background preloader

Anglais

Facebook Twitter

The Families Funding the 2016 Presidential Election. By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, SARAH COHEN and KAREN YOURISH They are overwhelmingly white, rich, older and male, in a nation that is being remade by the young, by women, and by black and brown voters. Across a sprawling country, they reside in an archipelago of wealth, exclusive neighborhoods dotting a handful of cities and towns. And in an economy that has minted billionaires in a dizzying array of industries, most made their fortunes in just two: finance and energy. Now they are deploying their vast wealth in the political arena, providing almost half of all the seed money raised to support Democratic and Republican presidential candidates.

Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, a New York Times investigation found. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

L'arrêt Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, rendu par la Cour suprême des États-Unis le est un arrêt historique[1], [2] qui permet la participation financière des entreprises aux campagnes politiques. L'arrêt[modifier | modifier le code] La Cour Suprême enterra une des dispositions de la loi McCain-Feingold[4] sur le financement des campagnes électorales (2002) qui prévoyait que toute organisation ayant le statut de corporation, qu'elle soit à but lucratif ou non, ne pouvait participer à la diffusion télévisée de messages faisant mention d'un candidat dans les soixante jours précédant une élection générale et les trente jours précédant une élection primaire. Avec Citizens United v. Etats-Unis : comment seulement 158 familles financent la majorité de l’élection présidentielle.

Elles sont quelques dizaines, ont fait fortune dans l’énergie ou la finance, sont inconnues du grand public et ont versé plus de la moitié des fonds levés jusqu’ici par les candidats à l’élection présidentielle : le New York Times a enquêté sur ces familles « à part », dont le portefeuille pèse sur la vie politique américaine.

Etats-Unis : comment seulement 158 familles financent la majorité de l’élection présidentielle

Selon le décompte du quotidien américain, 158 familles ont donné 176 millions de dollars, soit près de la moitié des fonds levés jusqu’ici par les candidats : une concentration inédite depuis les années 1970. Ces familles sont évidemment loin d’être représentatives du foyer américain moyen et tirent majoritairement leur fortune de la finance, du secteur de l’énergie ou du divertissement.

Elles forment ce que le Times décrit comme « une classe à part, loin de la plupart des Américains tout en étant géographiquement, socialement et économiquement proches les unes des autres ». Lire aussi : Etats-Unis : les outsiders dominent la course à l’investiture républicaine. Supreme Court Backs White House on Jerusalem Passport Dispute.

Photo WASHINGTON — In an important separation-of-powers decision, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Congress may not require the State Department to indicate in passports that Jerusalem is part of Israel.

Supreme Court Backs White House on Jerusalem Passport Dispute

The vote was 6 to 3, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissenting. Justice Anthony M. In dissent, Chief Justice Roberts said the majority had taken a bold step. The case concerned a 2002 law that instructed the State Department to “record the place of birth as Israel” in the passports of American children born in Jerusalem if their parents asked. President George W. The Obama administration also objects to the provision and has refused to follow it.

The case, Zivotofsky v. Explicit cookie consent. Explicit cookie consent. FOR decades rich countries have sought to foster global development with aid.

Explicit cookie consent

But all too often there is little to show for their spending, now over $135 billion a year and rising. Success depends on political will in recipient countries, says Erik Solheim of the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD, a club of mostly rich countries that includes the biggest donors. And that may well be lacking. What donors will pay for may not be what recipients deem a priority. So poor countries’ governments say what they must to get cash, and often fail to keep their side of the deal.

Now donors are trying a new approach: handing over aid only if outcomes improve. At the moment, donors fearful of theft or waste usually write detailed plans for how their money is to be spent and insist that they are followed to the letter. Obama to Limit Military-Style Equipment for Police Forces.

Civilisations anglophones (UK, US etc.)

UAE´s population - by nationality. The ratio between expatriates and nationals in UAE is one of the highest in the world, with Emiratis accounting for about only 11% of the population in the country.

UAE´s population - by nationality

Similarly to its neighbors in the GCC, UAE is relying heavily on foreign labor to keep its projects and economy running. Alongside Qatar, the country has the highest percentage of immigrants in relation to its own citizens, with the later amounting to about only 10% of the total population. It is important to note that the UAE National Bureau of Statistics does not publish demographic data broken down by nationality. Hence all the figures listed in the table below are estimates, however they are provided by the countries on the list – more specifically their respective Embassies in UAE.