovery of energy resources of the Caspian Sea that made the region important of the US foreign policy makers. The Central Asia and the Caspian Region is blessed with abundant oil and gases that can enhance the lives of the regions resident and provide energy for growth in both Europe and Asia. The impact of these resources on US commercial interests and US foreign policy is very significant. The United States first official foray into the Caucasus and Central Asia came in 1991 during the Bush administration. But it was not until major oil contracts were signed between US oil companies and the government of Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan in 1993-1994 that the region really began to register on the radar screen of the American public. The commercial interests of US oil companies in exploiting new energy reserves gave US policymakers a specific interest to protect in the Caucasus and Central Asia the US has come to see Caspian resources as one of the few prospects for diversifying world energy supply away from the Middle East. The role of the iron triangle in formulating US energy policy towards Central Asia can be understood by 1998 Congressional Hearing. In this hearing the subcommittee on Asia and Pacific examined the US interest in the region. It was acknowledged by the US Congress that Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan possess large reserves of oil and natural gas. It was further observed that Uzbekistan has oil and gas reserves that may make it self sufficient in energy and gain revenue through exports (Congressional Hearings: 1998). According to Mr. Bereuter the president of the Subcommittee on Asia and Pacific stated that US policy goals regarding energy resources in the region were based on the following factors- Independence of the states and their ties to the West. Breaking Russias monopoly over the oil and gas transport routes. Promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers encouraging the construction of East West pipeline and, Isolating Iran. In addition it was stated by the then Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot, that the United States sought to discourage any one country from gaining control over the region, but rather urged all responsible States to cooperate in the exploitation of regional oil and resources. It was noted that the Central Asian Region has emerged as one of the significant opportunities for investment opportunities for a broad range of American companies. This in turn will stimulate the economic development of the region. Debates in the Congress According to the Department of Energy, US has following interest in the region- Energy security Strategic interest and Commercial interest in promoting Caspian region energy development. It is further observed that US has an interest in strengthening global energy security through diversification, and the development of these new sources of supply. Caspian export would diversify rather than concentrate world energy supplies. This will help in avoiding the over reliance on the Persian Gulf. It was agreed in the Congress that United States has strategic interests in supporting the independence, sovereignty, and prosperity of the Newly Independent States of the Caspian Basin. And it was desired to assist the development of these States into democratic, sovereign members of the world community of the nations, enjoying unfettered access to world markets without pressure or undue influence from the region. In other words, it can be observed that the iron triangle i.e., Congress, Bureaucracy and the Interest Group have following four objectives with regard to Central Asia: Promoting Multiple Export Route-The administrations policy is centered on rapid development of the regions resources and the transportation and sale of those resources to hard currency markets to secure the independence of these new countries. The US government has promoted the development of multiple pipelines and diversified infrastructure networks to open and integrate these countries into the global market and to foster regional cooperation. It was decided to give priority to support efforts by the regional governments and the private sector to develop and improve east-west linkage and infrastructure networks through Central Asia and the Caucasus. A Eurasian energy transport corridor incorporating a trans-Caspian segment with a route from Baku, Azerbaijan, through the Caucasus and Turkey to the Mediterranean port was included. Emphasizing on Commerciality-It was realized that the massive infrastructure projects must be commercially competitive before the private sector and the international financial community can move forward. Keeping this in mind the Baku-Ceyhan pipelines was most endorsed. Cooperating with Russia-It was decided to support the continued Russian participation in Caspian participation in the Eurasian corridor was also encouraged. For this purpose US companies are working in partnership with the Russian firms in the Caspian. Isolating Iran- the US Government opposes pipelines through Iran because development of Irans oil and gas industry and pipelines from the Caspian Basin through Iran will seriously undercut the development of East-west infrastructure, and give Iran improper leverage over economies of the Caucasus and Central Asian States. Similarly, John Maresca, Vice President of International Relations, Unocal Corporation, focused on three issues with regard to Central Asia- The need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources. The need for US support for international and Regional efforts to achieve balanced reforms and development of appropriate investment in the region. While emphasising these issues, argued for the repeal or removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, because this section unfairly restricts US Government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits US influence in the region. Unocal and other American companies are ready to develop cost-effective export routes for Central Asian resources. So, after this analysis of the iron triangle in terms of the Central Asian Region it can be concluded that the Cooperation of power, federalism, interest group pluralism and other checks and balances in the constitutional architecture of the United States political system created a strong bias towards bargaining, compromise and instrumentalism in energy policy making today. the electoral cycle often compels energy policy to conform to the economic and political bias of legislative constituencies charged with implementing energy policies, attempt to impose upon those policies their own bureaucratic values, their unique political per spective growing from their several missions and many other institutional concerns sub government and the public opinion also influence policy. These elements in the policy process have long been recognized. They emphasise a truth often ignored in discussions of US public policy. The United States and the rest of the world are facing energy problem. The era of abundant, reliable, low-cost energy is in the past. Currently the condition will be that of scarcity and the continuing need to manage the complex and difficult issues associated with the use, supply, pricing and trading of energy to prevent economic, political, environmental and military crisis. Imported oil is the heart of energy problem. As mentioned earlier the economic growth and the consequent growth in energy demand requires increased need for imported oil. To understand the full scope of Congressional perception focus on Energy Security act-S.932 of 1980 is essential. Energy Security Act S. 932 Representative Christopher J. Dodd on June 25, 1980 observed that with respect to the energy act it represented a long overdue commitment of federal dollars to promote energy independence for America. He acknowledged the growing dependency of United States on imported oil. The Energy Security Act provides 25 billion for exploration of a variety of energy alternatives including synthetic fuels renewable resources, conservation, and gasohol. It mandated two actions -the filling of our strategic petroleum reserves and the study of acid rain problem. Though the historical energy security act comprehensively dealt with the synthetic fuel but it was not entirely about the synthetic fuel bill. This act also provide $3.1 billion to establish conservation and solar banks that will offer federal subsidies in the form of below market loans, loan guarantees and grant to finance solar and conservation work in homes, apartments and small business. Christopher J. Dodd argued that $ 3 billion includ ed in this bill to the energy bank was not enough to release the full potential of conservation and solar energy. But this funding was perceived to be a good beginning, and believed that the experience of the coming years will prove the worth these alternatives to continue oil imports. He further argued that the United States government must devise an effective national strategy to break the hold of OPEC and energy conservation in our homes and business should be taken as a vital part of that strategy (Congressional Hearings: 1980) The former Clinton Administration stressed that U.S. support for free market reforms directly served U.S. national interests by opening new markets for U.S. goods and services, and sources of energy and minerals. U.S. private investment committed to Central Asia had greatly exceeded. U.S. energy companies have committed to invest billions of dollars in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. U.S. trade agreements have been signed and entered into force with all the Central Asian States. By focusing on Congressional debates on Energy Policy with particular focus on Central Asia, the complexity of policy formulation can be understood. Further the various Hearings held by the Congress have also provided significant evidence that explains the changed nuances of Central Asia policy. It also helps to illustrate the argument that the Congress considered the Central Asian Region very important for US interest. In particular Congressional understanding of the Enormous Energy Export Potential that could ease Americas energy problem went a long way in shaping US policy towards Central Asia. For instance, despite concern on human right violent political movement, US government virtually supported the US government decision to promote a new pipeline from Kazakh to Azerbaijan and from Ceyhan to Turkey. Some analysts have noted that there has been different emphasis on the level of US involvement in the CAR. According to some there have been linkages between the adequate progress in democratisation and improving the human rights. The importance of energy resources to US has been disputed in early phase of 1990. However, the Congressional interest in Central Asia was reflected in the passage of Silk Road in late 1999 which enhanced US policy alteration, humanitarian needs, economic development (including energy pipelines) and communications, democracy and the creation of civil societies in the South Caucasian and Central Asia. The Bush energy policy was directed towards securing cheap oil because US oil consumption was below projected to increase by one-third over the next two decades. The white House during Bush Administration also had for greater domestic drilling and wants to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to the oil industry. The Administrations National Energy Policy Development Group, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, acknowledged in a May 2001 report that US oil production will fall 12% over the next 20 years. As a result US dependence on imported oil which has risen to a great extent (CRS Report: 2005). September 11 brought with it a dramatic reconfiguration of the entire international security environment as well as a fundamental shift in the ranking of American foreign and security priorities. Virtually every other foreign policy priority was now subordinated to the effort to create an anti-terrorist coalition (Chenoy: 2001:149-160). It is observed that the September 11 attack on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon has underlined the connection between oil and politics. When it became confirmed that the most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, it impacted on the oil market to a great extent. Since Saudi Arabia constitutes one fourth of the total petroleum reserves, United States had to look for some other alternative sources in order to fulfill its energy requirement. United States is dependent on foreign oil for its 58% of energy requirement which is likely to increase up to 65% by 2020 (Chenoy: 2001:149-160). The counterstrike of September 11 shattered the old barriers and opened new horizons. The United States Congress acknowledged the importance of the Central Asian republic for the fulfillment of its oil requirement in the 107th Congress. It was acknowledged that the Central Asian Region is inflicted with terrorist activities and hence consequently political instability. The support from the Congress and the administration was urged. It was argued that the US assistance in developing these new economics will be crucial to business success. A strong technical assistance progress throughout the region was endorsed. After September 11 Washingtons approval of more than US$1.4 billion for the economic recovery of barren and battle scarred Afghanistan provides the Bush administration with possible insurance for deepening its petro-political sphere of influence along Russias boarder in the form of revived Trans-Afghan pipeline. Further it was realized by the US energy analysts that the vast reservoir of oil and gas can be protected by the deployment of US special operations forces to Georgia because it will neutralize Russias influence in the region. It is noteworthy that the Vice president Dick Cheney, former CEO of the oil services company Halliburtons also a veteran of the American oil industrys presence in the Caspian Basin is sufficient to manifest the US presence in the region With almost $30 billion already invested by US oil companies in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan, the suggested Afghan route would cost only one-half the amount of the other alternative which would run through Georgia to Turkeys Mediterranean coast ( Alam :2002:5-26). The Caspian Sea region is widely viewed as important to world markets because of its large oil and gas reserves. Most Energy Company regards the Caspian Basin as the Persian Gulf of the 21st century. In Central Asia and elsewhere, America found new friends in hour of need. It can be said that the Sept. 11 have awakened many Americans to the interdependence to the even -smaller world, to their vulnerability especially in energy. The growing American stake in Central Asia is one response to that. It can be said that the American war against terrorism has also become a battle to control the energy resources of the Central Asian Region. Since Central Asian region can offer the United States a rare opportunity to diversify world oil supply, it could be one of the most important areas of US foreign policy. However, in Washington D.C., and especially in the US congress, foreign policy tends to be an elitist sport. Few members of the Congress focus on foreign policy and accepted by the most of the Americans. As a result, few members of the congress view foreign policy and the Caspian region in strategic terms. The Central Asian Region is viewed by the most members of the congress through one or more of the following perspectives- The Azerbaijan- Armenia issue US policy towards Iran US policy towards Russia Partition and domestic politics. Among the four factors mentioned above, the fourth one i.e. that is partition and domestic politics is perhaps the most important. Members of the Congress tend to be overly responsive to their domestic constituents and some even support certain ethnic groups as a way to raise campaign contribution. This leads to a phenomenon termed ethnic politics. Critics argued that ethnic politics have driven US policy towards both Azerbaijan and Iran (Congressional Hearing: 2001). In order to understand the attitude of Congress towards the Central Asian Region in the aftermath of Sept. 11 attack on World Trade Centre (WTC) and Pentagon, the congress role towards Azerbaijan-America issue, Iran, and Russia requires a brief consideration. The Azerbaijan-Armenia issue On the Azerbaijan Armenia issue, congress tends to favour Armenia and uses foreign aid legislation as a means of exerting pressure on Armenias neighbors particularly Azerbaijan and Turkey. The most obvious example of this is the section 907 at the Freedom Support Act which prohibits US government aid to the government of Azerbaijan. Concern over the plight of Azeri refugee and the increasing importance of United States investment in the Azeri oil sectors; have led Congress to adjust section 907 incrementally each year since it took effect in January 1993. Nevertheless, Congressional attitude towards the region began to change significantly in 1997. The changes occurred for several reasons: The presidential elections in Armenia appeared to be less than free and fare this damaged Armenias image on Capitol Hill and embarrassed lawmaker who had clouted Armenia as the democratic ideal for the region. Some members of the congress thought the Armenia lobby had gone too far and was out of step with the realities on ground. The Armenian lobby was pushing for what some members of Congress thought was excessive legislation. As the deadline for a decision on the main export pipeline route approaches Congressional interest has continued to rise. There was the increased number of Congressional delegation traveling in the region. At least five delegations visited the region in 1997 including one led by senator McConnell. However, since his trip he has taken a more balanced approach to the region. This is noteworthy because McConnell is the chairman of the Senate appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations, the subcommittee which has jurisdiction over section 907. The House of Representatives, however, continued to reject attempt to weaken section 907. Congress tends to be an incremental body and the facts demonstrate that there is momentum towards making further revisions in section 907. As a result of this increasing momentum it is believed that the US Senate is now positioned to make substantial changes in 907. Senate headway will be critical because progress will have to be made in a House-Senate c onference committee and the House of Representatives continues to be solidly on the side of Armenia and is likely to support a significant softening or repeal of S.907. A major problem especially in the House is that section 907 is not on the radar screen for most Representatives since 907 is usually inserted into the foreign operations appropriations legislation at the subcommittee level, only 13 House member-less than 3% have an opportunity to vote up or down on 907 each year (Congressional Hearing:1997). Congressional attitude towards Iran: Iran is the most stable country politically and economically bordering the Caspian, and offers the most attractive pipeline routes: it is important to understand congressional attitude towards that country. Congress is opposed to Iran and has limited the Clintons administrations flexibility in dealing with it. In this respect, Congress has played a significant role. In the opinion of Congress no country undermines American interest more than Iran. Since the Iranian revolution the United States has sought to isolate Iran diplomatically and politically and more recently economically. Congress has passed the Iran-Libya Sanction Act (ILSA). This act was passed without a single member of congress voting against the sanctions. Congress has rarely adopted any controversial piece of legislation unanimously which have a wide range of implications. This law is causing problem for the companies trying to move Caspian oil to market. US companies are prohibited from partnering with Iranian firms in the Caspian (CRS Report: 2003). US Policy towards Russia Another regional issue clouding Congress view of the region is US policy towards Russia. Congress is skeptical of Russia, and its relations with Iran. For many members of Congress opposing the Soviet Union was a major pillar in their political philosophy during 1980s. Today there are still resident effects of this cold war attitude especially Republican party. In 1997 dozens of bills were introduced seeking to impose sanctions on Russia. Congress has consistently opposed Russian efforts of nuclear cooperation with Iran. Congress views the possible pipeline alternative through Russia, southern route through Iran, eastern route through Afghanistan and western rout through Georgia and Today Congressional view of the pipeline can be summed up in three ways: congress is opposed to pipelines routes through Iran, Congress is skeptical of routes through Russia, and is dubious of routes through Afghanistan. Turkey and Georgia are the only options in view of the Congress. Therefore, it is obvious why Congress has expressed support for pipeline along an east-west axis. This also helps to explain why the US government (Congress and the administration) are increasingly calling the Baku Ceyhan route the preferred route because it belongs NATO, ally, and avoid Iran and Russia. During 1998, Congress continued to advocate isolation of Iran and continue the incremental progress in US relations with Azerbaijan. While formulating energy policy for the United States, Congress is the preeminent force. But congress is a house divided. Its authority is dispersed between the two chambers. It is due to the fact that its members are usually torn by the conflicting claims of local and national interest. In spite of having fragmented opportunity it can be expected for policy innovation. On the brighter side, the United States has important energy interests in Central Asia. With its recent energy resources, Kazakhstan could become one of the largest oil exporters in the world. The United States has a strong interest in this oil getting to the world market at reasonable prices via multiple pipelines (Congressional Hearings: 1998). The 107th Congress supported governments efforts to promote a new pipeline from Kazakhstan to Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey, the gateway to the entire Western oil market. It was also acknowledged that in addition to energy interests, the United States also has a strong interest in working with the existing Central Asia governments on combating drugs and on divesting themselves of their weapons of mass destruction materials ( Congressional Hearings:2001). Finally, domestic security concerns for the Central Asian region particularly about violent political movements also got due consideration. The world gets nearly hal

Canadian business laws and regulations Essay

The Therapeutic Products Directorate (TPD) applies the Food and Drug Regulations and the Medical Devices Regulations under the authority of the Food and Drugs Act to ensure that the pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices that are offered for sale in Canada are safe, effective and are of high quality. The TPD also administers fee regulations for drugs and medical devices under the authority of the Financial Administration Act. All Federal Acts and associated Regulations are available on the Justice Web site. The CMDR or The Canada medical device regulation laws can be downloaded from the following website below. http://laws. justice. gc. ca/en/notice/index. html? redirect=%2Fen%2Ff-27%2Fsor-98-282%2Ftext. html Its important that each law and clause is well read and analyzed before submission of the evidence/test report for the device approval. C: MY ROLE AS AN ENTREPRENEUR: I would be involved in strategic planning and management of the company. My work would preferably be product development and testing working in synchronization with the design and testing team. I would pick my own team and assign duties and responsibilities to each member of the team. PART 3: A: MARKETING: MARKET ANALYSIS: The market for spinal implants in South-east Asia is still nascent. The need would be to convince the people of long term benefits of a spinal implant in comparison to alternative medicines. This would not only alleviate back pain but also would improve the quality of life. Inspite of a nascent market, there is a great potential for growth in the next ten years. Our main aim would be to highlight the benefits of Prime disc especially the less non-invasive surgical procedures and initial payment of surgery by Spinal dynamics for the first 10 patients. We would gradually tie-up with Apollo Group of hospitals, Canada. Apollo Group is boasts of over 8000 beds in more than 41 hospitals, a string of nursing and hospital management colleges and dual lifelines of pharmacies and diagnostic clinics providing a safety net across Canada. It also has team of excellent, high profile neurosurgeons and orthopedic specialists. Spinal dynamics would sponsor seminars, backed by various medical practitioners to instruct future patients and improve its brand value. Our company will aim to capture at least 10% of total spinal implants market by fourth year of operation. The company’s marketing activity will start immediately after start of operations, and will concentrate on the requirements of prospective patients, with the aim of obtaining a sizable contract from a health institution. Public announcements will take place one year from the start of operations and will be heavily publicized in trade journals, brochures and shows. The devices will be exhibited at the annual orthopedic research society’s (ORS) annual meeting. Spinal dynamics will have its own stall, with information about its device etc. By this time, the company would have worked an agreement with another concern for marketing and distribution of its products. Regional offices will be set up at the four major metros of Canada, as this would improve the products sale ability and distribution. Once the product is well accepted a number of sales officers would be employed with a chance of an International center preferably in the U. S. A very detailed and lucid website would be designed with product information in order to furnish the requisite information to the doctors and the patients. CUSTOMER PROFILE Age 20-85 Sex M/F Disease/ symptoms Degenerative disc disease, black disc, chronic low back pain Income $20,000 (USD) Geographical Location Canada, south east Asia.

Making Dreams Reality Trudeau’s Just Society

Making Dreams Reality Trudeau’s Just Society Pierre Elliot Trudeau, Canada’s 15th prime minister, has always dreamed of Canada becoming a united society. This idea was announced and introduced after his candidacy in 1968. He described his idea of a Just Society as one that : one in which all of our people will have the means and the motivation to participate, in which personal and political freedom will be more securely ensured than it has ever been in the past, in which the rights of minorities will be safe from the whims of intolerant majorities, in which those regions and groups which have not fully shared in the country’s affluence will be given a better opportunity. †[1] Trudeau wanted Canada to become a united society that is independent from Britain and the U. S. A[2] The term ‘Just Society was used in 1968 during ‘Trudeaumania’ .The ‘Just Society’ Trudeau dreamed of was also a country that will be bicultural because o f its justice toward society. A society with justice means that every individual will have freedom, but they will also have responsibilities. Justice also gives people rights that must not be abused. In order to assure equality among citizens, people should help protect those in society who are vulnerable to subjection or prejudice. [3] Trudeau was an efficient prime minister who greatly changed Canada and turned it into a ‘Just Society’Trudeau, unlike the previous prime ministers who made minimal attempts to make Canada an independent country from Britain and the U. S, applied many changes that allowed Canada to be independent. To begin, one of Trudeau’s contributions to Canada was in 1976 when Trudeau successfully allowed Canada to be a part of G7, a group of seven major economic powers[4]. This was Canada’s own choice and did not require Britain’s approval in order to join. Moreover, in 1982 Trudeau passed a bill called Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This was a huge step for Canada’s independence.The Canadian Charter allowed Canada to have fundamental freedom, democratic rights, and more which led to the Constitution Act of 1982. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom guaranteed the rights and freedoms to a certain extent, which allowed Canadians to make more of their own decisions while regarding the law. Finally, on November 5, 1982, 114 years after the Confederation, Trudeau and nine other premiers made The Constitution Act which would finally allow Canada’s independence. This meant that Canada was free from British and American legislation. 5] The Constitution Act was signed by Queen Elizabeth II to make it official and it granted Canadians Democratic Rights, Mobility Rights, Legal Rights, Equality Rights, Official Languages of Canada Minority Language, and Educational Rights. [6] Any changes required the approval of the Canadian Parliament and 7 of the 10 provincial legislatures that make up at least 50% of overall population of Canada. [7] In doing this, Canada opened its doors to others ensuring everyone receives an equal chance. In conclusion, Trudeau made various changes that increased Canada’s independence.The Contribution Act of 1982 was merely a part of Trudeau’s dream of a ‘Just Society’, he also wanted Canada to be a bicultural country where everyone was welcomed no matter what their nationality, or background was. First, due to the fact that Trudeau was both a French and English, he wanted Canada to become a bilingual country. [8] Soon he enforced bill 22 which was a part of the Constitution Act and was under the name of the Official Languages of Canada and Minority Language Educational Rights. [9] This made Canada a more united country.Also, before the bill was passed most of Canada’s citizens were divided into two groups. One half of the country was the French Canadians, while the other half were the English Canadians. Trud eau wanted to live in a country in which French Canadians chose to live among English Canadians and English Canadians chose to live among French Canadians without abandoning their cultural heritage. The bills which Trudeau created made French and English the official languages of Canada. In Bill 22 it was made sure that French is the official language of Quebec and ensured that newcomers will become a part of the French-speaking community.In addition, during the Constitution Conference one of the decisions made was that French-speaking Canadians outside of Quebec were expected to be treated equally to English-speaking Canadians. [10] Trudeau welcomed all and introduced the immigration act in 1976. The act gave more power to the provinces to set their own immigration laws. Soon Canada’s population grew because of this because immigrants felt safe and welcomed. In doing this Canada is open to others and is able to communicate more with other countries.This allowed Canadaâ€℠¢s economy to grow and be more successful. In conclusion, Trudeau also promoted equality within the Canada. To further ensure equality within the country, Trudeau wanted to apply political equalities. Firstly, Trudeau was neither a dictator nor a fascist leader. The â€Å"Just Society† Trudeau dreamed of allowed everyone to have freedoms that he was not intending to ever take away. Trudeau did not want to cause any problems due to extreme control such as the Holocaust of 1941-1945. Also, Trudeau wanted Canada to be a democratic country.He wanted everyone to have an equal opportunity and believed that the growing gap between the rich and poor between his home and Third World countries should be reduced. When Trudeau was the justice minister he introduced legislation that expanded grounds for divorce and abortions and stopped penalties for homosexual acts between two people. When Trudeau was still the justice minister of Canada, he stated, â€Å"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation. †[11] Lastly, Trudeau often referred to the Constitution Act in order to lead his nation because it allowed Democratic Rights, Mobility Rights, and Legal Rights.The Democratic Rights allowed every Canadian citizen to vote, Mobility Rights allowed every citizen the right to leave, enter or remain in Canada, and Legal Rights allowed the right to life, liberty and security of a person. In doing this, Trudeau made every Canadian feel like any other person. In conclusion, Trudeau gave Canadians many opportunities to be equal as a nation. In end, the â€Å"Just Society† Trudeau dreamed of, was achieved through many methods and he managed to do many amazing things and turn the ‘Just Society’ into a reality.He transformed Canada into a new country, a new nation completely independent from the British and Americans. Trudeau Created equality for Canada nationally and internationally. If Trudeau did not step up at the time Canada would n ot be where it is now and all of us should be very thankful for it. Bibliography * WORDS: WOE & WONDER http://www. cbc. ca/news/indepth/words/misquotes. html * Statement on the introduction of the Official Languages Bill, October 17, 1968 http://www. collectionscanada. gc. ca/primeministers/h4-4066-e. html * Pierre Trudeau http://www. canadahistory. com/sections/politics/pm/pierretrudeau. tm * Constitution Act 1982 http://laws. justice. gc. ca/en/const/9. html#anchorsc:7 * The Constitution Act 1982 – Trudeau's greatest victory http://www. sharenews. com/features/2010/06/16/constitution-act-1982-trudeaus-greatest-victory * Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Philosopher and Prime Minister http://archives. cbc. ca/politics/prime_ministers/topics/2192/ * Official Statement by the Prime Minister, â€Å"The Just Society†, June 10, 1968 http://archives. cbc. ca/politics/prime_ministers/clips/13269/ Towards a Just Society A Literacy and Human Rights Educational Resource Reader, 81-82 * h ttp://peacefulschoolsinternational. rg/smf/index. php? action=dlattach;topic=363. 0;attach=182 * Pierre Elliot Trudeau http://www. suite101. com/content/pierre-elliott-trudeau-a141463 * John English, Citizen Of The World : The Life Of Pierre Elliot Trudeau Volume One: 1919 – 1968 (Vintage Canada Edition, 2007) * John English, Just Watch Me : The Life Of Pierre Elliot Trudeau 1968-2000 (Alfred A. Knopf Canada) ———————– [1] Official Statement by the Prime Minister, â€Å"The Just Society†, June 10, 1968 http://archives. cbc. ca/politics/prime_ministers/clips/13269/ (accessed December 8, 2010) [2] ibid 3] Towards a Just Society A Literacy and Human Rights Educational Resource Reader, 81-82http://peacefulschoolsinternational. org/smf/index. php? action=dlattach;topic=363. 0;attach=182(accessed December 8, 2010) [4] Pierre Elliot Trudeau http://www. suite101. com/content/pierre-elliott-trudeau-a141463 (accessed Decembe r 8, 2010) [5] Pierre Trudeau http://www. canadahistory. com/sections/politics/pm/pierretrudeau. htm (accessed December 8 2010) [6] Constitution Act 1982 http://laws. justice. gc. ca/en/const/9. html#anchorsc:7 (accessed December 8 2010) [7] The Constitution Act 1982 – Trudeau's greatest victory

8 errores que como turista debes evitar en USA

Millones de extranjeros viajan a Estados Unidos cada aà ±o como turistas. Para evitar problemas migratorios muy serios estos son 8 errores que se deben evitar. 8 errores migratorios que no debes hacer como turista Primero   Mentir en un formulario de inmigracià ³n o a un oficial consular (cà ³nsules). Se puede viajar a Estados Unidos como turista con una visa B2 (tambià ©n conocida como de placer o paseo).   Tambià ©n se puede ingresar con la là ¡ser o tarjeta de cruce si se vive a lo largo de la frontera mexicano-estadounidense e, incluso, sin visado si se tiene pasaporte de uno de los paà ­ses incluidos en el Programa de Exencià ³n de Visas. En este à ºltimo caso, si se llega a Estados Unidos por avià ³n, se necesita llenar un formulario por internet que se conoce como ESTA. Sea cual fuera la forma de ingreso como turista es muy importante no mentir en ningà ºn formulario ni en la entrevista consular ya que las consecuencias, si lo agarran a uno, son muy graves.   Segundo Creer que tener visa vigente o ESTA garantiza el ingreso a Estados Unidos. El oficial migratorio en puertos, aeropuertos y puestos fronterizos terrestres tiene la à ºltima palabra y puede decidir que un extranjero no entra. La informacià ³n que tienen las computadoras de aduanas es muy completa y por eso son ellos los que deciden. Si se produce una expulsià ³n inmediata, hay que conocer las consecuencias. Tercero Tratar de ingresar artà ­culos prohibidos. Especial mencià ³n merecen los alimentos y las medicinas. No traer remedios que no existen en Estados Unidos ni tampoco cantidades grandes de los que existen o medicacià ³n sin receta mà ©dica. Por ejemplo, no se puede traer antibià ³ticos mà ¡s allà ¡ que la cantidad necesaria para la enfermedad que se tiene en ese momento. Estas conductas pueden traer consecuencias muy graves, desde que en el aduana quiten el producto a multa, expulsià ³n inmediata y cancelacià ³n de la visa.   Cuarto   Viajar sin seguro mà ©dico. La medicina en Estados Unidos es, posiblemente, la mejor del mundo. Y tambià ©n la mà ¡s cara. Para evitar sustos comprar seguro mà ©dico antes de viajar. Si se necesita ir a un mà ©dico y no se tiene seguro o no lo cubre todo, intentar una clà ­nica comunitaria, por cuestià ³n de precio, o consultar costos para el mismo procedimiento en diversos hospitales. Puede haber una diferencia de miles de dà ³lares en operaciones sencillas. Conservar siempre la factura y si se tiene un bebà © con visa de turista, tener muy presentes las posibles consecuencias negativas. Quinto   No pagar las multas de trà ¡fico (trà ¡nsito). Esta es una manera tonta de buscarse problemas ya que la informacià ³n en las computadoras de los oficiales migratorios es cada vez mà ¡s completa. Sexto Quedarse mà ¡s tiempo del permitido. Jamà ¡s es una buena idea ya que puede dar lugar a la cancelacià ³n automà ¡tica de la visa (y si se ingresà ³ sin visa, a perder ese derecho para el futuro). Ademà ¡s, si la estancia se alarga mà ¡s de seis meses despuà ©s del plazo autorizado entra en aplicacià ³n el castigo de los tres y de los diez aà ±os una vez que se sale de Estados Unidos. Es cierto que en muchos casos se puede solicitar  un perdà ³n migratorio cuando no se puede ingresar  a Estados Unidos. Pero es difà ­cil obtenerlo. Sà ©ptimo Utilizar la visa de turista con otro fin, como por ejemplo estudiar a tiempo completo o trabajar. Incluso acciones como casarse deben realizarse con cuidado, ya que pueden tener consecuencias negativas. Octavo Ingresar con demasiada frecuencia. Se puede viajar a Estados Unidos como turista tantas veces como se quiera. Pero las entradas y salidas continuadas pueden resultar sospechosas y, en ese caso, el oficial de inmigracià ³n puede impedir el ingreso. A tener en cuenta Para obtener una visa de turista, renovarla y asegurarse el ingreso a Estados Unidos en el control de paso migratorio es necesario ser, en todo momento, elegible para la visa y admisible al paà ­s. Si no es asà ­, la visa puede negarse, cancelarse o no renovarse. Tambià ©n es posible que el oficial de inmigracià ³n en la aduana impida el paso y ordene el regreso inmediato al paà ­s de origen. Estas son causas que convierten a una persona en inelegible para la visa y estas lo convierten en inadmisible para ingresar a USA. Aprende jugando Se recomienda tomar este quiz o test de respuestas mà ºltiples sobre viajar como turista a Estados Unidos ya que puede servir para evitar errores tontos en el futuro y que pueden costar muy caro. Este es un artà ­culo informativo. No es asesorà ­a legal.