Difference between revisions of "National Planning Association"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
The National Planning Association, for example, is a small policy-discussion group which took its present form in 1942 as part of the concern with postwar planning. It has a more liberal outlook than the CED, but has been very close to it. In the mid-1950’s the two organizations considered a merger, but decided against it because the NPA has a distinctive role to play in that both its leadership and study groups include representatives from labor and agriculture: “NPA did not want to lose the frankness and open interchange it achieved through labor participation, and CED felt it had acquired a reputation for objectivity and did not wish to dilute this good will toward an avowedly business organization by bringing in other groups.�(25. Eakins, op. cit., p. 479.)
+
 
 +
 
 +
William Domhoff writes:
 +
 
 +
:The [[National Planning Association]], for example, is a small policy-discussion group which took its present form in 1942 as part of the concern with postwar planning. It has a more liberal outlook than the CED, but has been very close to it. In the mid-1950’s the two organizations considered a merger, but decided against it because the NPA has a distinctive role to play in that both its leadership and study groups include representatives from labor and agriculture: “NPA did not want to lose the frankness and open interchange it achieved through labor participation, and CED felt it had acquired a reputation for objectivity and did not wish to dilute this good will toward an avowedly business organization by bringing in other groups.�{{ref|25}}{{ref|domhoff}}
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
==REferences==
 +
 
 +
*{{note|25}} Eakins, op. cit., p. 479.)
 +
*{{note|domhoff}}

Revision as of 17:28, 4 March 2006


William Domhoff writes:

The National Planning Association, for example, is a small policy-discussion group which took its present form in 1942 as part of the concern with postwar planning. It has a more liberal outlook than the CED, but has been very close to it. In the mid-1950’s the two organizations considered a merger, but decided against it because the NPA has a distinctive role to play in that both its leadership and study groups include representatives from labor and agriculture: “NPA did not want to lose the frankness and open interchange it achieved through labor participation, and CED felt it had acquired a reputation for objectivity and did not wish to dilute this good will toward an avowedly business organization by bringing in other groups.�[1][2]


REferences

  • ^ Eakins, op. cit., p. 479.)
  • ^