Government Inclusion. [AIRLINE] and the Lessee covenant and agree that this Agreement shall be subordinated to the provisions of any existing or future agreement or assurances between the Lessee and the United States Government, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition precedent to the granting of federal funds or the approval to impose or use PFCs for the development of the Airport. Upon request, the Lessee shall provide copies at no cost to [AIRLINE] of any documentation related to the imposition or use of PFCs. [AIRLINE] further agrees that it shall not cause the Lessee to violate any assurances made by the Lessee to the federal government in connection with the granting of such federal funds or approvals.
Government Inclusion. 22.1 This Agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions of any existing or future agreements between County and the United States government relative to the operation or maintenance of Airport, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition precedent to the granting of federal funds, the transfer of federal rights or property to the County for Airport purposes, or the expenditure of federal funds for the improvements or development of Airport to the extent that the provisions of any such existing or future agreements are generally required by the United States or other civil airports receiving federal funds. County agrees to give Airline written notice in advance of the execution of such agreements of any provisions which will modify the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement is subject and subordinate to the terms and conditions of the instruments and documents under which the County acquired the Airport from the United States of America and shall be given only such effect as will not conflict or be inconsistent with the terms and conditions contained in such instruments and documents and any existing or subsequent amendments thereto.
Government Inclusion. The most prevalent and long-standing theories regarding party inclusion in gov- ernment relate to the ideological congruence of coalition members (Xxxxxxx 1970, De Swaan and Xxxxxxxx 1973, Xxxxx 1962) and the parliamentary seat-share of the party (Xxxxxx, Frendreis and Gleiber 1986, Xxxxxx 1961, Xxxxxxxxx and Xxxxx 1985). Ideological congruence with the formateur is a strong, established predictor of coali- tional inclusion. The theoretical logic for this understanding of coalitions rests on the importance of policy goals to parties and their members (Xxxxx 1990). Minimizing policy losses in a coalition of parties with differing goals requires the formateur to join in coalition with the most ideologically similar parties. The intuition behind each of these theories is that ideologically more compact coalitions will be more valuable because they involve fewer costs in terms of policy compromises and transaction costs for passing legislation than do more diverse ones. These models have been expanded based on party goals (B¨ack 0000, Xxxxx 1990) and applied to different settings (Klingemann, Hofferbert, Budge, Keman, Bergman, Xxxxx and Xxxxx 1994, Xxxxxx 2014, Warwick 1994), but the importance of ideology to forming governing coalitions has remained central to the study of government forma- tion. It is evident however that these studies assume that party ideological position is well defined and public information prior to the formation of the government, which may or may not be the case based on the information that parties provide throughout their campaign, through the language of their manifesto. All of this literature on the importance of ideology assumes that there is a clear understanding of the party’s ideal point either in a left-right ideological space or on specific issues. I argue through this chapter that uncertainty of this ideal point must be taken into account when understanding the nature of the bargaining environment. In order for parties to successfully use governing coalitions to reduce transaction costs and enact policy near their ideal point, the quality of the information that they have on other parties is crucial to understanding the complexity and uncertainty of the coalition building process. Along these lines, there have been challenges to these canonical claims that call into question some of the assumptions that underly these theoretical and empirical findings. The first is that the party is a unified actor (B¨ack, Xxxxx and Mu¨ller...
Government Inclusion. AIRLINE covenants and agrees that this Agreement shall be subordinated to the provisions of any existing or future agreement between the AUTHORITY and the United States Government or governmental authority, relative to the operation or maintenance of the AIRPORT, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition precedent to the granting of federal funds or the approval to impose or use PFCs for the improvement or development of the AIRPORT. AIRLINE further agrees that it shall not cause the AUTHORITY to violate any assurances made by the AUTHORITY to the federal government in connection with the granting of such federal funds or the approval of such PFCs.
Government Inclusion. 105 XXIII. AUTHORITY MEMBER PROTECTION ........................... 110 XXIV. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ................................. 111
Government Inclusion. 22.01 Airline covenants and agrees that this Agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions of any existing or future agreements between Authority and the United States Government, relative to the operation or maintenance of Airport, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition precedent to the granting of Federal Funds for the development of Airport to the extent that the provisions of any such existing or future agreements are generally required by the United States at other civil airports receiving Federal Funds and provided that Authority agrees to give Airline written notice in advance of the execution of such agreements of any provisions which will modify the terms of this Agreement.
Government Inclusion. 24.1 This Agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions of any existing or future agreements between County and the United States government relative to the operation or maintenance of Airport, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition precedent to the granting of Federal Funds for the development of Airport to the extent that the provisions of any such existing or future agreements are generally required by the United States or other civil airports receiving Federal Funds. County agrees to give Airline written notice in advance of the execution of such agreements of any provisions which will modify the terms of this Agreement.
Government Inclusion
