Even financially strong carriers such as United and American laid off employees and abandoned plans to purchase new aircraft, which added to the burdens on the depressed aerospace indust
Trang 1all domestic passengers traveled through a hub city before arriving at their final destination Of those passengers, eight out of ten remained on the same airline throughout their journey By
1992, there were at least 12 “fortress hubs,” or airports where one airline controlled more than
60 percent of the traffic Passengers who flew out
of these hubs paid over 20 percent more than they would have for a comparable trip out of an airport that was not a hub
After deregulation, the airlines also came to realize that they needed a more efficient way to book reservations and issue tickets It is difficult to imagine, in these days of highly sophisticated computers and split-second communications, that until the late 1970s and early 1980s, airline schedules were contained in large printed volumes, reservations were taken over the telephone and tallied manually at the end of each day, and tickets
were written by hand To streamline this process, the large companies initially proposed a joint computer system, listing schedules and fares The
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEobjected on the grounds that such a system would be anticompetitive and would violate theSHERMAN ANTI-TRUST ACT(15 U.S.C.A § 1
et seq.[1890]) Instead, each airline developed its own computer system and entered data in a manner that unfairly biased travel agents’ choices
in favor of the carrier that owned the system Through skillful manipulation of the data, the airlines were able to put competitors at a disadvantage For example, the airline that owned the system might enter the data so that all its flights
to a particular destination appear on the screen before any flights of a competitor
In a further attempt to win loyalty from passengers, the large airlines instituted frequent-flyer programs, which awarded free tickets to
ILLUSTRATION BY GGS
CREATIVE RESOURCES.
REPRODUCED BY
PERMISSION OF GALE,
A PART OF CENGAGE
LEARNING.
U.S Airline Industry, 1999 to 2007
SOURCE: Air Transport Association of America, annual reports.
Revenue passengers enplaned (millions)
2007
2005
2003
2001
622.1 646.3 738.6 769.2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Revenue passenger miles (billions)
2007
2005
2003
2001
651.7 656.9 779.0 829.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
a Excludes bankruptcy-related charges.
Annual profit/loss (billions of dollars)
2007 a
2005 a
2003
2001
1999
⫺8.0 ⫺7.0 ⫺6.0 ⫺5.0 ⫺4.0 ⫺3.0 ⫺2.0 ⫺1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
4.998
⫺5.673
⫺3.625
⫺7.710
5.576
Trang 2travelers after they logged a certain number of
miles flown with the company The combination
of hubs, central computer reservation systems,
and frequent-flier programs made the major
airlines almost invulnerable in large markets
Deregulation also brought a period of
finan-cial upheaval and an epidemic of“merger fever.”
A number of companies ceased doing business
between 1989 and 1992, and still others merged
with stronger, more aggressive companies
Among the companies that disappeared from
the skies were Eastern, Pan Am, Piedmont, and
Midway Airlines Continental and TWA sought
the shelter of Chapter ElevenBANKRUPTCY
reorga-nization USAir and Northwest required cash
infusions through cooperative arrangements
with foreign airlines Even financially strong
carriers such as United and American laid off
employees and abandoned plans to purchase new
aircraft, which added to the burdens on the
depressed aerospace industry
The mergers and buyouts of the 1980s were
often accomplished in an atmosphere of hostility
and distrust Charges of predatory pricing and
other unfair business practices were leveled by
one carrier against another During the 1980s
the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division
made a number of GRAND JURY investigations
into alleged anticompetitive activity by the major
airlines, but no indictments were handed down
However, the companies that survived did not
emerge unscathed Many of the acquisitions
were highly leveraged buyouts that left the
reconstituted companies heavily in debt With
profits insufficient to cover their enormous debt
loads, the companies frantically competed for
business, engaging in fare wars that produced a
dizzying array of pricing plans with equally
numerous and confusing restrictions Some of
the tactics were questionable, but, again, not
clearly illegal In 1993 American Airlines was
sued by Continental and Northwest for alleged
predatory pricing during a 1992 fare war The
jury took just over two hours to return aVERDICT
in favor of American
By 1993 the industry began to rebound
Continental Airlines and TWA emerged from
bankruptcy, and a few small carriers, such as
Kiwi International, formed by former Eastern
pilots, responded to the public’s demand for
low fares and began to make incursions into the
established markets, although they generally
shied away from directly challenging the giants
Older carriers, for the most part, chose to stay with their hub-and-spoke systems, whereas several, including Northwest and United, came
up with a creative new solution to their financial situation
Northwest avoided bankruptcy when its unions agreed to wage concessions in return for part ownership of the airline Then in 1994, after seven years of negotiating, employees of United gained majority control of their company in return for deep pay and benefits cuts Secretary of Labor Robert B Reich commented that other financially troubled companies would undoubt-edly follow suit: “From here on in, it will be impossible for a BOARD OF DIRECTORS to not consider employee ownership as one potential business strategy.” However, some industry analysts doubted that employee ownership would be effective in the long run because of inherent conflicts between labor and manage-ment, or between different labor groups.“It can’t work,” declared former Chrysler chairman Lee A
Iacocca.“What do you think will happen when it’s a choice between employee benefits and capital investment?”
Safety
One troubling criticism of deregulation is that aggressive competition has forced airlines to cut corners, resulting in safety lapses In 1990 Eastern Airlines was handed a 60-count federal
INDICTMENTcharging it with shoddy and dishonest maintenance practices The indictments came after years of complaints by the financially troubled airline’s mechanics, who claimed that pressures to cut costs led to maintenance short-cuts and falsification of maintenance records
In January 1991 Eastern ceased operation
Critics contend that Eastern was hardly alone in its cavalier approach to safety They charge that the FAA is understaffed and poorly managed and that money shortages have caused all the airlines to relax safety standards They point not only to increased pressures on the labor force but also to companies’ reluctance to replace their aging fleets, the congestion of airspace caused by increased air travel, crowded hub airports that create security risks, and overworked and sometimes poorly trained air traffic controllers Yet, statistically, passengers are no more likely to die in a plane crash since deregulation than they were before it Still, critics maintain that, despite the airlines’ and the government’s efforts to assure the traveling
Trang 3public to the contrary, air safety is in need of substantial improvements
Many critics feel that at least part of the problem lies in the dual role of the FAA
Charged simultaneously with promoting the economic health of the aviation industry and fostering safety, the agency is often at odds with itself In addition, the FAA’s budget was cut, and the number of inspectors reduced in the 1980s, the same period during which the number of passengers multiplied and the number of air traffic controllers was reduced
Furthermore, unions, which stand to benefit from the increased scrutiny and higher stan-dards imposed by the FAA, continue to be major instigators for change However, even neutral commentators have suggested that it is time to impose some degree of regulation on the industry in the form of stronger FAA oversight In fact, the FAA has been accused
of suffering from a “tombstone mentality” that causes the agency to delay acting on safety concerns until negative publicity generated by a crash forces the issue Even after safety measures are recommended by theNATIONAL TRANSPORTA-TION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB), the agency charged with investigating accidents, the FAA has been criticized for not always following through
Aging aircraft became a major concern during the late 1980s and early 1990s In 1988
an Aloha Airgroup Boeing 737-200, purchased
in 1969, lost the top of its fuselage while flying
at 24,000 feet A flight attendant was immedi-ately sucked out of the plane The plane made a harrowing emergency landing, but not before
65 passengers suffered injuries, some serious
Congress responded in 1991 by passing the Aging Aircraft Safety Act (49 App U.S.C.A
1421 note), which requires airlines to demon-strate that their older planes are airworthy
Critics claim that enforcement of the law has been lax and that it ignores other compelling reasons to replace aging aircraft, such as the availability of newer fire-retardant seat materials and of updated seats designed to be more resistant to the impact of a crash
Concerns over airline safety became even more acute in the early 1990s with a series of fatal crashes The Boeing Company, a major producer
of aircraft, predicted that the number of jet crashes worldwide could double by 2010 if accident rates of the early 1990s continue
However, according to David R Hinson, former
FAA administrator, flight safety “is not a simplistic science that lends itself to easy solu-tions.” Flight safety experts point out that all the most obvious causes of crashes have been addressed with technological advances that include such safeguards as early warning systems for wind shear
Many experts feel that not enough research has been devoted to the study of the human elements that contribute to crashes Boeing reports that flight crews have been the primary cause in more than 73 percent of jet crashes since 1959 In 1990 a federal jury in Minneapolis convicted three Northwest Airlines crewmen—a flight captain, a copilot, and a flight engineer—of flying a jet aircraft while under the influence of alcohol Although this was the first flying-while-intoxicated CONVICTION involving professional pilots, many claim that the problem of alcohol and drug abuse among flight crews is widespread and well hidden Yet it is difficult to convince companies to focus on the issue of human elements that contribute to accidents
In 1994 five fatal crashes, three involving commuter airlines, brought safety concerns to light once again After the fifth crash, Secretary
of Transportation Federico Peña ordered a safety AUDITof the entire airline industry As a result, commuter airlines, which had previously been held to a lower standard of safety than major carriers, were placed under new operat-ing rules that required them to broperat-ing their safety standards up to those of the other companies by the end of 1996 Industry experts said the elimination of the two-tier safety standards was
“the most important decision affecting the industry since it was deregulated in 1978.” Several other safety and health issues have been publicized Some have questioned the quality of air aboard an airplane As a result of intenseLOBBYINGby passenger groups and flight attendants, federal law prohibits smoking on all domestic flights and on many international flights as well Air quality was again questioned
in 1993 when it was revealed that, as a cost-saving measure, many airlines were circulating fresh air into their aircraft less frequently than they had in the past This led to complaints
by passengers and crew of headaches, nausea, and the transmission of respiratory illnesses Although the FAA conceded that circulating more fresh air would be beneficial, it backed off from requiring airlines to do so, because of the cost involved
Trang 4The safety of babies and toddlers on airplanes
was investigated after it was shown that a
number of them suffered injuries, some serious
or fatal, during incidents that did not injure their
parents Unlike adults and their luggage, children
under age two are not required to be secured on
an airplane but rather may be held on an adult’s
lap These“lap babies” are often ripped from the
adult’s grasp during turbulence or crashes In
1994 Representatives Jolene Unsoeld (D-Wash.)
and Jim Ross Lightfoot (R-Iowa) introduced a
bill that would have required the use of child
safety restraints on commercial flights However,
the measure, which was supported by the
Association of Flight Attendants, NTSB, Air
Transport Association, Aviation Consumer
Ac-tion Project, and Air Line Pilots AssociaAc-tion, was
opposed by the FAA and eventually defeated An
FAA spokesperson, testifying in opposition to the
bill, said the FAA’s research indicated that if all
children who needed them were placed in child
safety seats, the airlines would save approximately
one life over a ten-year period, and families would
save $2.5 billion in added fares and costs over the
same timespan In contrast to the FAA’s findings,
a study conducted at Harvard Medical School
estimated that one infant per year could be saved
through the use of safety seats The sponsors of
the bill vowed to continue to press for more
stringent safety standards for babies
Another major concern is delayed and/or
cancelled flights On Valentine’s Day in February
2007, an ice storm hit the Northeast and resulted
in many delayed and/or grounded flights At
New York area airports, passengers were
grounded on the runway in planes for three to
ten hours without water, food, and other basic
needs The air inside the planes became stale, and
the restrooms on board were inadequate and/or
malfunctioning Following that disaster, in June
2007 the state of New York became the first in
the nation to enact a Passenger BILL OF RIGHTS
[N.Y Gen Bus Law §251(g)(1)] The law, which
took effect in January 2008, was short-lived The
Air Transport Association of America (ATA)
filed suit, arguing that the new legislation
regulated a “service” provided by air carriers
Accordingly, the ATA argued, this meant that it
was preempted by the federal Airline
Deregula-tion Act, the scope of which extended to
anything“related to a price, route, or service of
an air carrier.” (49 U.S.C §41713) The U.S
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit agreed
Air Transportation Assn v Cuomo, 520 F.3d 218
(2d Cir 2008) In theINTERIMbetween legislation and court decision, nine other states had proposed similar legislation relating to lengthy ground delays and likely faced similar challenges
As of August 2009, uniform federal legislation was pending in both House and Senate congres-sional bills, folded into the FAA re-authorization package
Safety concerns will continue to plague the airline industry, even though the FAA assures the flying public that, statistically, at least, flying
a major airline in the United States is far safer than driving on an interstate highway Ques-tions persist about the FAA’s effectiveness in overseeing air safety And financially strapped airlines, which posted $12.8 billion in losses from 1990 to 1994, must make difficult risk-benefit analyses when contemplating new safety measures
Some critics, such asRALPH NADER, who initially supported deregulation, are now calling for limited government intervention to ensure safety
However, experts warn that the U.S airline system, which is already extremely safe, probably can never be completely without risk According
to Stuart Matthews, president of the Flight Safety Foundation, “If the public absolutely demands that flying be totally safe, you are going to have to ban flying.” Given the choice between taking a calculated risk and not flying at all, Americans, who take their lives into their hands each time they drive, will probably continue to trust the statistics and take their chances
The ADFAA and September 11, 2001
In 1996, to address concerns that the families of airline crash victims were not receiving timely information, Congress passed the Aviation Disas-ter Family Assistance Act (ADFAA) (49 USCA
§ 1136; 49 USCA § 41113) The act requires airlines
to submit a plan to the National Transportation Safety Board that would address the needs of the families of passengers who are involved in any aircraft accident that results in a major loss of life
Once approved, the carrier must make a GOOD FAITHeffort to carry out the plan
Plans approved under the ADFAA have some minimum requirements for notification and care of families affected by an airline crash
Among them are that the airline carrier must set
up, publicize, and staff a toll-free telephone line that passengers’ families can call for informa-tion The carrier must also cooperate with the
Trang 5independent, NTSB-appointed NONPROFIT (i.e., the Red Cross) to provide an appropriate level
of aid and support In addition, the carrier must assist a passenger’s family in traveling to the crash site, as well as provide for their physical needs while at the accident location Finally, the carrier must respect a family’s wishes for burial,
a memorial, or a religious ceremony, and obtain the input of all families before any memorial is erected in memory of the passengers
The ADFAA provides limitations on the
LIABILITY of airline carriers for passenger lists
The act states that a carrier may not be liable for
DAMAGES in preparing or providing a passenger list, unless the conduct of the air carrier was grossly negligent or constituted intentional misconduct Further limiting airline liability, the ADFAA provides that no unsolicited communication concerning a potential action for PERSONAL INJURY or WRONGFUL DEATH may be made by an attorney or any potential party to the LITIGATION to an individual injured in an airplane accident, or to a relative of an individual involved in the accident, before the 45th day following the date of the accident
The provisions of the ADFAA became crucial
on September 11, 2001—the day that four domestic airplanes were hijacked by terrorists and crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon outside Washington, D.C., and a field in Pennsylvania In the aftermath of that tragedy, the government built
on the ADFAA by passing the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (ATSSSA) (Pub.L 107-42, Sept 22, 2001, 115 Stat 230)
This act took into consideration the devastation wrought on U.S airlines on September 11 and enacted measures to try to ensure their survival
In addition to compensating airlines for direct losses incurred as a result of September
11, the ATSSSA established a framework for computing the maximum grant that an airline could claim as COMPENSATION To streamline efforts, it set up the Air Transportation Stabiliza-tion Board to review the prospective loan applications The act attempted to protect the insurance industry, as well as the aviation industry, by limiting the claims that could be made upon them It also established the Septem-ber 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 to deal directly with the needs of families who were victims of theSEPTEMBER11TH ATTACKS The fund provided direct financial assistance to families so
they would not have to endure lengthy court battles Liability for all third-party losses was transferred from the airlines to the U.S govern-ment, and aWAIVERsystem was established so that families could not sue the airlines for damages as
a result of the terrorist attack at any future date Security measures for airlines have also been upgraded since September 11 The government took over security at airports from private companies through the creation of the Trans-portation Security Administration (TSA) under theDEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY In addi-tion, cockpit doors were reinforced, passengers were limited in what they could bring on to flights, luggage screening was upgraded, and pilots were allowed to carry guns to protect themselves on flights In 2007 President George
W Bush signed into law the Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendation Act (the 9/11 Act), P.L 110-53, requiring the Secretary
of Homeland Security to establish a system that would ultimately result in the screening of 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft The new law was to be sequentially implemented within three years, with full
COMPLIANCEby 2010 Further, the Narrow Body Screening Amendment became effective in October 2008, requiring 100 percent screening
of all cargo on narrow body aircraft
Despite the ATSSSA and the increased security measures, the September 11 attacks had
a disastrous effect on U.S airlines A little over a year later, two major airlines, U.S Airways and United Airlines, were in bankruptcy, with a good chance that others would follow And the threat
of low-cost airlines, such as Southwest, combined with a widespread decline in flying, made the business plans of most major airlines inviable Following a few mergers and reorganizations, the airlines appeared to be more stable by 2009
FURTHER READINGS Dempsey, Paul Stephen 2003 “Aviation Security: The Role
of Law in the War against Terrorism.” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (spring): 649-733 Schroeder, Kristin Buja 2002 “Failing to Prevent the Tragedy, but Facing the Trauma: The Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Act of 1996 and the Air Transporta-tion Safety and System StabilizaTransporta-tion Act of 2001 ” Journal of Air Law and Commerce 67 (winter) Schwieterman, Joseph 2002 “From Consolidation to Crisis: The Airline Industry in Transition (Terrorism, Security, and Competition: The Future of the Airline Industry) ” DePaul Business Law Journal 14 (spring): 269-277.
Trang 6Sheth, Jagdish N., and Fred C Allvine 2007 Deregulation
and Competition: Lessons from the Airline Industry.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Stempel, Jeffrey W 2002 “The Insurance Aftermath of
September 11: Myriad Claims, Multiple Lines,
Argu-ments over Occurrence Counting, War Risk
Exclu-sions, the Future of Terrorism Coverage, and New
Issues of Government Role.” Tort and Insurance Law
Journal 37 (spring).
Transportation Security Administration 2009 “TSA:
Programs and Initiatives ” Available online at http://
www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/air_cargo/programs.shtm;
website home page: http://www.tsa.gov/ (accessed
September 10, 2009)
CROSS REFERENCES
Aeronautics; Carriers; Federal Preemption; Homeland
Security; Labor Union; National Transportation Safety
Board; Sherman Anti-Trust Act; Unfair Competition.
Amos Tappan Akerman, born in 1821 in New
Hampshire, served as attorney general of the
United States from 1870 to 1872 under President
ULYSSES S.GRANT
A graduate of Dartmouth College, Akerman
was admitted to the bar in 1841 He opened his
first practice at Elberton, Georgia, in 1850 He
was a well-established attorney by the outbreak of
the Civil War Akerman supported Georgia’s
decision to secede from the Union in 1861, and
he served the Confederate government in the
quartermaster’s department during the war (A
quartermaster is charged with procuring and
dispensing uniforms, WEAPONS, and other
sup-plies for the troops.) After the war, Akerman
developed ties with theREPUBLICAN PARTYand the
Reconstructionists He was appointed DISTRICT
ATTORNEYfor Georgia in 1866 Four years later, he
was named attorney general of the United States
Akerman’sTENUREas attorney general coin-cided with the Grant administration’s early attempts to enforce CIVIL RIGHTS laws in the South during RECONSTRUCTION Initially, Aker-man believed prosecutions for violations of criminalCIVIL RIGHTS ACTSshould be left to state and local authorities However, he soon chan-ged his mind and advocated a more aggressive federal role in the prosecution of crimes related
to civil rights
His change of mind can be attributed to the growth of theKU KLUX KLANin the South, and the results of a congressional investigation Investi-gators found that state and local legal systems in
Amos Tappan Akerman 1821–1880
1821 Born, Portsmouth, New Hampshire
1841 Graduated from Dartmouth College
1850 Opened law practice in Georgia
1866 Appointed district attorney for Georgia
1865 Ku Klux Klan founded
1861–65 Served
in Confederate army
1868 Fourteenth Amendment ratified
1870 Fifteenth Amendment ratified
1870–72 U.S attorney general under Ulysses S Grant
1880 Died, Cartersville, Georgia
◆ ◆
1825
◆
Amos Tappan Akerman.
Trang 7the South were inadequate to protect the rights
of free blacks or to PROSECUTE the increasingly violent actions of the Klan
Akerman agreed that the federal govern-ment should step in, and he wrote extensively
on the subject In his opinion, some South-erners would never acknowledge the rights of free blacks and government attempts to “con-ciliate by kindness” were a waste of time He noted that Southern klansmen and other malcontents “take all kindness as evidence
of timidity, and hence are emboldened to lawlessness by it.” He concluded that the federal government should“command their respect by the exercise of its powers.”
With Akerman’s leadership—and his suc-cessful effort to obtain a financial commitment from Congress—attorneys from the newly created
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE worked with local U.S
attorneys to bring hundreds of indictments under the Enforcement Act of 1870 (16 Stat 140 [codified as amended at 42 U.S.C.A § 1981 et seq.]) and theKU KLUX KLAN ACTof 1871 (§ 2, 17 Stat 13[current version at 42 U.S.C.A § 1985(3) (Supp V 1976)])
Together, these government officials prose-cuted, convicted, and imprisoned hundreds of Klan members from 1870 to 1872, and, for a short time, criminal civil rights acts were successfully enforced in the South Though he“rejoiced” at the suppression of the Klan, Akerman wrote,“I feel greatly saddened by this business It has revealed a perversion of moral sentiment among the South-ern whites, which bodes ill to that part of the country for this generation.”
Akerman was also saddened—and frustrated—by fiscal circumstances that com-bined to slow his efforts Concerned by the growing financial burden of the actions, and pressured to allocate funds for other priorities, Congress and the Grant administration
eventual-ly brought Akerman’s prosecutions to a standstill
The violence resumed, and Akerman resigned
Akerman’s resignation as attorney general can also be attributed to his discouragement with the pace of federal civil rights enforcement, and to political issues as well Akerman had angered President Grant by refusing to execute
a deed conveying western lands to the railroads, and he had antagonized many congressional Republicans with his lack of support for other business and railroad projects
After his resignation, Akerman returned to private life and thePRACTICE OF LAW He died in 1880
FURTHER READINGS Baker, Nancy V 1992 Conflicting Loyalties: Law and Politics
in the Attorney General’s Office, 1789–1990 Lawrence: Univ Press of Kansas.
Kousser, J Morgan, and James M McPherson 1982 Region, Race, and Reconstruction New York: Oxford Univ Press.
Sobel, Robert 1990 Biographical Directory of the United States Executive Branch 1774–1989 Westport, CT: Greenwood.
CROSS REFERENCES Civil Rights Acts; Grant, Ulysses Simpson; Ku Klux Klan Act; Railroad.
ALASKA BOUNDARY DISPUTE During the late 1800s and early 1900s, a dispute erupted between the United States and Canada regarding the legal boundaries of Alaska, which the United States had purchased from Russia in
1867 The primary point of contention in the dispute related to a several thousand mile long strip to the west of British Columbia and to the southeast of the AlaskaTERRITORY Although the dispute was resolved by way of a treaty signed in
1903, it caused a severe threat to U.S.-Canadian relations
Russia was the first nation to claim the Alaska territory after it was discovered by Vitus Bering, a Danish explorer who received a commission from Peter the Great to lead Russian sailors on a expedition of Siberia on August 20, 1741 Russia named the land Russian-America, and Russian whalers and fur traders established settlements in the region Russia and Canada, then a colony of Great Britain, disagreed as to the proper bound-aries, and in 1825 Russia and Great Britain signed the Anglo-Russian treaty Under this treaty, the Russian and Canadian territory was divided by the 141st Meridian, though at the time, much of this land had not been surveyed Russia lost much of the land it had claimed under the treaty, though the specific boundaries were still unclear
As fur-trading from Russian-America began
to decline, Russia lost interest in the territory The United States in 1867 agreed to purchase the territory for $7,200,000 and renamed the territory Alaska The continental nation of Canada formed during the same year, encom-passing the Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick
MORE TO ASCERTAIN
WHAT IS THE
CONSTI-TUTIONAL RULE THAN
TO LEARN WHETHER
THAT RULE HAS
ALWAYS BEEN
VIOLATIONS OF THE
NOT JUSTIFY A
—A MOS T APPAN
A KERMAN
Trang 8The United States maintained that it had
taken over the territory that appeared on Russian
maps at the time of the purchase However, the
Russian maps indicated that Russia had owned
more of the land than had been stipulated in the
1825 treaty As early as 1872, British Columbia
petitioned the United States for an official survey
of the boundaries between Alaska and western
Canada, but the United States refused due to the
costs that would have been involved Both the
United States and Canada conducted surveys of
particular areas in the region in the 1870s and
1880s, but no widespread survey was conducted
during that time
The dispute regarding the proper boundaries
between Alaska and western Canada heated up
during the 1880s after gold was discovered in the
area Between the 1880s and 1890s, an estimated
100,000 fortune seekers moved to the Klondike
region in search of gold Though only a fraction
of these miners and prospectors actually
discov-ered gold, more than $100 million was
eventu-ally extracted from the region Although the
Klondike gold rush was not a direct factor in the
ALASKA BOUNDARY DISPUTE, it almost certainly
focused more attention on that region
In 1898 the United States and Great Britain
formed a Joint High Commission to resolve the
boundary dispute The goal of the commission
was to order the survey and marking of the 141st
Meridian and to reach a compromise between
the United States and Canada The commission
agreed to a convention that would have resulted
in the survey and marking of the territory, but
the western states of the United States objected
to the commission’s work, and the United States
Senate refused to ratify the convention
Five years later, in January 1903, the United
States and Great Britain agreed to appoint an
Alaskan BoundaryTRIBUNAL, which consisted of
six IMPARTIAL judges, three from each side, to
resolve the dispute U.S President THEODORE
ROOSEVELTappointed SenatorHENRY CABOT LODGE,
Secretary of War Elihu Root, and former
senator George Turner Great Britain appointed
Lord Chief Justice of England Baron Alverstone
and two officials from Canada, Sir Louis A Jette
and Allen B Aylesworth Although Canada
believed that Great Britain would support
Canadian interests, Great Britain largely sided
with the United States because it needed the
latter’s assistance in an arms race between Great
Britain and Germany After three weeks of
discussion, thePANELof judges voted in favor the United States’ position
The tribunal established an International Boundary Commission to mark the official boundaries between Alaska and Canada The commission was made permanent by a treaty between the United States and Great Britain in
1908 Another treaty in 1925 required the com-mission to maintain a 20-foot wide demarcated line along the border The boundary is several thousand miles long and spread over mountains and through rivers, marshes, and forests
Although the Alaska Boundary Dispute has fallen beyond the American consciousness, it remains a point of contention among some Canadians The United States and Canada have had several disagreements regarding the proper land and water division in parts of the area
Moreover, environmentalists decry the clearing of timber along the border because of the potential for destroying biological diversity of plant and animal life The Alaskan boundary remains, however, exactly how it appeared in the 1903 agreement, and the 1925 treaty remains intact
FURTHER READINGS Carroll, F M 1987 “Robert Lansing and the Alaska Boundary Settlement ” International History Review 9.
Munro, John A., ed 1970 The Alaska Boundary Dispute.
Toronto: Copp Clark.
Penlington, Norman 1972 The Alaska Boundary Dispute: A Critical Reappraisal New York: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
CROSS REFERENCES Boundaries; International Law.
vALBRIGHT, MADELEINE KORBEL Madeleine Korbel Albright served from 1997 to
2001 as U.S.SECRETARY OF STATE, the government’s highest-ranking foreign relations officer She has the distinction of being the first woman to serve
in this position Albright, who has also taught international affairs, has had a long association with DEMOCRATIC PARTY presidential candidates, advising them on foreign policy
Albright was born on May 15, 1937, in Prague, Czechoslovakia, the daughter of a Czech diplomat In 1939 her family left Czechoslova-kia for London, arriving shortly before the outbreak ofWORLD WAR II After the war ended in
1945, the family returned to their homeland but left again in 1948 following the Communist takeover of the Czech government The family settled in the United States in 1949
THAT TRUE DEMOC-RACY IS NEVER
IF WE WHO LOVE LIBERTY GROW
ONLY POWER WILL ONE DAY SWEEP US
—M ADELEINE
A LBRIGHT
Trang 9Albright earned a bachelor’s degree in politi-cal science from Wellesley College in 1959 and then studied at the School of Advanced Interna-tional Studies at Johns Hopkins University She then entered the graduate program at Columbia University, receiving her master’s degree and doctorate from the university’s Department of
PUBLIC LAWand Government While working on her advanced degrees, Albright served in the diplomatic corps, acting as counselor for eco-nomic affairs at the U.S embassy in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, from 1969 to 1972 She also worked for the Export-Import Bank
After receiving her doctorate in 1976, Alb-right joined the staff of Democratic Senator Edmund S Muskie of Maine, serving as his chief legislative assistant until 1978 She became a staff member of theNATIONAL SECURITY COUNCILin 1978, serving PresidentJIMMY CARTERuntil he left office
in 1981
Albright shifted her focus in 1981 to acade-mia She was awarded a fellowship at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars at the Smithsonian (1981–82), following
an international competition in which she wrote about the role the press played in the political changes that occurred in Poland during the early 1980s Her findings were published in Poland, the Role of the Press in Political Change (1983) Albright also served as a senior fellow in Soviet and Eastern European Affairs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, conducting research in developments and trends in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe From 1982 to 1993 Albright taught at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, lecturing on interna-tional affairs, U.S foreign policy, Russian foreign policy, and Central and Eastern European politics She was also responsible for developing and implementing programs designed to en-hance women’s professional opportunities in international affairs From 1989 to 1993 Albright was president of the Center for National Policy, a
NONPROFITresearch organization formed in 1981
by representatives from government, industry, labor, and education to promote the study and discussion of domestic and international issues Albright began working with Democratic presidential candidates in 1984 when she advised Walter F Mondale on foreign policy She served
in a similar role for 1988 nominee Michael Dukakis and did the same for BILL CLINTON in
1992 After he was elected president, Clinton named Albright chief U.S representative to the
UNITED NATIONS, a cabinet-level position
After President Clinton was reelected in
1996, he made changes in his cabinet In
Madeleine Albright.
AP IMAGES
Madeleine Korbel Albright 1937–
❖
◆
1937 Born
in Prague,
Czechoslovakia
1949 Father gained political asylum for family in U.S.
◆
1976 Received Ph.D.
from Columbia Univ.
1939–45
World War II
1948 Communists took over Czech government
1981 Sandra Day O’Connor became first female U.S Supreme Court justice
2003 Madam Secretary:
A Memoir published
2001 September 11 terrorist attacks
1978–81 Member of National Security Council
1997–2001 Served
as first woman U.S.
Secretary of State
2008 Memo
to the President Elect published
1992–96 Chief U.S
representative to the UN
1982–93 Taught at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service
1989–93 President of the Center for National Policy
1983 Poland, the Role of the Press in Political Change published
Trang 10December 1996 Clinton nominated Albright as
secretary of state After being unanimously
confirmed by the U.S Senate, she was sworn
in as secretary of state on January 23, 1997
The outspoken and dynamic Albright
rein-forced U.S alliances, promoted American trade
and business, and sought to establish international
standards on trade and HUMAN RIGHTS Albright
advocated for the expansion and modernization of
NATO and helped coordinate NATO’s successful
campaign to end ethnic cleansing in Kosovo She
helped to promote peace in Northern Ireland, the
Middle East, and the Balkans
Albright sought the expansion of democracy
in Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America; she
traveled to China to promote trade with the
United States and also to address human rights
issues In June 2000, Albright and
representa-tives from all over the world convened the first
ever Conference of the Community of
Democ-racies Albright also led the fight to reverse a
decade-long drop in funding for U.S embassies
and overseas operations by helping to persuade
Congress to increase funding by 17 percent
In May 2001 Albright returned to
George-town University where she accepted an endowed
chair in the School of Foreign Service She
lectures at colleges and universities and has
appeared on numerous television news
com-mentary programs since leaving the STATE
DEPARTMENT In 2006 her book The Mighty and
the Almighty: Reflections on America, God, and
World Affairs, was published In 2008 Memo to
the President Elect: How to Restore America’s
Reputation and Leadership, HarperCollins (New
York, NY) was published She continues her
work with The Albright Group (global strategy
firm), of which she is founder and principal, and
Albright Capital Management LLC (INVESTMENT
advisory firm), which she chairs and is principal
FURTHER READINGS
Albright, Madeleine 2003 Madam Secretary: A Memoir.
New York: Miramax.
Blackman, Ann 1998 Seasons of Her Life: A Biography of
Madeleine Korbel Albright New York: Scribner.
Blood, Thomas 1997 Madam Secretary: A Biography of
Madeleine Albright New York: St Martin’s Press.
Dobbs, Michael 1999 Madeleine Albright: A
Twentieth-Century Odyssey New York: Henry Holt.
Georgetown University Available online at www.georgetown.
edu (accessed August 24, 2009).
Hirsh, Michael 2000 “The Lioness in Winter.” Newsweek
(July 10).
Lippman, Thomas W 2000 Madeleine Albright and the New American Diplomacy New York: Westview.
Special Libraries Association Available online at www.sla.
org (accessed August 24, 2009).
ALCOHOL Alcohol is the active principle of intoxicating drinks, produced by the fermentation of sugars
A Congressman was once asked by a constitu-ent to explain his attitude toward whiskey.“If you mean the demon drink that poisons the mind, pollutes the body, desecrates family life, and inflames sinners, then I’m against it,” the Congressman said.“But if you mean the elixir
of Christmas cheer, the shield against winter chill, the taxable potion that puts needed funds into public coffers to comfort little crippled children, then I’m for it This is my position, and I will not compromise.”
TheLEGAL HISTORYof alcohol in the United States closely parallels the economic and social trends that shaped the country The libertarian philosophy that ignited the WHISKEY REBELLION was born in the American Revolution Shifting concerns about morality and family harmony that were character-istic of the Industrial Revolution inspired the
TEMPERANCE MOVEMENTand brought about PROHIBI-TION, which began with the 1919 passage of the
EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution and ended with its repeal in 1933 The return of legalized drinking in the United States led to renewed discussion of the many health and safety issues associated with alcohol consumption Over the following decades, the states addressed these issues through a variety of laws, such as those dealing with a minimum age for the purchase or consumption of alcohol, the labeling of alcoholic beverages, and drunk driving Private litigants have expanded protections against harm from alcohol through tort actions, and various groups, both national and local, continue to lobby for increased legislation and higher penalties for alcohol-related acts that lead to injury
Historical Background of Alcohol
in the United States Drink is in itself a good creature of God, and to be received with thankfulness, but the abuse of drink is from Satan, the wine is from God, but the Drunkard is from the Devil
(Increase Mather, Puritan clergyman, Wo to Drunkards [1673])
Alcoholic beverages have been consumed in the United States since the days of Plymouth Rock