State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)

State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Ghada Alem Article Assessment State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP): Eligibility Expansion Impact I. BACKGROUND During an introductory course about health policy, namely Fundamentals for Health Policy, health insurance coverage in the U.S. was among the subjects presented. Under the public sector, there are two large insurance programs that are funded by the federal government: 1) Medicare, and 2) Medicaid. Fundamental aspects of the Medicaid program were discussed along with The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) expansion of the program’s eligibility. Moreover, CHIP or State Children’s Health Insurance Program was introduced. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to further detail the CHIP program and to explore the impact of expanding its eligibility. CHIP was created in 1997 when Congress acted to provide low-income children with health insurance. Prior to CHIP, a coverage gap occurred for this group of children in their states whose family income is above the eligibility level for Medicaid program. Initially, the program had a ten years block grant of $40 billion. Upon its expiry in 2007, Congress made an attempt to extend the program through passing of two versions of CHIP Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA). However, the U.S. then president GW Bush vetoed both versions and signed a temporary extension instead. When president Barack Obama took office back in 2009, Congress made its second attempt toward extending the program and the president signed it into law to be his first acts assuming his office. The Reauthorization Act of CHIP (CHIPRA) granted $33 billion in federal funds for children’s coverage and an extension until 2019. However, the funding was effective only through fiscal year 2015. [1] CHIPRA gave states additional resources and options to help reduce the uninsured children rate [2]. Such options include expanding the CHIP program eligibility to new populations, encouraging families to signup for coverage through simplifying enrollment and renewal procedures for Medicaid and CHIP program, and funding outreach grants to help enroll eligible children [2]. Although these policy changes would have potential and hence, invoke more studies examining their impact, few efforts have actually examined the implication of the new policy changes [2]. In this paper, two articles that have actually addressed the impact of CHIP eligibility expansion are covered in the following sections. II. FIRST ARTICLE ASSESSMENT In the first article titled â€Å"Coverage For Low-Income Immigrant Children Increased 24.5 Percent In States That Expanded CHIPRA Eligibility†, Saloner et al., stated the absence of any previous studies examining the effect of CHIPRA for immigrant children. Thus, authors compared changes post CHIPRA passage in terms of coverage and access. The said comparison was aimed at immigrant children who reside in states that expanded eligibility to them against the states that did not expand their eligibility. [3] Goals and Methods This article indicates that CHIPRA policy did not eliminate some barriers that could be a cause for missing health insurance coverage in immigrant children (e.g., language and cultural barriers). However, states were provided with federally funded health insurance as a new option by the policy toward expanding eligibility to immigrant children. Accordingly, authors hypothesized that a coverage and access increase would occur among immigrant children as a result of the policy. The study design was cross-sectional by using the National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH). The main data sources were the 2003, 2007, and 2011–12 rounds of the National Survey of Children’s Health. Sample selection was based on CHIP eligibility income threshold that would most likely extract eligible children population in the previous year. Two groups were compared against a children and parent in the same income category who are US-born: 1) children and parents who are foreign-born, an d 2) children who are US-born with foreign-born parents. During the study period, children in the comparison group (i.e., US-born child and parents) had higher healthcare coverage and access. Three outcomes related to health insurance coverage had been examined: 1) coverage status at the time of the survey, 2) coverage type (i.e., private plan or public), and 3) coverage gap during past year. Sample characteristics of all children living in states that implemented (or did not) the policy were compared using descriptive analysis. In order to ensure that the policy was the source of differences affecting immigrant children in states, authors controlled for state-level trends of children and parents who are US-born. Isolation between independent outcomes changes and confounding ones occurring during the same time period were possible through difference-in-difference-in-difference method (quasi-experimental). [3] Findings and Conclusions Insurance coverage increase among immigrant children in states that expanded the eligibility was 24.5 percent compared to the same group in states that did not expand the eligibility. This increase was contributed to the public insurance high enrollment. Moreover, decrease of unmet healthcare needs and disparities (among immigrant children and nonimmigrant families) were evident in states that adopted the eligibility expansion. Finally, healthcare coverage and access gaps between immigrant and nonimmigrant children was reduced due to CHIPRA eligibility expansion. [3] Article Assessment Policy Implications This research effort is a contribution highlights the importance of healthcare insurance coverage and access for immigrant children. Usually, immigrant children (foreign-born or US-born with foreign-born parents) have poor preventive care compared to nonimmigrant children. This poor status at the children earlier stages in life would have consequences through adulthood. Additional research effort should examine the remaining financial and cultural care barriers. Moreover, variation in the new policy implementation among states and other groups should be investigated. Finally, a significant factor that needs to be examined is sustainability; the explored healthcare coverage and access improvement in this study was applicable to the two years following CHIPRA and hence, further studies are required to check for any further improvements after those two years. [3] II. SECOND ARTICLE ASSESSMENT In the second article titled â€Å"The Impact Of Recent CHIP Eligibility Expansions On Children’s Insurance Coverage, 2008–12†, Goldstein et al., stated the absence of any in-depth analysis about the impact CHIP expansions to higher-income children on insurance coverage. Hence, they intended to estimate the impact of CHIP eligibility expansion on changes in un-insurance, public insurance, and private insurance. [2] Goals and Methods The data source for this study was from the 2008-2012 American Community Survey (ACS). A difference-indifferences framework study design was used in this study. Authors have analyzed two groups of children: 1) newly eligible children for CHIP (i.e., the treatment group), and 2) similar children who were not eligible for CHIP (i.e., comparison group). The treatment group consisted of all children who were made newly eligible for CHIP by their state’s expansion. Sensitivity analysis was used with different comparison groups to test the consistency of results since difference-indifferences estimates can vary depending on the composition of the comparison group. Authors first analyzed unadjusted changes in the three types of insurance coverage (public, private, and uninsured) by calculating the raw change in each type for the treatment and comparison groups between 2008 and 2012. They then calculated difference-in-differences estimates for each type of insurance coverage. Next, th ey estimated the relative change in the un-insurance rate attributable to the expansions. Finally, they assessed the degree of crowd-out (i.e., the share of gains in public coverage from the expansions that was a result of decreases in private coverage). All estimates were weighted using survey weights that reflected the complex survey design of the ACS. [2] Findings and Conclusions A decrease of 1.1 percentage point in the newly eligible uninsured group was estimated in this study due to the expansion (15% cut in un-insurance rate). An increase of 2.9 percentage points in public coverage was evident with variations in states adoption. Since higher-income children might not have access to affordable coverage, the study findings suggest providing coverage to them through CHIP toward lowering their risk of being uninsured. The study concluded that a significant reductions in un-insurance among newly eligible children was produced by the recent CHIP expansions. [2] Article Assessment Policy Implications Analytical approach includes a couple of limitations. First, authors included the year of the expansion’s passage in their pre-expansion period, which could be a source of bias to their change estimates downward. Second, measurement error could arise from their use of the ACS (ACS does not provide state-specific program names for CHIP or include a verification question for un-insurance, and it may overestimate no group coverage) [2]. Third, it is unknown whether the changes reported in the results of this study could be generalized to the remaining thirty-five states in the case these states chose to expand CHIP eligibility [2]. A policy implication could be realized if CHIP funding is not extended. Authors indicated that in the case of no extension, families with children enrolled in the program could turn instead to a health insurance Marketplace to purchase subsidized coverage. However, many of these families would not be eligible for such subsidized coverage. This is due to the fact that ACA definition for affordability is based on the cost of premiums for employee-only coverage that ignores the cost to the family of covering dependents. For instance, dependent family members for a worker would not be able to receive Marketplace subsidies, even if the cost for full family coverage were unaffordable, since the worker were offered affordable employee-only coverage. Accordingly, some children would end up without either CHIP coverage or access to affordable private insurance. Thus, many children in this study could also lose coverage in the case of not addressing barriers to employer-sponsored family covera ge and Marketplace subsidies. [2] CONCLUSION Generally, CHIP expansion has a positive impact on children insurance coverage. While the first study addressed benefits to immigrant children from the expansion, the second one addressed the reduction of uninsured children through the expansion. Expansion was supported as it would result in maintaining a good health and reducing disparities among this immigrant population [3], and would decrease the risk for having uninsured children [2]. REFERENCES [1] Teitelbaum JB. Essentials of Health Policy and Law. Jones Bartlett Learning; 2012. [2] Goldstein IM, Kostova D, Foltz JL, Kenney GM. The impact of recent CHIP eligibility expansions on childrens insurance coverage, 2008-12. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(10):1861-7. [3] Saloner B, Koyawala N, Kenney GM. Coverage for low-income immigrant children increased 24.5 percent in states that expanded CHIPRA eligibility. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(5):832-9. 1 | Page

Quaker up ad

There are eight grams of whole grains are chocolaty, pretzels-caramels mash-up the whole family craves. Its how we're fighting the human energy crisis one bar at a time (Quaker). The ad insinuates that any family that is in a rush should buy their product. It is a good healthy snack for families on the go. The ad is a good target for families that are in a rush all the time. They can Just eat a Quaker bar on their way to work. School, taking your kids somewhere, or really anywhere. It also targets young people that aren't always home o eat all the time, even people trying to eat healthy.The #Quaker is a hash tag and It targets people that keep up with social media. It shows people that Quaker Is also up to date on their social media. Everyone that puts that on their social media the hash tag #Quaker will show on their page or wall and Its pretty much free advertisement for Quaker products. The product is something fast and easy. The ad tries to persuade people by the saying MM MM and families GO GO GO. Its a fast and easy treat that the whole family will love. The ad tells us how many grams here are in a bar. It explains what the Quaker bar will Bates 2 taste like.A chocolate, caramel, and pretzel mash up. The Quaker up theme also helps the ad sell this product. Its a good saying. Pretty much saying wake up and Quaker up, by having a Quaker bar. Which also lets you know its something fast and easy for breakfast. One thing that doesn't seam to fit the ad is when it says, â€Å"It's how we're fighting the human energy crisis one bar at a time. † That means, the Quaker bar saves peoples energy and time you would have to make a meal. Also, here won't be a crawls or a hassle by trying to make something In a short period of time.This ad suggests that Quaker big chewy bars are good and helps families on the go. It repeats GO GO GO and MM MM MM. It stresses that so people will know how good Quaker bars really are. Also, it lets people know how fast and easy the bars are on the go. This ad is successful because it shows the Quaker big chewy floating in the air by a parachute, on a perfect blue sky day. The ad make life look so simple and easy. Of course, the Quaker up theme is a personal identity which intensifies all the Quaker ads.It simply says wake up world, you would have a Quaker bar and everything will be okay. Its the best saying for Quaker products. Anyone that is hungry and Is on the go go go. Go grab a snack that's fast and easy. The Quaker bar ad shows the box in the air, which also goes good with the Quaker up thyme. The Quaker bars are up up and away. This ad could easily persuade anyone. The small bar that you can take with you anywhere, and tastes great Is the Bates 3 Work Cited Quaker. Advertisement. Redbook July. 2014: Print.

Arbitration in India - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 9 Words: 2784 Downloads: 3 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Analytical essay Tags: India Essay Did you like this example? The rapid increase in trade, commerce and investment along with growing demand of asserting legal claims has led to streamlining of dispute resolution system in developing countries throughout the world. Litigation in many developing countries are confronted with numerous defects which have resulted in the evolution of the concept of alternative dispute resolution mechanism. With the march of time, the alternative forum of dispute resolution has gained importance and prominence in the world by empowering the ordinary litigants with promptness, affordability, impartial decision making, reasonable solutions and efficiency. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Arbitration in India" essay for you Create order Arbitration is one of such being one such speedy and efficacious system of alternative dispute resolution for doing appropriate justice to the parties who are in need of the same[1]. In developing countries due to high population, the litigative nature of the individual and backwardness of technology and infrastructure has made judiciary collapse under the pressure of large number of cases pending for disposal. The high cost, un-necessary delays, lack of brevity and privacy in the process of litigation have compelled nations and individualà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s to search for alternative dispute resolution mechanism[2]. One of the solutions for the increase clogging of the judiciary is to develop alternative dispute resolution mechanism which can be done through the development of Arbitration which is known as private litigation. So Arbitration may be defined à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“ A reference of a dispute or difference between not less than two parties for determination after hearing both sides in a judicial manner by a persons or person other than court of competent jurisdictionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ [3]. The principle of Arbitration includes a fair resolution of disputes by an impartial body without unnecessary delay or expense and without interference by the courts. Therefore, arbitration which was similar to litigation in the private sector seemed conducive to provide a support system to the overburdened and inefficient system of adjudication. India is not new to Arbitration process. Start of Arbitration process is lost in the mist of time with no record indicating how Arbitration process started in India. Nevertheless, the law and practice of private and transactional commercial dispute without the court intervention can found in the haze of Indian history. The Arbitration model in India is mainly based around the role of panchayat at grass root level. The panchayat were known since time immemorial that made introduction to Arbitration and acceptance much easier. The panchayat were group of five elderly people who would guide the villagers to settle their dispute. In some cases, the panch more resembled a judicial court; they could intervene on the complaint of one party and not necessarily on the agreement of both, for example in the case of caste matter. However, in most cases, the arbitral award was made by an agreement between the parties[4]. In the absence of serious flaws or misconduct, by and large, the courts have given recognition to the awards of the panchayat. For instance, Sitanna v Viranna, the Privy Council affirmed an award of the panchayat in a family dispute challenged after 42 years. These arbitral bodies dealt with a variety of disputes, such as disputes of contractual, matrimonial and even of a criminal nature. The Raja was the ultimate arbitrator of all disputes. However, with change in socio-economic conditions of the people with the changing times, the role of such conventional arbitral bodies appeared to be inadequate and out-dated[5]. During Muslim rule, all Muslims were governed by the Islamic laws- The Sharia is contained in Hedaya. The non- Muslims continued to be governed by their own personal law which has been compendiously collected as Hindu law. However, for transactions between Muslims and Non-Muslims a hybrid system of arbitration law developed. The Hedaya contains the provisions for Arbitration between parties. The practice of recourse to arbitration which evolved up to the end of Mughal Empire, continued even during the British period in different parts of the country. Under the British rule the East India Company did not change the law relating to arbitration prevalent in the country at the time, they came into power. But between the years 1772 and 1827 the government enacted legislation to enact law relating to arbitration by making regulations in three Presidency towns- Calcutta[6], Bombay[7] and Madras[8], in exercise of the powers given to them by British parliament. Thes e regulation lacked clarity and detail. The law governing arbitration in a formal sense was first introduced by the British with the creation of the Bengal Regulations in 1772. Bengal Regulation 1772 and 1781 made a provision that parties can refer the dispute to the arbitrator and such arbitrator must be appointed by mutual agreement between the parties and the award of the arbitrator shall amount to decree of a civil court. Madras Regulation IV of 1816 formulated a scheme for working the panchayat system in villages and to encourage village people to solve their problems. Bombay Regulation VII of 1827 made a special provision for arbitration. It provided for arbitration through their intervention of the court with one rider that suit must not be pending. In the year 1859 the Act VII of 1859 was passed and it codified the procedure of civil court. Provision of chapter VI was incorporated in the Act[9]. Prior to 1899 there was no particular law dealing with the arbitration in India. In the year 1899, the British enacted the Indian Arbitration Act 1899 which was modelled upon the British Arbitration Act of 1899. Though this was the first substantive piece on legislation on arbitration, in India, its provision just affirmed to presidency town Bombay, Calcutta and madras In the year 1908 Civil Procedure Code was enacted and it repealed the earlier code of 1859. Section 89 and Second Schedule of the code contained detailed provisions of arbitration in respect of the subject matter of the suit through arbitration without court intervention[10]. The working of Arbitration Act 1899 presented complex and cumbersome problems, ad judicial opinion started voicing its displeasure and dissatisfaction with the prevailing state of the arbitration law. The judicial reprimand as well as clamour of the commercial community led to the enactment of a consolidating and amending legislation. The Arbitration Act 1940 (Act No 10 of 1940), which consolidated and amended as law relating to arbitration as contained in the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 and the second schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It was to a great extent based on the English Arbitration Act of 1934 and came into force on 1st July, 1940. It extends to whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir. This Act dealt with broadly three kinds of arbitration: (i) arbitration without intervention of a court, (ii) arbitration with intervention of court where no suit is pending before court, and (iii) arbitration in suits. It applied to all arbitrations, including statutory arbitrations as per the Arbitration Act 1940[11]. The Arbitration Act, 1940 which was only applicable to domestic arbitration, required intervention of the court in all the three stages of arbitration, such as, prior to the reference of the dispute to the arbitral tribunal, during the continuance of the proceedings before the arbitral tribunal, and after the award was passed by the arbitral tribunal, for ensurin g due compliance with the provisions of Arbitration Act, 1940. While the 1940 Act was thought to be a decent piece of legislation. But in its actual operation and execution by all the concerned parties, arbitrators, lawyers and the courts it proved to be ineffective and was broadly understood to have become out-dated[12]. Arbitration proceedings under the 1940 Act has degenerated into a legal quagmire which left the parties, irrespective of whether they win or lose, impoverished in terms of time and money. The Supreme Court itself lamented over the state of affairs in 1981 by observing: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“However, the way in which the proceeding under the Act are conducted and without exception challenged in the courts has made lawyers laugh philosopher weep. Experience shows and law reports bear ample testimony that the proceeding under the act have become technical accompanied by unending prolixity at every stage providing a legal trap to the unwaryà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ [13]. Th e globalisation of trade and commerce and the necessity for effective implementation of economic reforms necessitated re-drafting of the Indian Arbitration Act of 1940 with a view to ensuring smooth and prompt settlement of domestic as well as international commercial disputes. The law commission of India, in its 76th report in November, 1978 had already recommended for updating the Arbitration Act of 1940 to meet the challenges of a modern developing country like India. Besides, several other representative bodies of trade and commerce including legal experts had also given valuable proposals for significant changes in the body of existing arbitration law of India which were beset with several deficiencies and lacunas. As a result of these demands, the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 1996 was promulgated through ordinance by the President of India and as the parliament could not pass the said Bill within the stipulated time, the ordinance had to be promulgated twice until it was passed and it got final assent of the President of India on 16th August, 1996. The Act came to be known as the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 and was effective from 25th January, 1996[14]. THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996:- Before the enactment of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the law on arbitration in India was substantially contained in three enactments, namely the Arbitration Act, 1940, the Arbitration (protocol and convention) Act, 1937 and the Foreign Awards Act 1961. In the statement of objects and reasons appended to the Bill it was stated that the Arbitration Act, 1940 which contained the general law on Arbitration, had become out-dated. The said objects and reasonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s stated that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) adopted in 1985 Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. The General Assembly recommended that all the countries should give due consideration to the said Model Law w hich along with the rules, was stated to have harmonized concepts on Arbitration and Conciliation of different legal systems of the world and contained provisionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s which had universal applicationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s. The above statement of objects and reasons also states that though the said UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules are intended to deal with international commercial arbitration and conciliation they could with appropriate modifications serve as a Model Law for enactments relating to domestic arbitration and conciliation. The present bill seeks to consolidate and amend the law relating to domestic arbitration, international commercial arbitration, enforcement of foreign awards and to define law relating to conciliation, taking into account the said UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules[15]. Salient Features of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996[16]: A Comprehensive Statute- The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which is mainly based on the UNCITRAL Model Law relating to international commercial arbitrations is a comprehensive statue relating to arbitration law in India, since it covers all the relevant provisions relating to domestic, international and interstate arbitrationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s as per the said UNITRAL Model Law. The act also recognises Conciliation as a means of settlement of commercial disputes along with Arbitration. The act is more comprehensive that the Arbitration Act, 1940 because the Arbitration Act, 1996 contains provisions relating to both domestic and international Arbitration, while the Arbitration Act, 1940 contains provisions only to domestic arbitrations. An Explanatory Code- The Arbitration Act, 1996 is an explanatory and complete code in itself, as it contains necessary provisions relating to both domestic and international arbitration and also for the first time confers the status of tribunal to the arbitrators, which is a significant over the old Arbitration Act, 1940. Curtailment of the Court Powers- The Act of 1940 allowed the Civil Courts to intervene in the arbitral proceedings matter. As a result of such interference the arbitral tribunal could not function effectively. The Act of 1996 has limited the powers of the court and restricted the exercise of judicial power. As provided under Sec 5 of Act, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Further, Sec 35 of the Act states that subject to this part, the arbitral award will be final and binding upon the parties. Sec 36 provides for enforcement of award without intervention of the court. Procedure for conduct of Arbitration and Awards in detail- Chapter V of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for detailed procedure and practice for conduct of arbitration and rendering of Arbitration awards. PrÃÆ' ©cised power of the court- The Act of 1996 has curtailed the powers of the court by taking assistance only in particular matters. The Courtà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s support could be looked in taking evidence only with prior approval of the arbitration tribunal, as per Section 27(1) of the Act. In matter of jurisdiction as per Section 42 of the 1996 Act states that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“where with respect to an arbitration agreement any application has been presented in a court, that particular court will alone have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedingsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . Power of arbitrators Enhanced- A comparison of the provision of the Arbitration Act, 1996 with that of the Arbitration Act, 1940 goes to indicate that the new Act has increased the powers of arbitrators in respect of jurisdiction of Arbitration Tribunals and also competency of the arbitrators to rule. A new form of Conciliation- Part III of the 1996 Act deals with internationalised conciliation approach and clarifies the application and scope of conciliation for effective resolution of commercial dispute. Section 63 of the Act specifies the number of conciliators to be appointed by the parties to the agreement. International Applicability- The old Arbitration Act of 1940, had no provision for interim awards to be made by a foreign tribunal, but the new Act of 1996, has provision for applicability of Foreign Arbitral Tribunals Awards. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which replaced the old 1940 Act, was passed with a view to provide an efficient and expeditious dispute resolution system, which would instil confidence in the minds of the foreign investors in the reliability and effectiveness of the Indian dispute resolution system, as well as for attracting foreign investments in India. The Arbitration Act, 1996 which has been enacted as per the UNCITRAL Model Law, has even surpassed the scope and limits of the said Model Law in certain respects. First, while the UNICITRAL Model Law only applies to international Commercial arbitrations[17], the Arbitration Act, 1996 applies both to international and domestic arbitrations. Secondly, the 1996 Act goes beyond the UNICITRAL Model Law in the area of minimizing judicial intervention[18]. The changes which were brought by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Indian arbitration system which were prevalent under the 1940 arbitration act, was d one in a very hasty and quick fashion, without recourse to a judicious debate regarding the changes to be brought by the 1996 act as well as without any appropriate understanding of the legislative changes enunciated by the said act[19]. The Law Commission of India in its 176th report submitted to the government of India had given a number of useful recommendations for bringing desired changes in the Arbitration Act, 1996, so as to do away with the deficiencies and lacunas of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which has been experienced during the working of the said Act. In response to the recommendations of the Law Commission, the Government of India introduced the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2003, in Parliament for amending the 1996 Act. The said Bill has not yet matured into legislation, as during the said period the government of India, the Ministry of Law and Justice, appointed a Committee popularly known as the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Justice Saraf Commi ttee on Arbitrationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, to study in depth the implications of the recommendations of the Law Commission of India contained in its 176th Report and the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2003. The Committee submitted its report in January 2005. 1 | Page [1]Namrata Shah, Niyati Gandhi, Arbitration: One Size Does Not Fit All: Necessity of Developing Institutional Arbitration in Developing Countries, 6 J. Intl Com. L. Tech. 4, 232-234 (2011). [2]Id. [3] OP Malhotra Indu Malhotra, THE LAW AND PRACTICES OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION 4, (LexisNexis Butterworthà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s, New Delhi, 2d ed. 2012). [4] Id. [5]AIR 1934 PC 105, 107. [6]Bengal Regulation I of 1772. [7]Bombay Regulations I of 1799, IV and VI of 1827. [8]Madras Regulation I of 1802 and Regulations IV, VI and VII of 1822. [9] Sukumar Ray, ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 12-14 (Eastern Law House, Calcutta, 2012). [10] Id. [11]P.C Rao and William Sheffield, ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 34 (Universal Law Publishing Co.Pvt.Ltd, New Delhi, 2002). [12] Krishna Sarma, MomotaOinam, AngshumanKaushik, Development and Practice of Arbitration in India à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å"Has it Evolved as an Effective Legal Institution, CDDRL WORKING PAPERS 103 , 3 ( 2009). [13]Guru Nanak Foundation v. Rattan Singh Ors, (1981)4 SCC 634. [14] Dr. N. V. Paranjape, LAW RELATING TO ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION IN INDIA 4-5, ( Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 4th ed, 2011). [15] Dr. S. C. Tripathi, ARBITRATION, CONCILIATION AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM 6-7, (Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2nd Ed, 2002). [16]Id. [17] UNCITRAL Model Law, Article 1. [18] S.K Dholakia, Analytical Appraisal of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill 2003, ICAà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Arbitration Quarterly, ICA, New Delhi, vol. XXXIX/ NO.4, pg.3 (2005). [19] Sundaram Finanace vs. NEPC Ltd, (1999) 2 SCC 479.

Life of Alan Turing, Code-Breaking Computer Scientist

Alan Mathison Turing (1912 –1954) was one of Englands foremost mathematicians and computer scientists. Because of his work in artificial intelligence and codebreaking, along with his groundbreaking Enigma machine, he is credited with ending World War II. Turings life ended in tragedy. Convicted of indecency for his sexual orientation, Turing lost his security clearance, was chemically castrated, and later committed suicide at age 41. Early Years and Education Alan Turing was born in London on June 23, 1912, to Julius and Ethel Turing. Julius was a civil servant who worked in India for much of his career, but he and Ethel wanted to raise their children in Britain. Precocious and gifted as a child, Alans parents enrolled him in the Sherborne School, a prestigious boarding school in Dorset, when he turned thirteen. However, the schools emphasis on a classical education didnt mesh well with Alans natural inclination towards math and science. After Sherborne, Alan moved on to university at Kings College, Cambridge, where he was allowed to shine as a mathematician. At just 22 years old, he presented a dissertation that proved the central limit theorem, a mathematical theory that implies that  probability methods such as bell curves, which  work for normal statistics, can be applied to other types of problems. In addition, he studied logic, philosophy, and cryptanalysis. Over the next few years, he published numerous papers on mathematical theory, as well as designing a universal machine – later called the Turing machine – which could perform any possible math problem, as long as the problem was presented as an algorithm. Turing then attended Princeton University, where he received his PhD.   Codebreaking at Bletchley Park During World War II, Bletchley Park was the home base of British Intelligences elite codebreaking unit. Turing joined the  Government Code and Cypher School  and in September 1939, when war with Germany began,  reported to Bletchley Park in Buckinghamshire for duty. Shortly before Turings arrival at Bletchley, Polish intelligence agents had provided the British with information about the German Enigma machine. Polish cryptanalysts had developed a code-breaking machine called the Bomba, but the Bomba became useless in 1940 when German intelligence procedures changed and the Bomba could no longer crack the code. Turing, along with fellow code-breaker Gordon Welchman, got to work building a replica of the Bomba, called the Bombe, which was used to intercept thousands of German messages every month. These broken codes were then relayed to Allied forces, and Turings analysis of German naval intelligence allowed the British to keep their convoys of ships away from enemy U-boats. Before the war ended, Turing invented a speech scrambling device. He named it Delilah, and it was used to distort messages between Allied troops, so that German intelligence agents could not intercept information. Although the scope of his work wasnt made public until the 1970s, Turing was appointed as an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in 1946 for his contributions to the codebreaking and intelligence world. Artificial Intelligence In addition to his codebreaking work, Turing is regarded as a pioneer in the field of artificial intelligence. He believed that computers could be taught to think independently of their programmers, and devised the Turing Test to determine whether or not a computer was truly intelligent. The test is designed to evaluate whether the interrogator can figure out which answers come from the computer and which come from a human; if the interrogator cant tell the difference, then the computer would be considered intelligent. Personal Life and Conviction In 1952, Turing began a romantic relationship with a 19-year-old man named  Arnold Murray.  During a police investigation into a burglary at Turings home, he admitted that he and Murray were involved sexually. Because homosexuality was a crime in England,  both men were charged and convicted of gross indecency.   Turing was given the option of a prison sentence or probation with chemical treatment designed to reduce the libido. He chose the latter, and underwent a chemical castration procedure over the next twelve months. The treatment left him impotent and caused him to develop gynecomastia,  an abnormal development of breast tissue. In addition, his security clearance was revoked by the British government, and he was no longer permitted to work in the intelligence field. Death and Posthumous Pardon In June 1954, Turings housekeeper found him dead. A post-mortem examination determined that he had died of cyanide poisoning, and the inquest ruled his death as suicide. A half-eaten apple was found nearby.  The apple was never tested for cyanide, but it was determined to be the most likely method used by Turing. In 2009, a British computer programmer began a petition asking the government to posthumously pardon Turing. After several years  and numerous petitions, in December 2013 Queen Elizabeth II exercised the privilege of royal mercy, and signed a pardon overturning Turings conviction. In 2015, Bonhams auction house sold one of Turings notebooks, containing 56 pages of data, for a whopping  $1,025,000. In September 2016, the British government expanded Turings pardon to exonerate thousands of other people  who were convicted under the indecency laws of the past. The process is informally known as the Alan Turing Law. Alan Turing Fast Facts Full Name:  Alan Mathison  TuringOccupation: Mathematician and cryptographerBorn: June 23, 1912 in London, EnglandDied: June 7, 1954 in Wilmslow, England  Key Accomplishments: Developed a code-breaking machine that was essential to the Allied powers victory in World War II