Michael wrote:
>I was under the impression that it was not so much changes in the [US 
>foodstamp] law, but changes in the interpretation and the implementation 
>of the law -- as well as misperception on the part of people who might 
>have otherwise been on welfare.

interpretation is crucial. I once heard a lecture by a law prof who argued 
that it wasn't labor law that turned against US organized labor in the 
1970s but instead the way in which the judges interpreted it. (That is, no 
new legislation was passed.)

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine

Reply via email to