text:
Legislature(2019 - 2020)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/12/2019 01:30 PM JUDICIARY
Senate JUD 04/12/2019 13:32
01:32:44 PM SJR3
02:59:12 PM Confirmation Hearing
*+ SJR 3 CONST. AM: MEMBERSHIP OF JUDICIAL COUNCIL TELECONFERENCED
+ Consideration of Governor's Appointees: TELECONFERENCED
Commission on Judicial Conduct - Jane Mores
<Item Above Added to Agenda>
SJR 3-CONST. AM: MEMBERSHIP OF JUDICIAL COUNCIL
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the  first order of business would be
SENATE  JOINT RESOLUTION  NO. 3,  Proposing an  amendment to  the
Constitution of  the State of  Alaska relating to  the membership
of the judicial council.
SCOTT   OGAN,   Staff,   Senator  Mike   Shower,   Alaska   State
Legislature, Juneau, introduced himself.
SENATOR SHOWER, paraphrased his sponsor statement, which read as
SENATE JOINT  RESOLUTION NO. 3, Proposing  an amendment
to the Constitution of the  State of Alaska relating to
the membership of the judicial council.
Proposing  an  amendment  to the  Constitution  of  the
State  of  Alaska relating  to  the  membership of  the
Judicial Council.
Alaska's Constitution  Art 1  Sec 2 states,  "All power
is inherent with the  people. All government originates
with the people, is founded  on their will only, and is
instituted  solely for  the  good of  the  people as  a
whole."
Passage of SJR 3  will help restore this aforementioned
principle, as noted  by the Constitutional Convention's
professional    consultants,    "These   sections    in
particular  go  a  long   way  toward  withdrawing  the
judicial branch from  the control of the  people of the
state and placing it under that of the organized bar."
The constitutional  convention professional consultants
also  said, "the  convention has  gone farther  than is
necessary, or safe, in  putting them (Judicial Council)
in the  hands of a private  professional group, however
public spirited its members may be."
SENATOR SHOWER continued.
Senate  Joint  Resolution  3  places  a  constitutional
amendment  on the  next  general  election ballot  that
would   allow  the   voters  to   decide  whether   the
membership of  the Alaska Judicial Council  Bar members
should   require   legislative  confirmation   of   all
Currently,   only  public   members   are  subject   to
legislative confirmation.  Alaska is  one of  a handful
of   states   that   does   not   require   legislative
confirmation of member of the  Bar to serve on Judicial
SJR  3  would  increase   the  public's  voice  on  the
Judicial  Council through  legislative confirmation  of
the  members  of  the   [Alaska]  Bar.  Currently,  the
attorney  members   are  selected   by  the   Board  of
Governors of the Bar Association  and are not currently
subject  to legislative  confirmation  as  they are  in
many   other   states.    The   lack   of   legislative
confirmation  is a  stark  glaring  oversight when  all
members  of every  other Alaskan  regulatory or  quasi-
judicial agency  are subject to  confirmation according
to Article 3 Section 26 of the Alaska Constitution.
The  sponsor of  this  legislation  believes that  that
[the Alaska]  Bar has too much  unilateral influence on
who  is  ultimately  submitted   to  the  Governor  for
consideration of becoming a judge or justice.
Alaska's  current  crime   wave  requires  a  wholistic
approach  in considering  all aspects  of the  criminal
justice system. In some states,  judges run for popular
election, with  "hang em high" judges  often winning by
popular affirmation.
This  measure  will  still  protect  the  integrity  of
judicial  temperament  and  impartiality  with  greater
accountability by the people's representatives.
SJR 3 will  still put the Chief Justice  in a perceived
and   sometimes  actual   conflict  of   interest.  The
Judicial  Council  must  act  by  a  concurrence  of  4
members,   as   required   by   Article   IV   of   the
According to  the Judicial  Council Bylaws  (Article V,
Section 1),  the Chief Justice  normally does  not vote
on any  matter coming  before the  council    except in
those  instances, quoting  the Bylaws,  "when to  do so
could change the result." Because  of this provision in
the Council's  bylaws, on those occasions  when the six
regular  voting members  split 3-3,  the Chief  Justice
suddenly  morphs  from  a   non-voting  member  of  the
Council into  the crucial deciding  vote on  whether an
applicant will be forwarded to the Governor or not.
Inevitably,  this empowers  the  Chief  Justice to  use
inclusion or  exclusion of an  applicant as a  means of
influencing who will  be among his or her  peers on the
bench.  It  is  even  more alarming  when  this  occurs
during a Supreme  Court nominating vote    and in fact,
these tie-breaking  votes actually occurred on  each of
the last two Supreme Court vacancies.
SJR  3   provides  a   cursory  level   of  legislative
oversight to members of the  [Alaska] Bar that serve on
the Council.  The [Alaska] Bar having  unilateral power
to  appoint who  selects judges  that the  Governor can
consider, is  an inherent conflict  of interest  to the
profession, and  casts doubt on their  objectivity with
the   judicial  temperament   and  philosophy   of  the
candidate.
The tie  votes on the Council  are especially troubling
when  it involves  a split  of all  three public  (non-
attorney) members voting one  way, and all the attorney
members voting  the opposite way. Though  rare over the
course  of the  Council's history,  these attorney/non-
attorney   vote   splits   have  happened   much   more
frequently in the past few years.
From  June 22,  2012    Oct 10,  2013, there  were five
attorney/non-attorney split  votes, in which  all three
public  members voted  to send  an applicant's  name to
the  Governor, but  the Chief  Justice  sided with  the
attorney members and turned down the applicant.
I  urge  your support  for  SJR  3 and  the  additional
legislative oversight  it would provide to  the members
of the Bar on Judicial Council.
SENATOR SHOWER  offered to  provide context  by referring  to the
three  branches   of  government,   the  executive   branch,  the
legislative, and the judicial branch.  He offered his belief that
allowing  a  judge to  be  picked  from  within their  own  ranks
without a voice from the people  is like allowing the governor to
pick the  next governor from  a pool of governors  or legislators
picking  who  the  next  legislators  will  be  from  a  pool  of
legislators.  He did  not think  most people  would think  this a
reasonable  approach.  In  this   case,  the  state  is  allowing
attorneys to pick who the next judges are going to be.
SENATOR SHOWER  asked to read  from an article in  the Federalist
Papers  No.  39,  "The  Conformity  of  the  Plan  to  Republican
Principles,"  by James  Madison. He  noted it  is written  in old
English. He read an excerpt from paragraph 2.
The first  question that offers itself  is, whether the
general form  and aspect of the  government be strictly
republican. It is  evident that no other  form would be
reconcilable with the genius  of the people of America;
with the  fundamental principles of the  Revolution; or
with that honorable  determination which animates every
votary   of  freedom,   to  rest   all  our   political
experiments  on  the  capacity  of  mankind  for  self-
government. If  the plan of the  convention, therefore,
be found  to depart from the  republican character, its
advocates must abandon it as no longer defensible.
He read an excerpt from paragraph 4:
If  we   resort  for  a  criterion   to  the  different
principles on  which different forms of  government are
established,  we may  define a  republic to  be, or  at
least  may  bestow that  name  on,  a government  which
derives all its powers  directly or indirectly from the
great  body  of  the  people, and  is  administered  by
persons holding  their offices  during pleasure,  for a
limited  period,   or  during  good  behavior.   It  is
ESSENTIAL to such a government  that it be derived from
the   great  body   of  the   society,   not  from   an
inconsiderable proportion,  or a  favored class  of it;
Even the judges, with all  other officers of the Union,
will, as in  the several States, be  the choice, though
a  remote   choice,  of  the  people   themselves,  the
duration of the appointments  is equally conformable to
the  republican standard,  and to  the  model of  State
constitutions.
SENATOR  SHOWER   stated  that   the  process  outlined   in  the
[Constitution of  the State  of Alaska]  for selecting  judges in
Alaska,  in his  view,  is  not republican  as  defined by  James
Madison in The  Federalist No. 39 and  guaranteed in Constitution
of the  State of  Alaska in  Article IV Section  4. He  said that
Alaska's  Judicial process  is  un-republican  because it  grants
power [to  one of  three] branches of  the state's  government to
judicial  nominees who  are not  even  the remote  choice of  the
people.  Instead,  they   are  the  choice  of   the  Alaska  Bar
Association,   a    private   organization   consisting    of   a
disproportionate portion  of the  population, about  4,500 people
or 0.6 percentage  of the state's population. This  is the reason
for SJR  3 to  allow the  public a voice  in selecting  judges by
allowing  them  to  select  who serves  on  the  Alaska  Judicial
MR. OGAN said  that SJR 3 would give the  legislature the ability
to  confirm the  members of  the bar  that are  appointed to  the
Alaska Judicial Council. As the  sponsor said, Article I, Section
2 states  that "All  political power is  inherent in  the people.
All government originates with the  people, is founded upon their
will only,  and is instituted solely  for the good of  the people
as a whole."
He said that Alaska's unified  court system is very efficient. He
said that there  are advantages to have  an independent judiciary
with  an  independent  body free  from  elections,  and  campaign
donations. The framers  were mindful when they  made the decision
to set up a merit system.
MR.  OGAN said  that the  sponsor supports  that philosophy.  The
disadvantage is  that the branch  of government that  is supposed
to provide  the checks and  balances has no  corresponding checks
from the  citizens. In contrast,  many states have  county courts
and   other  jurisdictions   that   challenge  superior   court's
assumptions or  rulings or present reasonable  arguments why they
should  rule one  way or  the other.  Further, many  other states
confirm members of the bar.
He  said he  fully expects  the  Alaska Supreme  Court to  recuse
itself  if  a constitutional  challenge  occurs  with SJR  3.  He
anticipated the Alaska Court System  would oppose the measure. He
offered his  belief that the  Alaska Supreme Court has  shown its
bias by  opposing this. He  said that the Alaska  Bar Association
(ABA) will  not say that the  founders ignored the wisdom  of the
professional  consultants it  hired. He  said that  the Judiciary
Committee  in the  Constitutional  Convention  consisted of  five
lawyers and two laymen. According  to the record, the purportedly
fair and  balanced committee quickly agreed  to follow principles
suggested by  the American Bar  Association and  the professional
civic groups.  The Judiciary Committee deliberately  designed the
Alaska  Judicial  Council  with  a  weighted  balance  to  easily
prevail over  the people's representatives  in a close  call. The
Committee of the Day created  a judicial oligarchy to empower the
Alaska Bar  Association as the  sole source power of  this branch
of  government.  He  said  that   the  sponsor  finds  this  very
troubling. He characterized  it as reminding him of  the fable of
democracy  with a  committee  comprised of  five  wolves and  two
lambs deciding what is for lunch.
MR. OGAN said that Vic  Fisher, the last surviving constitutional
founder wrote  a book, in  which he  said, "the main  features of
the  proposed judicial  council  system  were unity,  simplicity,
efficiency,  accessibility, independence  for  the executive  and
legislative branches and accountability to the people."
MR. OGAN said  that regrettably the accountability  to the people
in the selection of judges got  left on the table. Only a smidgen
of accountability is left to  the people, when the bar-controlled
council  evaluates  judges and  tells  citizens  how to  vote  on
retention during election.
CHAIR HUGHES  asked whether  he was quoting  from Vic  Fisher and
when the quote started and ended.
MR. OGAN  re-read, "The  main features  of the  proposed judicial
council    system    were    unity,    simplicity,    efficiency,
accessibility,  independence for  the  executive and  legislative
branches and accountability to the people."
MR. OGAN  restated that regrettably accountability  to the people
of accountability is  left to the people  when the bar-controlled
retention  during election.  That  is really  the  only time  the
people have a say in this, he said.
MR.  OGAN  acknowledged that  a  minority  of three  members  are
confirmed by the  legislature and the chief justice  weighs in if
there is a  split vote. He reiterated the  sponsor's statement as
noted   by    the   Constitutional    Convention's   professional
consultants, "These sections  in particular go a  long way toward
withdrawing the  judicial branch from  the control of  the people
of the state and placing it under that of the organized bar."
He  read,  "No state  constitution  has  ever  gone this  far  by
placing one of  these three coordinate branches  beyond the reach
of democratic  controls. We feel  that in its desire  to preserve
the  integrity of  the courts,  the convention  has gone  farther
than  necessary  or safe  in  putting  them  in  the hands  of  a
private, professional  group however public spirited  its members
may be."
SENATOR SHOWER  agreed with  the constitutional  consultants that
the convention  went to far  when it placed the  entire judiciary
branch under the control of the Alaska Bar Association.
CHAIR HUGHES  asked whether  he knew what  the response  was from
the constitutional convention to the consultants.
MR. OGAN responded  that it apparently ignored them.  He said you
might say the five wolves had the lambs for lunch.
CHAIR HUGHES  said the foundation  of government is  a separation
of powers  doctrine. She  said it  also relies  on the  check and
balances  between  branches.  She  asked  what  other  check  and
balances the legislature  has on the judiciary  branch other than
the appropriation process or adjusting a court rule.
MR.   OGAN   said  the   legislature   attempts   to  deal   with
constitutional  questions  from  time  to time.  He  offered  his
belief  that the  frustration is  that  some legislators  believe
that  at  times the  Alaska  Supreme  Court legislates  from  the
bench. He said that checks and  balances are an important part of
democracy  and the  sponsor  is not  attempting  to undermine  or
politicize it.  He said the  Constitution of the State  of Alaska
bans  political  consideration  [for appointees]  to  the  Alaska
Judicial Council. That ban would  apply to the legislature during
[the appointment and confirmation process.]
CHAIR  HUGHES   said  she  appreciated  the   premise  that  this
resolution is based  upon, that "All political  power is inherent
in  the people.  All government  originates with  the people,  is
founded upon  their will only,  and is instituted solely  for the
good of the people as a  whole." Therefore, she will keep an open
mind, she said.  She indicated that [the  committee] has received
substantial  opposition to  the  resolution.  She emphasized  the
importance  of  checks  and  balances. Part  of  the  checks  and
balances are  achieved by  the confirmation  of the  three public
members appointed  to the Alaska Judicial  Council. The committee
will hear  from an appointee  to the Judicial  Conduct Commission
later  today.   Those  appointees   are  all  confirmed   by  the
legislature, which provides some  additional checks and balances.
However, the  judiciary's checks and balances  on the legislature
is  quite high  since  it  can overturn  and  determine laws  the
legislature has passed are unconstitutional.
She  emphasized  the   need  for  checks  and   balances  in  the
discussion. She  offered that part  of the opposition  is because
[Alaska]  has a  merit-based  system. She  acknowledged that  the
judicial process  is politicized,  and corruption occurs  in many
states in  the Lower 48. For  example, during her travels  to the
Lower 48, she has observed  that signs are everywhere when judges
are  up  for election.  Although  many  states have  an  election
process, she  offered her belief  Alaska's system is  unique. She
asked how Alaska's system compares to ones in other states.
MR. OGAN  said he was unsure  of the exact number  of states that
nominate  their judges  through a  judicial council,  but only  a
small   handful  do   not   have   legislative  confirmation   of
appointees.
CHAIR HUGHES stated  that another point of those  who are opposed
[to SJR 3] is that the system is working fine.
SENATOR  SHOWER said  he agrees  with  the phrase,  "If it's  not
broke, don't fix it." However, he  questioned if it does work. He
said  that  historically  when  the vote  is  split,  the  public
members of  the Alaska Judicial  Council (AJC) vote one  way, and
the attorneys  vote another way.  He said that the  chief justice
of the Alaska  Supreme Court always sides with  the attorneys. He
acknowledged that it could be argued  that this is because of the
data  and that  the decisions  are  based on  merit. However,  he
reiterated that it  was troubling to him when  the public members
vote  one way  and the  attorneys, and  the Alaska  Supreme Court
chief justice vote  the opposite. He pointed out  that the Alaska
Bar  Association  consists   of  a  very  small   subset  of  the
population. He  characterized the attorneys  as a group  who have
the same mindset due to  their training and duties, which results
in a  more homogenous group. Of  course, the same thing  could be
said about the  military or the legislature,  but the legislature
consists of Republicans and Democrats, he said.
He expressed further  concern that the opposition  is coming from
the Alaska Supreme  Court. It reminded him  of military strategy,
that the  closer the  military gets  to a  target that  is really
near and dear  to the enemy's heart, the harder  they will fight.
He wondered if he was on  to something with this resolution, that
if [the opposition] is fighting  hard, there may be something [to
examine]. Perhaps he has identified  something that could provide
a better  balance to the  system, which should be  considered. He
clarified   that   when   he  speaks   of   balance,   he   means
representation  by the  people, which  is why  he has  introduced
this resolution.
SENATOR SHOWER said he anticipates  opposition, which to date has
come mostly  from lawyers  and the Alaska  Supreme Court.  At the
end  of the  day, Alaska  is  a representative  republic and  the
people have  a voice, he  said. He  emphasized that all  power is
derived from  the will  of the  people. A  full one-third  of the
government has complete power over  the executive and legislative
branches, he said. He found that  to be troubling. He offered his
belief that the  people have little to no voice  in the selection
of the attorney members. He said  a small group pick members from
its own pool  to serve on the AJC, who  are subsequently selected
by  the governor,  and  serve on  the bench.  He  said that  [the
Alaska Supreme  Court] can  strike down  laws and  make decisions
about  everything the  legislature  does. He  did  not think  the
court would be  happy if a legislator  brought legislation before
them  to argue.  He characterized  it as  a "one-way  street." He
said what drives  his decision-making process is the  will of the
people and the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
CHAIR  HUGHES  agreed   that  standing  up  for   the  people  is
important. She  said she  can speak to  this in  public. However,
until  the ethics  law is  fixed,  she cannot  work privately  on
health care  laws [due to  a potential conflict of  interest]. In
fact, she had  to withdraw a bill that "stood  up" for the people
and the  health-care industry. The  health insurance  industry is
not happy  about the bill,  she said. However, she  must consider
what is right for the people, she said.
She   said   that   she  has   thought   about   democratic   and
representative government  and the potential for  corruption. She
emphasized that  she is not implying  in any way that  the Alaska
Bar Association  is corrupt. However,  when the  attorney members
are picked  from the pool, it  is a less democratic  process. She
reviewed   the  three   branches   of   government,  noting   the
legislative branch is  a mix of parties, the  executive branch is
typically  one party  or  another, and  the  judiciary branch  is
supposed to be nonpartisan. However,  she said her research shows
that  the legal  profession  in  Alaska in  the  1950s and  1960s
tended to be moderate and slightly  left of center. She said that
has changed, depending  on the source of the  research, such that
68-74 percent of  attorneys now identify themselves to  be on the
CHAIR HUGHES  said that the  legislature can create  balance. She
emphasized  her  belief that  when  she  and her  colleagues  are
voting on  confirmation hearings, they consider  candidates based
on  merit. She  explained  that they  examine qualifications  and
merit. If  SJR 3 were  to pass, it would  not mean that  merit is
being  disregarded  since the  pool  would  still come  from  the
Alaska Bar  Association. Thus, if  this resolution were  to pass,
every  candidate would  be considered  acceptable based  on their
merits  and  qualifications. She  said  the  opposition seems  to
think it  would be  politicized, and  it might  be for  some. She
said  that members  of the  executive branch  are all  confirmed,
including  the  attorney general.  She  offered  her belief  that
merit would not be removed from the process.
SENATOR MICCICHE joined the meeting.
SENATOR SHOWER reiterated  that the Constitution of  the State of
Alaska does not  allow the process to be politicized,  but we are
humans. He  said he does  not believe that judges  are absolutely
unbiased since they are human, although  he is sure they do their
best. He  offered his belief  that SJR 3  gives a balance  of who
sits  on the  Alaska Judicial  Council. The  council selects  and
forwards  the names  of candidates  for potential  judges to  the
governor and the governor selects the judge.
SENATOR  KIEHL  appreciated  the   discussion  of  principle.  He
acknowledged that  the legislature has considered  appointees who
are not of  the majority party in the legislature  and have voted
them down without a single  word of debate. He questioned whether
that is always apolitical. He  asked for further clarification if
the Alaska Supreme  Court has ever elected a  chief justice prior
to the retention vote of the people.
MR. OGAN answered that he was unsure.
SENATOR SHOWER deferred to anyone who may know the answer.
SENATOR KIEHL said it is important  to him, since it is important
to have a vital check of  the people. He said Alaskan voters have
a  say in  who serves  on  the bench.  He characterized  it as  a
critical  check. He  said he  would  be surprised  if anyone  was
elected  to a  three-year term  as  chief justice  to the  Alaska
Supreme  Court  without  having  gone before  the  voters  for  a
retention vote.  He said  he was intrigued  by the  James Madison
He said  that if  a judge  has been retained  by the  people, the
public  has weighed  in and  made  the decision.  He offered  his
belief that  the vote reflects the  will of the people.  He asked
who the consultants to the  Alaska Constitutional Convention were
and if they were Alaskans or consultants from the Lower 48.
SENATOR SHOWER said  that the "remote voice of  the people" would
refer to  a voice  in the  selection process.  He said  that this
happens in  some states and  in others,  such as Alaska,  it does
not. He said  the distinction is whether the  judges are directly
elected.  He said  that there  is not  any direct  line from  the
voters  to the  three people  who  serve on  the Alaska  Judicial
Council. He reiterated that historically,  when the chief justice
sides with the three attorney  appointees, these four individuals
have  made  the  decision  of  which  names  to  forward  to  the
governor.  He maintained  that  means the  people  would have  no
voice in the process. Instead, the  decisions are made by a small
subset of the  population. He acknowledged that  the three public
members are confirmed by the  legislature, but the other four are
not confirmed, which he found most concerning.
SENATOR KIEHL offered that when  the chief justice is retained by
a vote of  the people, it means  that at least 60  percent of the
Alaska  Judicial  Council voting  members  are  confirmed by  the
legislature. He  asked for  further clarification  on consultants
for the constitutional convention.
MR. OGAN  responded that he  referenced Vic Fischer's  book [,"To
Russia  with   Love,  An  Alaskan's  Journey."]   He  read,  "The
consultants  suggested  the number  of  revisions  that would  in
their  view  democratize the  proposed  system  by providing  for
legislative  confirmation the  attorney members  of the  judicial
council, adding a superior court  judge and another lay member to
the membership  of the  council and  other changes.  However, the
suggestions were  not accepted  by the  meeting of  the committee
chairman and never reached the convention floor."
MR.  OGAN  surmised  that  if   they  were  advising  the  Alaska
Constitutional  Convention   Judiciary  Committee   that  someone
considered them qualified.
CHAIR  HUGHES  asked  for  further   clarification  on  how  many
attorneys drafted the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
SENATOR  SHOWER offered  to research  it and  report back  to the
SENATOR KIEHL recalled  the sponsor referenced a  series of split
votes by  the Alaska  Judicial Council. He  asked how  many total
votes were made during the  18-month period that resulted in five
split  votes. He  further asked  for  the number  of split  votes
going back  over a  longer period  and whether  this is  a system
that  has a  consistent problem  or if  there are  a few  outlier
votes.
CHAIR HUGHES said judges are  sworn to uphold the Constitution of
the State of Alaska, yet people weigh in against this.
SENATOR SHOWER observed  that SJR 3 seems to be  a sensitive area
since it is upsetting people. He  offered his belief that most of
the opposition  is from the  Alaska Bar Association  and lawyers.
He offered his  belief that the people would want  a voice in the
process of  selecting judges. He  reiterated that the  Alaska Bar
Association really gets to make the choice.
CHAIR HUGHES pointed out that this  is not giving people a direct
choice  over   who  sits  on   the  bench,  but  it   relates  to
confirmation  of  members  appointed   to  serve  on  the  Alaska
Judicial  Council  and  that  group  selects  names  of  judicial
candidates to  forward to  the governor.  She offered  her belief
that the names selected would be of high merit.
SENATOR  MICCICHE said  he does  not have  any personal  vendetta
against  the  court.  He  pointed  out that  the  court  and  the
legislature are supposed to be  isolated bodies. The courts judge
the  legislature's   work  and   define  if   what  is   done  is
constitutional,  which  is  often not  reciprocal.  However,  the
voters can choose not to retain  a judge. He asked whether judges
should be selected by the people.  He offered his belief that the
tendency is to  send everything to the people to  decide. He said
that the reason [the Alaska  Bar Association has selected members
of the Alaska  Judicial Council] is because they  are the experts
in  this  field.  The  reason  legislators  generally  make  good
decisions is because  they are forced to become  experts. He said
he  is not  taking  an  adverse position  on  this  bill, but  he
wondered  how much  should be  sent to  the people.  He concluded
that Alaska does not have that kind of government.
SENATOR SHOWER  said this issue  arose when a young  man provided
him with  his research on this  topic, that it was  not something
he had  considered. He related  his personal experience  in front
of a  court was when he  was a major  still in the Air  Force. He
was  ticketed  for having  a  load  of  wood extending  over  the
sidewalk. He appeared in uniform  and the case was dismissed. His
experience with judges has been very positive.
He was not sure  if it would be better to use  this process or to
hold elections  to determine judges. He  acknowledged that voters
vote on whether  to retain judges [in Alaska], which  is based on
merit  and  performance. He  said  that  legislators are  elected
representatives of  the people.  However, he maintained  that the
people do not have a voice  in who selects the judicial branch of
government  members. He  said he  would not  propose that  Alaska
elect  its  judge  or  for   the  legislature  to  pick  judicial
nominees. However, he  said he thinks that it  is very reasonable
that the members of the Alaska Judicial Council [be confirmed].
SENATOR  MICCICHE said  there are  reasons  for the  court to  be
independent or it would be a  mob rule on every decision. He said
that  mob rule  is not  always the  right one.  He said  the five
split votes does  not mean anything to him, but  he would like to
understand the  problem. He  acknowledged that  he has  been very
frustrated with the courts because  they do not always agree with
SENATOR SHOWER asked the record to  reflect that he does not have
a vendetta.  This issue was  brought to him.  He has tried  to be
clear  that  the court  generally  works  fine. He  reviewed  the
Alaska  Constitutional Convention  related  to  selection of  the
judiciary.   He  recapped   that  the   Alaska  Bar   Association
essentially  makes  the choices  of  [who  serves on  the  Alaska
Judicial  Council   and  the  AJC  forwards   names  of  judicial
candidates to the  governor]. He characterized it as  a small gap
that he is trying to address.
MR. OGAN  said that judges  and courts have  a lot of  power over
Alaskans. They have the power  to imprison and impoverish people.
The courts can  overturn laws the legislature passes.  He said he
served in the  building for 10 years. He said  the litmus test he
would have for the Alaska  Judicial Council appointees is if they
would  select people  who are  fair  and impartial  and will  not
legislate  from  the bench.  The  Constitution  of the  State  of
Alaska says the bar cannot  consider the politics of an appointee
to  the Alaska  Judicial  Council and  the  legislature would  be
constitutionally prohibited from doing the same.
SENATOR KIEHL  expressed an interest  in hearing from  the Alaska
Court  System.  He offered  his  belief  that the  Constitutional
Convention did not miss anything.  He said that they required two
branches  of government  to make  a decision.  With a  regulatory
board, the governor appoints member  and the legislature confirms
the  appointee.  The board  can  set  regulations and  fees.  The
governor  appoints  members  to  the Board  of  Regents  and  the
legislature  confirms. He  said that  this seems  to be  the only
situation that has two and  a half members. The governor appoints
and the  legislature confirms half  of the members of  the Alaska
Judicial Council.  The AJC screens  applicants, and  the governor
appoints judges.  He offered his  belief that more checks  in the
process  occur  with the  Alaska  Judicial  Council, rather  than
fewer.
SENATOR SHOWER  said he does  think [the gap] was  overlooked. He
referred  to the  Alaska  Constitutional  Convention minutes.  He
read, "As  noted by the professional  consultants, these sections
in  particular go  a  long way  toward  withdrawing the  judicial
branch from  the control of the  people of the state  and placing
it under the organized bar.  The convention has gone farther than
necessary or safe  in putting them, the judicial  council, in the
hands of  a private, professional group,  however public-spirited
its  members  may  be."  He  surmised  that  these  people  would
disagree  that  there  is  more control  since  the  very  people
involved in  the process  say that there  is less.  He maintained
that the  people's voice is  being removed from the  selection of
who ends up being on the bench and wielding immense power.
CHAIR HUGHES said that the Alaska  Bar Association is not part of
the legislature  or the executive  branch, so she arrives  at one
and one-half.  She said the  governor makes the  appointment, but
the legislature only confirms half of the board members.
SENATOR  KIEHL   said  the  governor  appoints   and  legislature
confirms some members of the  Alaska Judicial Council. The people
vote on  retention of the  chief justice.  It is in  the judicial
branch  and the  Alaska Judicial  Council screens  applicants for
the governor. He maintained that  all three branches are involved
in this  process. He said  he would like  to hear more  about the
consultants   because   the  Alaska   Constitutional   Convention
delegates  were elected  by the  people. The  delegates disagreed
with the consultants.
CHAIR HUGHES  said that this  relates to the  appointment process
and  not how  the judiciary  branch and  legislative branch  work
MR. OGAN  offered his  belief that  only a  few judges  have been
turned down  by an  election. He recalled  that perhaps  only one
other  judge was  voted down  in 40  years. He  said he  votes no
unless he knows the judge. He said  he thinks it is good to get a
little "fresh blood"  in there once in a while.  He said the non-
retention is  a pretty limited  check and  it is rarely  used. He
acknowledged that  judges can be removed  through the impeachment
process. He offered his belief  that this resolution would make a
very small correction in the process.
SENATOR  SHOWER offered  to research  and provide  information on
the consultants to the Alaska Constitutional Convention.
SENATOR MICCICHE  said he  would like to  put more  emphasized on
understanding the reason the three  positions are independent. He
said he appreciated Mr. Ogan's  statement that the legislature is
not  overly  political  with  respect   to  the  people  who  are
confirmed. He  said, "But that  just simply isn't the  case." The
legislature "digs stuff  up from elementary school  and we parade
it  out there  as though  the rest  of us  should be  casting the
first  stone."  He  acknowledged  that  no  one  is  perfect.  He
reiterated that  the confirmation  process is not  apolitical. He
said that  a prime  example is  the Board of  Fish. He  said that
this  sounds like  a change  that he  would support.  However, he
maintained he  would like to  put more  time in to  determine why
the three  positions are independently selected  by the technical
experts as opposed to those who will be weighing in politically.
CHAIR  HUGHES   suggested  that  doing  a   background  check  on
appointees is  not something she  considers to be  political. She
considers it to be part of the qualification and merit check.
SENATOR SHOWER  focused his concern  that a small  subset selects
who serves  on the  Alaska Judicial Council.  He would  prefer to
have representatives  of the people  making those  decisions. His
concern  is  that  the  ultimate decisions  made  by  the  Alaska
Judicial Council could  be swayed. Again, less  than 5,000 people
are part of the Alaska Bar Association, he said.
SENATOR MICCICHE  said this is  the second  or third time  he has
seen this  approach since  he has served  in the  legislature. He
said he  will be very  careful about  this measure. He  will also
keep an open mind, he said.
CHAIR HUGHES  offered her  belief that  the last  iteration would
have added three public members. She  said that SJR 3 seems to be
a much smaller tweak and a more reasonable approach.
NANCY  MEADE,  General  Counsel, Administrative  Offices,  Alaska
Court System,  Anchorage, stated  that this  is a  resolution the
Alaska Supreme Court  has asked her to oppose. She  said that the
reason  the Alaska  Court  System  opposes SJR  3  is because  it
believes that it is not a  harmless change to the Constitution of
the State  of Alaska  to add  confirmation. In  fact, it  has the
potential to  be quite harmful  to the judicial  independence and
it goes to the administration of justice.
She  offered  to provide  the  reasons  why  the court  does  not
believe it  is a harmless change.  She said she has  no intent to
disparage  anyone's  intentions   in  the  legislature.  However,
confirmation  of appointees  often  does  become something  other
than 100  percent merit based.  Currently, the appointees  by the
Alaska  Bar  Association  to  the  Alaska  Judicial  Council  are
appointed  based on  merit. She  said that  not a  lot of  people
apply  to serve  on the  Alaska Judicial  Council. These  are not
considered to be plum positions  that are highly competitive with
twelve or fifteen people being voted  on, she said. She said that
Ms. DiPietro can  provide more information; however,  it is often
one, two,  or three  attorneys who  apply. Those  attorneys would
run the  risk of having "red  flags" raised that might  be things
said in  a legal  brief, when they  were representing  someone in
court or previously made donations  to politicians. She said that
these  are not  things that  the Alaska  Bar Association  members
would be  considering when voting  on appointees to serve  on the
council. She  pointed out that  Attorney General Clarkson  had to
defend himself against  things he said in  litigation and explain
how those  comments may not  necessarily mirror his  beliefs. She
said she did  not agree with the implication that  this change is
harmless.
MS. MEADE said that the  sponsor and sponsor's staff acknowledged
that the very  goal of this is  to change the nature  of who sits
on  the  bench. She  pointed  out  the  comments in  the  sponsor
statement about criminal justice and  "hang 'em high judges." The
implication is  that perhaps some  judges are perceived  as being
not  tough  enough  when   sentencing  criminal  defendants.  She
reiterated  that the  goal is  to get  behind who  serves on  the
bench. She said that the thinking  appears to be that if there is
a little  bit more check on  who chooses the nominees  that go to
the governor that  it might change the nature of  the judges. She
said  that  is   why  it  goes  beyond   a  harmless  legislative
confirmation just like every other board and commission process.
MS. MEADE cautioned that the  Alaska Judicial Council is not just
like  every  other  board and  commission.  The  Alaska  Judicial
Council is an  independent entity created in  the Constitution of
the State of  Alaska. The Board of Fish and  the Board of Barbers
and  Hairdressers is  not in  the  Constitution of  the State  of
Alaska, she said.  The council is established  specifically as an
independent group.  It is  in the  judiciary article  on purpose.
She said  the constitutional  drafters discussed  this provision.
She provided an  excerpt from the minutes  [in members' packets].
This  is  not  a  "stark  glaring  oversight"  that  the  sponsor
statement indication.  This was  an absolutely  purposeful, well-
thought out and debated provision.  There was an amendment during
the Alaska  Constitutional Convention to provide  for legislative
confirmation of the three attorney members.
MS. MEADE referred to the  document she provided to the committee
titled,  "Excerpted Minutes  of  Constitutional Convention."  She
said that this  describes the whole theory of  the Missouri Plan.
She read from the language titled  "Page 695", "The theory on the
lay members  on the confirmation,  they represent the  public and
they represent  the predominate  political thought."  She pointed
out that this is 50 percent of the members on the council.
MS. MEADE  continued. "The  theory on the  lawyer members  of the
council, they  represent the profession, they  represent the best
interests of the profession. They  represent a desire to have the
best judges  on the  benches." She emphasized  that this  was not
She turned  to a  statement by Mr.  McLaughlin found  above "Page
695," and  read: "The whole theory  of the Missouri Plan  is that
in substance,  a select and  professional group, licensed  by the
state, can best determine the  qualifications of their brothers."
She  explained that  this does  not give  lawyers any  elitist or
special population a say that  seems unfounded. She characterized
it as  being the  same as  acknowledging that  if you  need heart
surgery  you  might ask  other  doctors  who  is the  best  heart
surgeon. It does  not mean that it  is put to a  popular vote but
rather to contact the people who  know their "brethren" as it was
stated at  the time  of the  constitutional convention.  They are
best able to  determine which lawyers are the ones  at the top of
their field.
She continued and read a portion of the following:
The intent  of the  Missouri Plan  was in  substance to
give  a predominance  of the  vote to  professional men
who   know   the   foibles,   the   defects   and   the
qualifications of their  brothers. It is unquestionably
true that in  every trade and every  profession the men
who know their brother careerists  the best are the men
engaged in the same type of occupation.
She emphasized that  it was not an accident and  it is not "willy
nilly"  that lawyers  get  to  choose the  three  lawyers on  the
commission. It  is very  purposeful, she  said. She  continued to
read excerpts of the minutes:
If you  require confirmation  of your  attorney members
you can  promptly see what  will happen.  The selection
is not then  made by the organized bar on  the basis of
a   man's   professional  qualifications   alone.   The
determination of the selection  of those people who are
on  the  judicial  council will  be  qualified  by  the
condition, are they acceptable to  a house and a senate
or a  senate alone, which is  essentially Democratic or
essentially  Republican.  No  longer  is  the  question
based  solely on  the qualification  ***Page 695***  of
the candidate for the bench.
MS. MEADE  remarked that requiring  confirmation of  the attorney
members  was  not  a  generalized  discussion  of  the  judiciary
article, which is what the consultants were talking about.
She emphasized  the excerpt, "The  determination of  those people
who are  on the council will  be qualified by the  condition, are
they acceptable to a house and  a senate or a senate alone, which
is  essentially   Democratic  or  essentially   Republican."  She
remarked  that the  Alaska Court  System  absolutely agrees  with
MS.  MEADE said  that these  thoughts from  1959 are  exactly the
thoughts  that  [the Alaska  Court  System]  currently has.  This
system has worked well for the last  50 or 60 years. There is not
any need to think that this  language that swayed the day in 1959
is any different now. The excerpt  goes on to read, "The question
is,  will those  people  whom  we set  up  here  on the  judicial
council, that  we send from the  bar, will they be  acceptable in
terms of political correctness?"
She  said that  [the  Alaska  Court System]  does  not want  that
question  coming into  play until  the very  end of  the judicial
selection process.
MS.  MEADE  asked  members  to  flip to  the  last  page  of  the
constitutional  convention   excerpted  minutes.  She   said  the
amendment overwhelmingly failed by a  vote of 4-49. The delegates
overwhelming voted  not to have  legislative confirmation  of the
attorney  members.  It  was  not   an  oversight,  but  was  very
purposeful, she said. She offered  her belief that those concerns
hold sway just  as well today and [the Alaska  Court System] does
not want the  qualifications removed or the merit base  to be de-
emphasized at all and add politics at that level.
MS. MEADE touched  on the votes [of the  Alaska Judicial Council]
to emphasize  the reason it is  not necessary to make  any change
[to  the  process  for selecting  council  members].  The  Alaska
constitutional  drafters  had the  benefit  of  [48] other  state
constitutions and  the benefit to  see what worked well  and what
did  not work  well. She  said at  least 12  other states  do not
require  legislative  confirmation  of  their  attorney  members.
Alaska is  not a "lone wolf"  in this area and  other states were
studied. The Constitution of the State  of Alaska is known as the
"gold standard" nationwide in the selection of judges.
There is  a balance. Three  people are appointed by  the governor
and confirmed  by the  legislature. That  is the  peoples' voice,
she said.  Three lawyers, who  are also constituents  and regular
Alaskans  and citizens.  All  six people  serving  on the  Alaska
Judicial  Council  are  constituents.  The  chief  justice  votes
rarely, only when a tie occurs.
MS.  MEADE referred  to  a handout  in  members' packets  titled,
"Alaska  Judicial  Council  Vote Summaries,  1984-present."  This
shows that  this is a council  that works very well.  Since 1984,
which is  as far  back as  the data goes,  1,389 votes  have been
taken. She said that 82.5 percent  of the votes were unanimous or
5-1. She  characterized that as a  well-functioning organization.
She offered  her belief  that this  could be  said of  many other
organizations  in this  state. During  this  35-year period,  the
chief justice has  voted 75 of 1,389 times. Of  the 75 votes, the
chief  justice  voted  57  times  to  forward  the  name  to  the
governor. She said that most ties  were a mix of attorney members
and public members. In one percent  of the time, 19 times between
1984 to the  present were the attorneys  and non-attorneys split.
She  emphasized that  this does  not demonstrate  a dysfunctional
organization  or  an  organization  in which  the  attorneys  are
bullying  the   public  members.   This  group  gets   along  and
cooperates well,  she said. She said  that in 8 of  19 times, the
chief justice voted  with the non-attorneys and  the remaining 11
times   with  the   attorneys.   She  characterized   it  as   an
inconsequential  difference. She  said that  there cannot  be any
conclusion that the chief justice  votes with the attorneys every
time. It is not borne out by  the data; however, it does not show
an organization with problems or needs to be adjusted.
MS. MEADE said  she wanted to address something that  is a little
difficult to broach.  She said she thinks that it  is fair to say
that  there is  a thought  that  changes to  the Alaska  Judicial
Council is needed  because there is a sense  that Alaska's judges
are not conservative enough. There's  a sense that the judges are
over-empowered or  exercising judicial  activism from  the bench.
She said  that the Constitution  of the  State of Alaska  is like
every  other  constitution in  every  other  state and  the  U.S.
Constitution  does have  checks  and balances.  One  of the  main
checks and balances  for the legislature is  that the legislature
can  in every  session  overrule  an opinion  of  the court.  The
legislature does  this by changing  the statute.  The legislature
will state  in its legislative  intent the whole purpose  of this
bill is  to change the  decision of  the Alaska Supreme  Court or
the Court of  Appeals. The legislature can do so  up to the point
of a  constitutional determination. In our  system of government,
someone must have  the last say as to what  is constitutional and
it  is  the  Alaska  Supreme  Court.  She  acknowledged  that  it
sometimes frustrates the legislature because  it passes a bill or
resolution  it believes  passes  constitutional  muster, and  the
Alaska  Supreme Court  decides otherwise.  She said  that if  the
Alaska  Supreme Court  or  the  Court of  Appeals  says that  its
interpretation is "X," the next  session the legislature can pass
a statute to change the law to  "Y," based on policy. She said it
frequently  occurs  and  it  represents  a  big  "check"  on  the
opinions from the Alaska Court System.
MS.  MEADE addressed  the concern  and  sense that  conservatives
cannot  become   judges.  She  said   that  of  the   73  judges,
approximately  42  percent  were  prosecutors,  33  percent  were
public  defenders   at  some  point   in  their   careers.  These
applicants  have  been  business attorneys  and  public  interest
attorneys; and she did not think  that it is a fair assessment to
say that it  has been hard for certain people  to get through the
Alaska Judicial  Council because  of their politics.  Some judges
have  attended   military  schools,  Christian   schools,  public
universities,  and private  universities.  They  fish, they  fly,
they are in  Boy Scouts, and they are involved  in athletics. She
offered her  belief that a unified  liberal bench is a  myth. She
said if anyone thinks it is  otherwise, to point to something and
she  is  willing  to  hold  a  discussion  and  would  need  hard
evidence. She  said that  Alaska's judges  are ranked  during the
retention cycle  by all the jurors  who appear in front  of them.
They  receive   a  score  based  on   performance,  impartiality,
temperament,  fairness,  integrity,  diligence and  overall.  The
performance  score for  Alaska's  judges  is 4.9  out  of 5.  She
pointed out  that constituents are the  ones who sit in  front of
the judges for  hours and days. She said that  the peace officers
and  probation  officers overall  ranking  of  is  4.5 of  5.  In
closing, she  stated that Alaska  does not have a  broken system.
She noted that the performance rating is statewide.
CHAIR HUGHES  asked for the  dates of  the 21 instances  when the
chief justice acted  as a tiebreaker, in terms of  years in which
those occurred  so the committee can  see the trend and  if it is
evenly spread.
MS. MEADE  said that  there have  not been any  in the  last four
years. She offered to research and provide it to the committee.
SUSANNE  DIPIETRO, Executive  Director, Alaska  Judicial Council,
Anchorage,  reviewed the  Alaska  Judicial Council's  procedures,
purposes, and  goals. She  said she has  some information  on how
Alaska's judicial merit system fits  in with the national system.
She directed  attention to the Alaska  Judicial Council's bylaws.
She said  the Alaska Judicial  Council evaluates people  who want
to  be  judges  by  considering  their  professional  competence,
including  written  and  oral  communication  skills,  integrity,
fairness,  temperament, judgment,  including common  sense, legal
experience,  life  experience,  and  demonstrated  commitment  to
public and  community service. These  are the qualities  that the
council members are evaluating in the applicants.
She said that  the council has published  very detailed selection
procedures, which are  found on its website and  published in its
annual  report.   The  Alaska   Judicial  Council   provides  the
legislature  with its  biennial report.  She emphasized  that the
council is  prohibited from considering applicants'  political or
religious beliefs.
MS.  DIPIETRO  said  that  the  council  is  very  proud  of  its
transparent judicial selection process.  Its bylaws are available
in  written form  and are  posted on  its website.  She said  the
council has  approximately 15 pages of  detailed procedures about
how the  council evaluates  people who want  to be  judges, which
includes an  important public  component of  the process.  At any
point in  a judicial selection  process, a citizen can  provide a
written  letter   to  the  Alaska  Judicial   Council  about  any
applicant, or with  any opinion or suggestion on  how the council
should  be   doing  its   job.  She  said   that  all   of  these
communications go  to the council members  for consideration. She
said that in  a formal sense, the council holds  a public hearing
for  every vacancy  in  the  community where  the  judge will  be
seated. The  council has been  very gratified, in  particular, in
rural areas to have standing  room only attendance. She said that
people identify  who they  believe are  the good  applicants, and
even more  importantly, identify challenges in  the community for
the council to assist them in the selection process.
MS. DIPIETRO  discussed how  the council  fits into  the national
perspective.  She said  she welcomed  the opportunity  to have  a
dialogue  with the  sponsor's office.  She said  that the  Alaska
Judicial  Council's  staff  tracks   what  is  happening  in  the
national scene in terms of  judicial selection. She said that her
data  does not  support  the  statement that  only  a handful  of
states  do  not  require  legislative  confirmation  of  attorney
members. In fact,  her tally shows that 35 states  use a judicial
nominating commission  in some  way to  select state  judges. The
states all use  very different processes. She said that  in 18 of
the 35, the bar association  appoints the attorney members of the
commission with  no further  involvement by  the governor  or the
legislature.   In  several   jurisdictions,  several   seats  are
reserved  for legislative  appointment. She  said that  she found
only two  states in which  the legislature actually  must confirm
an attorney member  of a judicial nominating  commission She said
that her research  indicates it is an extreme  minority. She said
that  the  most  common  template  for  the  judicial  nominating
commissions  is  very similar  to  the  one  used by  the  Alaska
Judicial Council.  She said  that a roughly  equal number  of the
non-attorney and  attorney members  are appointed. She  said that
usually the  attorney members  are appointed by  the bar  with no
further  involvement  of  confirmation  by the  governor  or  the
legislature. The  non-attorney members are selected  by a variety
of  methods,  sometimes  by gubernatorial  appointment  or  other
CHAIR HUGHES  asked her  to provide her  chart to  the committee.
She  further  asked  if  she would  provide  the  composition  of
attorney and non-attorney members for the other states.
[SJR 3 was held in committee.]
SJR 3 Version A.PDF SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJUD 4/15/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3
SJR 3 - Sponsor Statement.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR3 Fiscal Note.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 - Historical Roster of AJC members.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 - AJC Att -Non Att vote splits - highlighted.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 - Constitutional Convention Minutues about Judiciary_AJC.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 - AJC_Court System members and votes info.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 - Vic Fisher Constitution book exerpts.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 Opposition AFL-CIO.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 Opposition Former Attorney General.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 Opposition Justice not Politics.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
SJR 3 Opposition Resolution AFN.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM
JUD Judicial Conduct Mores Resume.pdf SJUD 4/12/2019 1:30:00 PM


text:
Q: "unresolved external symbol" when including a single-header library When I try to include any single-header library in my project (here I am using HTTPRequest), it keeps giving me the LNK2019 error.

This is my code:
#include "HTTPRequest.hpp"

void main()
{
    http::Request request{ "http://test.com/test" };
    const auto response = request.send("GET");
    std::cout << std::string{ response.body.begin(), response.body.end() } << '\n';
}

Is this an issue with my project setup because these libraries are meant to be a single h/hpp file?

A: Those error messages are referring to socket API functions which the HTTP library is using.  You need to link your project to your platform's socket library, ie ws2_32.lib on Windows, etc.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: How to add three colors of texts in a single span without using a  tag how to add three colors of texts in a single span (details-red, Enter-blue, here-yellow) without using a  tag. Is that possible?
Details Enter Here

A: You can't do it without using 3 separate tags of some sort since you need an identifier or something to add the color to. Just plain text isn't enough of a specifier. Here is an example showing how to use it with either 3 separate  or 3 separate
.
JSFiddle

A: You need to use 3 different span in order to do that as shown below:
Details
 Enter
 Here

A: While there is no CSS selector for words, you can't do it without any additional tags inside the span. As font tag is deprecated, you still might be able to use other inline tag. The most common is span, so there is no problem wrapping a span inside a span, as it is allowed (valid for HTML 4 and 5) to wrap inline elements inside a span.
You said in a comment above:

sir, we have a common css so we cant use the font tag, including more span will need to change other pages also

So this is right, if you split the span tag into three tags. But you should be able to wrap some additional span inside the existing tag, like:

    Details
    Enter
    Here!

Then you might be able to use classes for the child span or even use some CSS magic like:
span:first-child {
  color: red;
}
span:nth-child(2) {
  color: blue;
}
span:last-child {
  color: yellow;
}

This way, there is no need to change any of the current CSS (so other pages won't be affected), but you might need to add some additional selectors for the new tags (you might even do this inline like  if you don't want to touch the CSS files).
You can try the fiddle here. Hope this helps!


As I've told you on the helpdesk, we haven't release the list of the bugs solved.
There's a blog post that introduces the new additions to the mikroC.
I've forwarded the request for the bug track list to our developers.


text:
20 años es el nombre del séptimo álbum de estudio grabado por el intérprete mexicano Luis Miguel. Fue lanzado al mercado por la compañía discográfica WEA Latina el 18 de mayo de 1990.

Producción
El álbum fue producido por el compositor y productor musical español Juan Carlos Calderón, que ya había trabajado en los cuatro anteriores álbumes de Luis Miguel. 20 años fue un éxito masivo en América Latina y los Estados Unidos.

Todos las canciones del álbum fueron lanzados como sencillos, de éstos, 6 fueron los más exitosos: "Entrégate", "Tengo todo excepto a ti", "Amante del amor", "Hoy el aire huele a ti", "Más allá de todo", "Será que no me amas". Esta última, versión del tema "Blame It on the Boogie", tuvo una coreografía muy popular en América Latina.

Adicional a estos, se lanzó un sencillo en inglés titulado Before the dawn, versión en dicho idioma del tema Entrégate, para su promoción en Reino Unido y Estados Unidos. El escaso éxito obtenido, provocó que fuera la primera y única vez que Luis Miguel grabara versiones en inglés de sus canciones.

Las interpretaciones especiales de trompeta en "Hoy el aire huele a tí" es por Herb Alpert y en los coros por Martika.

Lanzamiento y recepción
En 1991, el álbum recibió una nominación a los Premios Grammy en la categoría de mejor álbum de pop latino y al Premio Lo Nuestro en la categoría de mejor álbum pop del año.

Fue el álbum de consolidación del artista, batiendo un récord de ventas en México, al lograr vender 600 000 durante el primer fin de semana de su lanzamiento, además de eso, Luis Miguel entra a la adultez en definitiva donde su álbum 20 años se consideró el cuarto mejor álbum del artista Mexicano luego de Palabra de Honor 1984 y Hombre Busca una Mujer 1988/Aries 1993 y Toda la Serie de Romance 1991-2001.

Posicionamiento en listas

Créditos y personal
 Productor: Juan Carlos Calderón
 Arreglos: Juan Carlos Calderón, Robbie Buchanan (básicos) & Jerry Hey (metales)
 Batería y Percusión: John Robinson
 Bajo: Dennis Belfield y Neil Stubenhaus
 Guitarra eléctrica: Paul Jackson, Jr.
 Guitarra acústica: Oscar Castro-Neves
 Piano y Sintetizadores: Robbie Buchanan y Juan Carlos Calderón
 Cuerdas: Gina Krontasadt (Sección de cuerdas)
 Metales: Jerry Hey (Sección de metales)
 Coros: Martika, Darlene Koldenhoven, Marlene Landin, KC Porter, José Pezullo, Dan Navarro y Clydene Jackson
 Solo de Trompeta en "Hoy el aire huele a ti": Herb Alpert
 Solo de Saxofón: Dan Higgins
 Programación de música por computadora y diseño de sonido: Philip Cacayorin
 Coordinación general: Ivy Skoff.
 Fotografía: Carlos Somonte
 Masterización: Bernie Grundman
 Grabado y mezclado en Sunset Sound Studios, Hollywood, CA
 Ingeniero de Grabación y Mezcla: Benny Faccone
 Mezcla de "Será que no me amas", "Alguien como tú" y "Cuestión de piel" por: Brad Gilderman.
 Trompeta y fliscorno: Jerry Hey
 Trompeta y fliscorno: Gary Grant
 Trombón: Bill Reichenbach
 Saxofón Tenor y Barítono: Marc Russo
 Saxofón Alto: Dan Higgins
 Herb Alpert aparece por cortesía de A&M Records
 Martika aparece por cortesía de CBS Records

Lista de canciones

Sencillos
 1990: «Tengo todo excepto a ti» (Con Videoclip)
 1990: «Entrégate» (Con Videoclip)
 1990: «Amante del amor»
 1990: «Hoy el aire huele a ti»
 1990: «Más allá de todo»
 1991: «Será que no me amas»
 1991: «Más»
 1991: «Alguien como tú (Somebody in your life)»

Referencias

Álbumes de 1990
Álbumes de México de 1990
Álbumes de Luis Miguel
Álbumes en español
Álbumes de balada romántica
Álbumes de Warner Music Latina
Álbumes producidos por Juan Carlos Calderón

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
HomeINDUSTRY NEWSPernod Ricard USA And Southern Wine & Spirits Launch A National Effort To Promote Responsible Drinking
Pernod Ricard USA And Southern Wine & Spirits Launch A National Effort To Promote Responsible Drinking
Companies Team Up In Support of Foundation For Advancing Alcohol Responsibility
Pernod Ricard USA, the premium spirits and wine company in the U.S., and Southern Wine & Spirits of America, Inc. (Southern), the nation's leading spirits and wine distributor, today announced a national effort to promote retailer engagement with The Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility (FAAR), a national not-for-profit funded by distillers aimed at reducing drunk driving and underage drinking.
Pernod Ricard USA's full salesforce will team up with more than 1,000 Southern salespeople beginning today to distribute information to retail accounts that can be shared with consumers about key FAAR programs, including B4Udrink.org, which offers tips on how such factors as body type and food consumption can affect Blood Alcohol content (BAC) after alcohol consumption. The team is expected to cover nearly 15,000 stores nation-wide.
"Pernod Ricard USA and Southern Wine & Spirits are committed to being leaders – not only in the sales of our premium portfolio, but also in the fight against the abuse of our products," says Bryan Fry, President and CEO, Pernod Ricard USA. "That's why we're excited to team with Southern in this effort to help retailers promote responsible consumption."
Wayne Chaplin, Southern's President and Chief Operating Officer, added, "We're asking our sales teams to do what they do best – talk to retailers – about useful tools aimed at reducing the irresponsible consumption of alcohol. We're honored to work with Pernod Ricard USA and FAAR on this initiative and committed to being leaders in educating consumers on responsible drinking."
Formerly known as The Century Council, FAAR has created breakthrough programs that have significantly reduced drunk driving and underage drinking. Since the organization was formed in 1991, underage drinking among eighth graders has reached an all-time low and drunk driving has declined by 35 percent.
"While the progress has been impressive, we can't rest on our laurels," says Martin Crane, SVP, Spirits Sales, Pernod Ricard USA. "That's why the messaging our sales teams will deliver is designed to enlist retailers' support in our fight against irresponsible consumption, while also empowering them to issue a call to action to consumers."
FAAR President and CEO Ralph Blackman commended Pernod Ricard USA and Southern for teaming up to reach retailers, saying he is "delighted by this integrated initiative to help spread the word about FAAR and alcohol responsibility."
ABOUT PERNOD RICARD USA
Pernod Ricard USA is the premium spirits and wine company in the U.S., and the largest subsidiary of Paris, France-based Pernod Ricard SA, which employs a workforce of nearly 19,000 people worldwide and is listed on the NYSE Euronext exchange (Ticker: RI).
The company's leading spirits and wines include such prestigious brands as Absolut Vodka, Chivas Regal Scotch Whisky, The Glenlivet Single Malt Scotch Whisky, Jameson Irish Whiskey, Malibu, Kahlúa Liqueur, Beefeater Gin, Plymouth Gin, Seagram's Extra Dry Gin, Martell Cognac, Hiram Walker Liqueurs, Pernod, Ricard and Avión Tequila (through a joint venture with Tequila Avión); such superior wines as Jacob's Creek and Brancott Estate; and such exquisite champagnes and sparkling wines as Perrier-Jouët Champagne, G.H. Mumm Champagne and Mumm Napa sparkling wines.
Pernod Ricard USA is based in New York, New York, and has roughly 850 employees across the country. Pernod Ricard USA urges all adults to consume its products responsibly and has an active campaign to promote responsible drinking. For more information on this, please visit: www.acceptresponsibility.org.
About Southern Wine & Spirits of America, Inc.
Southern Wine & Spirits of America, Inc., is the nation's largest wine and spirits distributor and broker with operations in 35 markets. The multi-state distributor currently operates in: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Kentucky, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming. Southern also holds operating licenses and permits in Nebraska and Texas. On a national basis, Southern Wine & Spirits of America, Inc. employs more than 14,000 team members. Southern urges all retail customers and adult consumers to market, sell, serve and enjoy its products responsibly. For more information about Southern and its responsible consumption program, see: www.southernwine.com.
About the Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility
Formerly known as The Century Council, the Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility (FAAR) is a national not-for-profit that leads the fight to eliminate drunk driving and underage drinking and is funded by Pernod Ricard USA and other leading U.S. distillers, including Bacardi U.S.A., Inc.; Beam, Inc.; Brown-Forman; Constellation Brands, Inc.; DIAGEO and Hood River Distillers, Inc. For more than 23 years, FAAR has transformed countless lives through programs that bring individuals, families and communities together to guide a lifetime of conversations around alcohol responsibility. To learn more, please visit FAAR at responsibility.org.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Perfect forWine-lovers who dream of getting lost in miles of vines.
In the knowAlso on site are 20 residential villas for long-term guests.
On a private estate in Calchaquí Valley, in the rugged north-west of Argentina.
The decor in the rooms, villas and suites is made up of earthy tones and natural materials to complement the hotel's surroundings. Light pours in through wide windows and some have balconies or terraces; opt for a suite if you want more space and a Jacuzzi. There are also 20 residential villas on the estate.
Indulge in refined Argentine cuisine at Muse, where you'll be treated to gourmet dishes made with locally sourced produce: Grace Cafayate even has its own vegetable garden. Naturally there are many exclusive regional wines to choose from, such as Torrontes and Tannat.
The hotel has a cigar lounge, heated outdoor pool and terrace bar.
In an area renowned for equestrian sports as well as wine, it makes sense to grab a saddle and venture through the vineyards on horseback. The estate is popular for polo and golf: there are two polo fields here and a fantastic 18-hole course. However if it's simply the superb gastronomy you're after, Grace Cafayate has you covered. Take an Argentine cookery class with the hotel chef, make your own wine at Bodega El Porvenir or dine between the vines under a clear night sky.


text:
Home News Taiwan's Health2Sync diabetes management platform gets $6M to boost Japan expansion
Taiwan's Health2Sync diabetes management platform gets $6M to boost Japan expansion
Health2sync team members in Taipei. CEO Ed Deng stands in the left corner on the back row.
See also: Health2Sync
Taiwan-based Health2Sync, the startup behind a diabetes management platform under the same name, announced today that it has secured $6 million US in a series B round. This round was led by Japanese insurance conglomerate Sompo Holdings (TSE:8630) with participation from existing investors: Alibaba and WI Harper. For Health2Sync, this follows their seed round $1.2 million funding from Cherubic Ventures back in June of 2014 and their series A 3 million funding back in August of 2016. During the raising of the series A round, the company participated in the 7th batch of Korea's SparkLabs global accelerator.
The Health2Sync platform helps diabetes patients to keep track of their blood-sugar level online. Their mobile apps are available in several languages on the iTunes AppStore and Google Play. Integrated with glucose meters from different makers, it aims to reduce the patient's burden in managing and recording their blood-sugar level by automating the process. The company claims many of their users come from Taiwan followed by Japan and Hong Kong. With more than 10 million diabetes patients domestically, Japan is now ranked the 8th in the population of diabetics. We were told that the team has decided to expand into Japan because the country's massive governmental policies and funding measures for preventing the disease.
Health2Sync CEO Ed Deng told The Bridge:
In terms of population, it is true that China and India have a larger number of diabetes patients respectively. In such emerging countries, however, people's awareness still low while their governments are not gungho for funding to disease prevention businesses.
In Japan, the government has gradually facilitated schemes so that diseasse prevention projects and clinical care providers can receive grants or get funds. That is why we decided to expand into the Japanese market.
Health2sync's mobile app
Image credit: Health2Sync
The funds aforementioned here is not one that the Health2Sync will directly receive but it will be distributed to local municipalities and care providers across Japan by the government, and the Health2sync solution will be able to see more opportunities for use in such a supply chain. The company expects to gain access to potential users through these stakeholders, aiming to help individuals improve their eating habits and maintain their health.
Sompo Holdings has a subsidiary focused on elderly care services called Sompo Care Next. However, Deng told The Bridge that the Japanese insurance conglomerate's intention with the latest investment is probably inventing a new insurance product through supporting Health2Sync's roll-out in Japan rather than adopting the solution into elderly people because the platform's primary end users are aged between 40 to 65.
Health2Sync is also discussing potential partnership with other insurance companies in Japan because the agreement with Sompo Holdings is not an exclusive deal. Because it is offered as a service providing software, Health2Sync will massively explore collaboration opportunities with glucose meter manufacturers that are likely to complement each others, in addition to working with startups in sectors like Electronic Medical Records (EMR) and telemedicine.
Health2Sync's stakeholders
The company is setting up a team in Japan consisting of one business developer plus two engineers. With the fresh cash injection, they will strengthen employee hiring for online marketing and other professionals like Certified Diabetes Educators (CDEs).
In addition to many CDEs getting older, they are suffering from overwork and chronic shortages of personnel while diabetes patients are increasing but CDEs are not. So what HealthSync wants to solve may include the context of robotics process automation and workstyle reforms in this niche.
Edited by "Tex" Pomeroy
CEO Ed Deng stand in the middle of Health2Sync three co-founders
Previous articleJapan's Factbase unveils cryptocurrency market forecast platform at Blockchain Expo
Next articleCafé Wifi helps digital nomads find place to work, now adds P2P seat reserve function


text:
Q: Change python function argument formating in Emacs I there any way to change python-mode indenting for function args, so instead of
urlpattrens = patterns('',
                       view,
                       name='view')

on enter key press formating will be following:
urlpattrens = patterns('',
    view,
    name='view')

?

A: After upcoming release of python-mode.el 6.1.2 introduction of indent-styles is at the table.
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-mode/+bug/1197521
Consider to add your request there.
For the moment you could install a macro correcting the indent of the first line "view," - afterwards that indent should be honored.
For any curious to hack the indent-machine: here some pseudo-code indicating the entry-point:
+++ python-mode.el  2013-08-16 13:47:45.059486451 +0200
@@ -10859,7 +10859,10 @@
                            ((< (current-indentation) (current-column))
                             (+ (current-indentation) py-indent-offset))
                            (t (py-fetch-previous-indent orig)))
-                        (cond ((looking-at "\\s([ \t]*$")
+                        (cond (
+                               NEW_VAR_SET
+
+                               (looking-at "\\s([ \t]*$")
                                (py-empty-arglist-indent nesting py-indent-offset indent-offset))
                               ((looking-at "\\s([ \t]*\\([^ \t]+.*\\)$")
                                (goto-char (match-beginning 1))


text:
PPAC XC
Victory Services
For Athletes/D-Tag Instructions
For Athletes/ B-Tag Instructions
74days since
RR PR 2 MILE
Colorado State XC Championships
victoryracingcompany@gmail.com
cmhstrack@gmail.com
Locally Owned:
Karen Scott: Co-Owner and Timer
Karen grew up in Howard County, MD. and has a master's degree from Loyola College in Maryland. The Victory Racing Company was a natural progression of a lifetime committed to running. Karen has competed in, coached at, developed & directed running races for most of her life! After years of coaching and competing, it's time to give back and provide an excellent experience to those that love to run and people just beginning to run. As an athlete, Karen was a two time high school track state champion in Maryland, and competed for the University of Maryland B.C. after high school. Karen was a member of the 2007 U.S.A. 100K World Championship team (Hokkaido, Japan), and she has won several ultra races, including the Rocky Raccoon (100mi), Texas Ultra 100K, 24 hour ultra race in Colorado (107mi) and Leadville 100 (big buckle, top 5 finisher) to mention a few events. Karen has competed in marathons, countless 5 & 10k races, competed in over 20 triathlons, and was an active track racer during high school. As a coach at Cheyenne Mountain H.S., Karen has dedicated the past eighteen years to helping students learn to love running. Having competed in a variety of race distances, Karen has seen every facet of the racing experience one can have. Karen has been constant with her drive to develop races (Silver Moon XC Relays (night time), D-12 running club, Cross Country program for elementary students in Cheyenne Mt. School District, the Litefoot Running Series (First trail running series of it's kind in the U.S.) and the Cheyenne Mountain Stampede (now, the state championship course of Colorado). These varied perspectives on a running events provide a deep level of experience that Karen brings to Victory Racing Company team.
Stan Lambros: Vice President/Co-Owner and Race Day Management
Stan Lambros grew up in Baltimore, Maryland and has a master's degree in Education, Counseling Psychology from Loyola College, Maryland. Stan has competed in six full Ironman races, well over thirty triathlons, several trail races, and a few snowshoe events (as a coach and athlete). Currently, Stan is the Head Coach at Cheyenne Mountain High School for the track and cross country teams. As a coach, athlete, spectator and fan, Stan brings his passion for sport to the Victory Racing Team. His ability to attend to the multiple nuances of racing will bring a great amount of experience to anyone participating in a Victory Racing Company event or needing support with their event.


text:
Class Action Defense Cases—In re Family Dollar Stores: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Plaintiffs' Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation But Transfers Class Actions To Western District Of North Carolina
Over Objection of Defense Attorneys, Judicial Panel Grants Plaintiffs' Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, but Agrees with Defendant that Class Actions should be Centralized in Western District of North Carolina
Nine class action lawsuits were filed against Family Dollar Stores alleging violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); specifically, the class action complaints alleged that under the FLSA defendant's store managers are entitled to overtime pay. In re Family Dollar Stores, Inc., Wage & Hour Employment Prac. Litig., ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit. April 8, 2008) [Slip Opn., at 1]. Six of the class actions were pending in the Western District of North Carolina; the three other class actions were pending in Florida, Tennessee and Texas. Id. Plaintiffs' lawyers in five of the North Carolina class actions filed a motion with the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) requesting centralization of the class actions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 in the Northern District of Alabama; plaintiffs in the other class actions supported the motion. Id. Defense attorneys opposed pretrial coordination, and alternatively argued that the class action lawsuits should be transferred to the Western District of North Carolina. Id. The Judicial Panel noted that five additional, related class action complaints had been filed against Family Dollar Stores in Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, and that it would treat these class actions as tag-along cases. Id., n.1. The Judicial Panel granted the motion to centralize the class action lawsuits, id. But the Panel rejected Alabama as a transferee court. Rather, the Judicial Panel agreed with defense attorneys to centralize the litigation in the Western District of North Carolina because "(1) six of the nine actions are already underway there, and (2) Family Dollar Stores, Inc., is headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, and witnesses and documents will likely be found there." Id., at 1-2.
Download PDF file of In re Family Dollar Stores Transfer Order
Posted in: Class Action Court Decisions, Multidistrict Litigation and Uncategorized


text:
{{item.title | formatTitle}}
5 things you need to know about Scheer's economic policies
By Jameson Berkow
Andrew Scheer speaks after being elected the new leader of the federal Conservative party at the federal Conservative leadership convention in Toronto on Saturday, May 27, 2017. , THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn
Jameson Berkow
Follow|Archive
Andrew Scheer is the new leader of the Conservative Party of Canada. The Saskatchewan MP and former Speaker of the House of Commons has been relatively quiet about his policy priorities in the past, but now that he has been handed the reigns of the federal Official Opposition, Canadians can expect him to be more vocal about his views.
Below, BNN takes a look at what Scheer wants to do for the Canadian economy should he become Prime Minister in 2019.
TWO YEARS TO A BALANCED BUDGET
If he leads the Tories to victory in 2019, a Prime Minister Scheer would promise to spend no more than the government makes within two years of taking office. Details will be especially important here, since the most recent update from Ottawa last week said the Liberal government will end the current fiscal year more than $23 billion in the red. By 2019, the deficit is expected to surpass $27 billion and according to an internal Finance Canada analysis published in late December 2016, Ottawa is on track to post decades of deficits until finally returning to balance sometime around 2050. Aside from raising taxes or introducing new ones (anathema for a Conservative) Scheer would have to dramatically cut spending to achieve his goal.
KILL CARBON TAXES
Calling it a "cash grab" and a "job killer" in his victory speech on Saturday, Scheer took direct aim at the federal carbon tax legislation current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's governing Liberal Party plans to put in effect starting next year. Repealing the carbon tax – which Trudeau's team has argued is the opposite of a "cash grab" as it raises no additional federal government revenue – would be the first piece of legislation tabled by a Scheer-led government. The new Conservative leader instead prefers selling made-in-Canada carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to more heavily polluting countries around the world – China and India in particular – despite major government subsidies having been necessary for every major CCS project constructed in Canada to date.
KEEP SUPPLY MANAGEMENT
Opposing the controversial policy of supply management is arguably what kept longtime Conservative leadership frontrunner Maxime Bernier from claiming victory in the 13th and final ballot on Saturday. Scheer supports supply management, which some see as indirect government subsidization of the dairy industry. He even told reporters after his victory that support among Quebec dairy farmers "absolutely" helped lead to his win. To that end, Scheer even won in Bernier's home riding of Beauce, Quebec; where Bernier has been elected in every general election since 2006. U.S. President Donald Trump has taken aim at Canada over supply management, pledging to address the issue in upcoming renegotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement. In defeating Bernier, Scheer has removed the possibility of Trump having a powerful Canadian politico as an ally on the supply management issue.
APPROVE ENERGY EAST
Easily the most creative proposal Scheer made over the course of the Conservative leadership campaign was to put the flags of countries that send crude oil to Canada on gasoline pumps across the country. The idea would be for Canadians to know where their gas originally came from but the implicit policy is an endorsement of the $15-billion Energy East pipeline from Calgary-based TransCanada. Right now there is no convenient and affordable way to ship crude oil extracted in western Canada to be refined in eastern Canada, which is why refineries from the Maritimes through Ontario have to source most of their crude from abroad. Energy East would ship more than enough crude to New Brunswick for the maple leaf to be the only flag Canadians would ever see under Scheer's scheme; even if the already low odds of Energy East ever actually getting built have only been getting lower lately.
KEEP CANNABIS LEGAL
While opposed to the legalization of recreational marijuana for adult use in principle, Scheer seems to acknowledge the economic pitfalls of trying to reinstate prohibition once tens of thousands of Canadians are employed in income-tax-paying CPP-contributing jobs related to the cannabis sector. "I am very realistic," Scheer said last month when asked about his views on the current Liberal plan to legalize marijuana by July of 2018. "Once [marijuana] is legal in a short period of time there's going to be a lot of people that work for companies that distribute it… so we have to be very realistic as a party."
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated Andrew Scheer was elected Conservative Party leader on the 14th ballot.
Andrew Scheer steps onto Parliament Hill for first time since winning Conservative race
Meet Andrew Scheer, the Conservative party's new leader
Trudeau, Scheer talk Parliament, trade in call after Conservative race
Trump to sign new NAFTA as impeachment trial continues
Trump Impeachment Trial Hits Question Phase as Witness Vote Looms
Bolton Leak Describes Trump Linking Ukraine Aid to Biden Probe
Democrats shift focus to second article of impeachment
House Democrats Focus on Constitutional Case Against Trump
Moelis Says Trump's Policies are Generating 'Substantial Rewards'


text:
Q: Lambda Expression closure function not working I want to confirm the lambda expression and converted closure by compiler and tried to write the following:
//this example demonstrate lambda function in c++

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>

using namespace std;

struct Sum
{
    int mySum;
    Sum(){}
    Sum(int s):mySum(s){}

    void operator()(int x){
        mySum += x;
    }
};

int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
    vector<int> v { 3, 4, 2, 1, 56, 2, 4, 65, 2, 9, 8, 5, 7 };

     auto sum = 0;
     //for_each(begin(v), end(v), [&mySum = sum](int x){ mySum += x;});
     for_each(begin(v), end(v), Sum());
     cout << sum << endl;
    return 0;
}

But the above lambda closure is not working. If I remove the default constructor then compiler gives error, If I have this then the result is still 0.
What is going wrong?
Thanks,

A: You are creating a temporary Sum object, passing it to for_each and throwing it away.  Meanwhile, an unrelated int variable called sum is not modified.  In addition, the UnaryFunction taken by std::for_each is by value, so the Sum object it modifies will be temporary anyway.
The lambda captures the closure variables as members, and if they're specified to be references, then they reference things visible in the outside scope regardless of whether the lambda itself is a copy.  You could emulate what lambda does like this:
//this example demonstrate lambda function in c++

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>

using namespace std;

struct Sum
{
    int mySum;
    Sum(){}
    Sum(int s):mySum(s){}

    void operator()(int x){
        mySum += x;
    }
};

// Incorporates a reference to a UnaryFunction so it can be passed by
// reference.
template <class A, class T>
struct LambdaWrapper {
    LambdaWrapper(T &t) :t(t) { }
    void operator () (A a) { return t(a); }
    T &t;
};

int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
    vector<int> v { 3, 4, 2, 1, 56, 2, 4, 65, 2, 9, 8, 5, 7 };

     auto sum = Sum(0);
     //for_each(begin(v), end(v), [&mySum = sum](int x){ mySum += x;});
     //for_each(begin(v), end(v), LambdaWrapper<int,Sum>(sum)); // <-- this would be fine
     for_each(begin(v), end(v), [&sum](int x) { sum(x) }); // <-- also fine
     cout << sum.mySum << endl;
    return 0;
}

A: Much cleaner would be:
vector<int> v { 3, 4, 2, 1, 56, 2, 4, 65, 2, 9, 8, 5, 7 };
auto sum = for_each(begin(v), end(v), Sum()).mySum;
cout << sum << endl;

Based on op's comment:

What changes are required to get the same functionality by functor as
  provided by lambda expression?

The equivalent code of the lambda would be:
struct Sum
{
    int *mySum;
    Sum(){}
    Sum(int *s):mySum(s){}

    void operator()(int x){
        *mySum += x;
    }
};

int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
    vector<int> v { 3, 4, 2, 1, 56, 2, 4, 65, 2, 9, 8, 5, 7 };

     auto sum = 0;
     for_each(begin(v), end(v), Sum(&sum));
     cout << sum << endl;
    return 0;
}


This assessment item relates to course learning outcomes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 as listed in course profile. The main purpose of this assignment is to guide you through an exploration of major topics in information systems to build up your knowledge, and for you to demonstrate that you understand and can explain the basic concepts underlying Information Systems. The use of word processing skills is required in completing the assignment.
NOTE: You can use non-Microsoft software, such as Open Office or Star Office, but make sure you save your work in Microsoft Office format and you only submit the Microsoft Office format files.
An intended side benefit of completing this assignment is to provide additional review and practice for successfully sitting the final examination at end of term. The exam will consist of questions and topics similar to those covered in both Part A and Part B.
All students will complete this part, to be submitted as a word-processed document on the Assignment Submission System available in Moodle (the course website).
You are to research and prepare answers to all questions listed below. You may use quotations or referenced paraphrasing, but you must always summarise your findings and conclusions in your own words. Failure to do this will cost you marks – see marking guide. Answers to each question should be around 300 to 400 words. Be succinct and to the point.
Do not use direct quotations. Instead, you are required to research, read, understand and then explain in your own words. Any paraphrasing from sources must be correctly referenced in-text and in the References section, using the Harvard referencing standard.
Use a variety of web sources, journals and books (avoid using Wikipedia for every question). It is always helpful to read about the same topics from more than one source. Visit the CQU library journal database. The minimum resource to use for all questions is the prescribed textbook.
Table of Contents: The Table of Contents (TOC) must be generated by the word processor software. The title page and table of contents itself should not appear in the table of contents. The table of contents should be on its own page.
The Questions: Type out each question formatted as a sub-heading. Each question should then be an entry in the Table of Contents with page reference see hint below. Your answer should then follow the question with a space in between. Number each question.
Important: Do not attempt to shorten or to re-phrase the question, as this runs the risk of accidentally changing the question. Marking will always be against the original question as published in this specification.
References: Include in this section any web site addresses from which you obtained information, as well as information or help you received from any other sources, including the textbook. Remember that only cited sources should be included in a References section. Use the Harvard system of referencing to correctly cite in-text as well as listing in the References. For the purpose of this assignment, avoid using direct citations or quotes. You are to read sources, develop an understanding of the material, and paraphrase using your own words. Unreferenced direct quotations may be treated as plagiarism. If or when you paraphrase an idea, you should certainly use an in-text reference to note the source.
Header & Footer: Provide a header and footer for your assignment. In the header, put your student ID on the left side and your full name on the right side. In the footer, insert a page number, centered. The header and footer should not appear on the Title Page or on the Table of Contents page, but should appear on all other pages.
Style: Use a word processor to create the business report in portrait-mode, single spaced, Times New Roman (TNR), 12-point font for all non-heading text.
Your university wants to recruit high-quality high school students from your state. Provide examples of (1) the data that your recruiters would gather in this process, (2) the information that your recruiters would process from these data, and (3) the types of knowledge that your recruiters would infer from this information.
Describe the five forces in Porter's competitive forces model and explain how the internet has affected each one.
Differentiate between data warehouses and data marts. Describe a few of characteristics of a data warehouse.
Discuss the strategic benefits of BI systems.
Why are authentication and authorisation important to e-commerce?
List 3 Web 2.0 social networking tools and describe how you would use each for marketing your products.
Discuss the major limitations of e-commerce. Which of these limitations are likely to disappear? Why?
Describe the benefits of integrated accounting software packages.
Explain why web-based customer interaction centres are critical for successful CRM systems.
Explain the important role that information systems play in supporting a supply chain strategy.
For this assignment, you need to upload one file, a word-processor document, and it must be in Microsoft Office format. If you are using non-Microsoft software, such as Open Office or Star Office, then make sure you save your work in Microsoft Office format and that you only submit the Microsoft Office format files. For example, use "Save As" to save word-processor files as .doc or .docx. DO not submit any other kinds of file, such as ODS, ODT, PDF, and RTF. Before submitting your work, review the assignment requirements. Have you achieved all of these? Have you included all of the sections of the report? You may wish to check the detailed marking guide for the assignment to verify that your assignment meets the marking criteria.
Submit your assignment file electronically by using the assignment upload links provided on the course website.


text:
Sugar production
Foundations' blog
Jobs with SOMDIAA
Unsolicited job applications
Somdiaa | The Group | Our values
It is essential for us to go beyond the standards in terms of Quality, Health and Safety at Work and Environment.
Right from the very start the SOMDIAA Group has evolved "in Africa for Africa", basing its development on the values that are intrinsically its own and which have forged its identity and culture.
Playing a role in ensuring the continual supply of basic foodstuffs to local markets is a commitment and a responsibility to consumers.
The Group's persistence and dedication over the last fifty years has enabled it to acquire a unique understanding of the African agri-food industry. Combined with a managerial culture that is both dynamic and appreciative, these human values form the very foundations of the SOMDIAA Group.
The constant quest for high performance, in both agriculture and industrial techniques commits the SOMDIAA group to impeccable levels of service in terms of its staff, clients and suppliers, with an emphasis on respect, listening and dialogue thanks to an awareness of the wealth of cultural diversity which forms the landscape if which the Group continues to evolve.
Teams are predominantly guided by the need to satisfy the requirements and expectations of local consumers and in compliance with its mission statement, the SOMDIAA Group constantly strives to further improve the quality of commercialised end products, most notably through commitments to quality, safety, environment and CSR measures.
If the SOMDIAA Group has been able to maintain long-term and sustainable growth, this is in part due to its commitments on a local level in each of the countries in which it is active and its respect for the local population and its employees and partners. The Group is keen to develop synergies on a local scale and focuses on the training of its human resources and the development of local business owners.
By embracing these values, the SOMDIAA Group pursues its aim to create ever more value across the spectrum of its agri-food activities, which include sugar, flour, eggs and animal feed.
Its ability to dream and to innovate has stayed intact with the passing of time and characterizes its very DNA.
> 08.02.2013 - Somdiaa va ouvrir de nouvelles fondations au Congo et Centrafrique
> 08.02.2013 - Les grands travaux de la SMAG
> 08.02.2013 - SOMDIAA lance son nouveau site doté de la technologie responsive
> 08.02.2013 - Journée Mondiale pour l'industrialisation de l'Afrique
Suivez-nous sur Twitter Lire toutes nos actualités
Web & Press