eliseabril.bsky.social profile picture

Lizzy Stone

@eliseabril.bsky.social

93 Followers

192 Following

Health care system researcher with a PhD in Population Health Science and Master of Public Policy. Reader, Utah Mammoth and Caps fan, baker, cat person, National Park hiker, Nerdfighter.

  1. carlbergstrom.com profile picture

    Carl T. Bergstrom @carlbergstrom.com

    1. "'Trusting the experts is not a feature of either a science or democracy," Kennedy said."

    It's literally a vital feature of both science and of representative democracy.

    I've written a fair bit about trust in expertise as a vital mechanism in the collective epistemology of science.

    HHS Secretary RFK Jr. sat down with Scripps News for a wide-ranging interview, discussing mRNA vaccine funding policy changes and a recent shooting at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    RFK Jr. in interview with Scripps News: ‘Trusting the experts is not science’

    HHS Secretary RFK Jr. sat down with Scripps News for a wide-ranging interview, discussing mRNA vaccine funding policy changes and a recent shooting at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    524
  3. eliseabril.bsky.social profile picture

    Lizzy Stone @eliseabril.bsky.social

    Reply to eliseabril.bsky.social

    This says they usually don’t start considering taking up a potential case for about 60 days after the first petition (July, here): www.scotusblog.com/election-law...

    The justices have conferences scheduled to discuss potential cases on 9/29, 10/10, 10/17 & 11/7. www.supremecourt.gov/casedistribu...

    This election explainer was written by Amy Howe. It is part of SCOTUSblog’s 2020 Election Litigation Tracker, a joint project with Election Law at Ohio State. When the losing side […]

    The certiorari process: Seeking Supreme Court review

    This election explainer was written by Amy Howe. It is part of SCOTUSblog’s 2020 Election Litigation Tracker, a joint project with Election Law at Ohio State. When the losing side […]
    0
  4. eliseabril.bsky.social profile picture

    Lizzy Stone @eliseabril.bsky.social

    Reply to moonyriot.dftba.social

    Hey! Not Hank and not a lawyer, but I looked around a little. The article says we’ll likely know in the fall. I’m sure you’re looking for something more specific than that, but it doesn’t look like the court has a fully standardized timeframe for this.

    1
  8. eliseabril.bsky.social profile picture

    Lizzy Stone @eliseabril.bsky.social

    Reply to petersagal.bsky.social

    Yes! This is soooo nerdy, but one of my favorite theories of any kind is all about this. Our society believes groups deserve certain kinds of benefits and burdens based on how we perceive the group. Only policies that align with those beliefs are likely to gain broad support.

    A diagram from the paper “Social Constructions of Target Populations”. It’s is labelled “Figure 2: Variations in how policy treats target populations: allocation of benefits and burdens. The figure shows a cube that illustrates three dimensions of this question. The first dimension is power (weak vs strong). The second is constructions (positive vs negative). The third is benefits vs burdens. The advantaged group (those with positive social construction and power) have high control of the policy agenda. Benefits are oversubscribed and burdens are undersubscribed in this group. The contender group (those with negative social constructions but who have power) have low control. Benefits are sub rosa and burdens are symbolic and overt in this group. The dependent group (those with positive social construction but who lack power) have low control. Benefits are undersubscribed and burdens are oversubscribed in this group. The deviant group (those with negative social constructions and who lack power) have no control. Benefits are very undersubscribed and burdens are very oversubscribed in this group.
    0