Packaged in handsome, affordable trade editions, Clydesdale Classics is a new series of essential works. From the musings of intellectuals such as Thomas Paine in Common Sense to the striking personal narrative of Harriet Jacobs in Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, this new series is a comprehensive collection of our intellectual history through the words of the exceptional few. Originally published as a political pamphlet in 1848, amidst the revolutions in Europe, The Communist Manifesto documents Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels's theories on society and politics. It does so by defining the state of the class system in contemporary Europe in which a larger, lower class is controlled and oppressed by a tyrannical, oppressive upper class. The Manifesto argues that, at some point in history, the lower class will inevitably realize their potential and exploitation and subsequently revolt. Once this occurs, Marx and Engels argue, there will be an uprising among proletariats that shifts political and economic power, ultimately resulting in the dismantling of class systems and capitalism. Additionally, in the Manifesto, Marx and Engels also predict the future state of the global economy and discuss their viewpoints on private property, while also addressing many other topics pertinent to today's world. Although written nearly 170 years ago, The Communist Manifesto is still widely read and cited. Amid the current turmoil between social classes and the societies of the world, its revolutionary prose and ideas can still yield ripe food for thought.

Apologia Pro Beata Maria Virgine: John Henry Newman’s Defence of the Virgin Mary in Catholic Doctrine and Piety represents a discussion of a theme within John Henry Newman’s Mariology: namely, his apologetic defence of the place of the Virgin Mary in Catholic doctrine and piety. Newman is not instinctively known as a Marian theologian or apologist, but he should be. This book shows how Newman possessed a highly developed Mariology—one that grew out of his Anglican background and that developed into his life as a Catholic priest. Based upon Scripture and the Church Fathers, Newman's thought on the place of the Virgin Mary in the life and faith of Catholicism was, like much of his theology, ahead of its time and frequently out of step with the nineteenth-century Catholic milieu he lived within. This study of Newman’s defence of Catholic Mariology and its place in Catholic piety is achieved through an examination of some of Newman’s Anglican sermons, his influential Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845), some of his private correspondence and, finally, his 1866 published reply to his old friend, Edward Bouverie Pusey, the Letter to Pusey. From a discussion of these texts, this book argues that Newman’s Mariology was both unique in its day and has proved prophetic in directing the future direction of Catholic Mariology—especially in its ability to provide an orthodox commentary on the more effusive elements of Marian piety within Catholicism. Patristic and restrained in its pious expressions, Newman’s Mariology had connections with both his Anglican past and the native Recusant context he made contact with when he became a Catholic in 1845, in addition to providing an important critique of the ultramontane influences then making their way into Victorian Catholic life. For Newman, the Virgin Mary—rightly understood in her biblical and patristic context—was the `pattern of faith’, a theological model for Catholics to emulate and use when explaining the Catholic religion to others.

President Obama's FY2014 budget submission was released on April 10, 2013. Using data from that budget submission, this report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1976 through FY2012, preliminary estimates for FY2013 spending, and the levels consistent with the President's proposals for FY2014 through FY2018. Spending caps and budget enforcement mechanisms established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25; BCA) strongly affected the FY2013 budget cycle and are likely to shape the FY2014 budget cycle as well. BCA provisions include separate caps on discretionary defense and non-defense spending. As the 113th Congress considers funding levels for FY2014 and beyond, past spending trends may prove useful in framing policy discussions. For example, rapid growth in national defense and other security spending in the past decade has played an important role in fiscal discussions. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5; ARRA) funded sharp increases in spending on education, energy, and other areas. Since FY2010, however, base defense discretionary spending has essentially been held flat and non-defense discretionary spending has been reduced significantly. The base defense budget excludes war funding (Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror). This report may provide a starting point for discussions about spending trends and federal priorities, but it does not attempt to explain spending patterns in each policy area. Other CRS products are available to provide insights into those spending trends in specific functional areas. Functional categories (e.g., national defense, agriculture, etc.) provide a means to compare federal funding for activities within broad policy areas that often cut across several federal agencies. Subfunction categories provide a finer division of funding levels within narrower policy areas. Budget function categories are used within the budget resolution and for other purposes, such as possible program cuts and tax expenditures. Three functions, however, are omitted. These are (1) allowances, which contain items reflecting technical budget adjustments; (2) net interest, which by its nature is not discretionary spending; and (3) undistributed offsetting receipts, which are treated for federal budgetary purposes as negative budget authority. Spending in this report is measured and illustrated in terms of discretionary budget authority as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). Measuring spending as a percentage of GDP in effect controls for inflation and population increases. A flat line on such graphs indicates that spending in that category is increasing at the same rate as overall economic growth. Discretionary spending is provided and controlled through appropriations acts, which provide budget authority to federal agencies to fund many of the activities commonly associated with such federal government functions as running executive branch agencies, congressional offices and agencies, and international operations of the government. Essentially all spending on federal wages and salaries is discretionary. Program administration costs for entitlement programs such as Social Security are generally funded by discretionary spending, while mandatory spending generally funds the benefits provided through those programs. Thus, the figures showing trends in discretionary budget authority presented herein do not reflect the much larger expenditures on program benefits supported by mandatory spending. For some federal agencies, such as the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Transportation, the division of expenditures into discretionary and mandatory categories can be complex.

Noir, jazz clubs, seedy bars, gangsters and assassins go hand in hand in this darkly comic crime tale of investigation by any means possible. When a man is murdered outside Reno's Bar in LA late one night, PI Carlos Vespa is hired to take the case. However, with no clues, no evidence and a suspect that can't be found, the biggest case that Carlos has ever taken may be too difficult to swallow. Especially when the killer turns out to be a member of the mob. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. A fast-paced, atmospheric thriller that will keep you reading until the end.

Total federal debt can increase in two ways. First, debt increases when the government sells debt to the public to finance budget deficits and acquire the financial resources needed to meet its obligations. This increases debt held by the public. Second, debt increases when the federal government issues debt to certain government accounts, such as the Social Security, Medicare, and Transportation trust funds, in exchange for their reported surpluses. This increases debt held by government accounts. The sum of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts is the total federal debt. Surpluses reduce debt held by the public, while deficits raise it. On August 2, 2011, President Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; S. 365; P.L. 112-25), after an extended debt limit episode. The federal debt had reached its legal limit on May 16, 2011, prompting Treasury Secretary T. Geithner to declare a debt issuance suspension period, allowing certain extraordinary measures to extend Treasury's borrowing capacity. The BCA included provisions aimed at deficit reduction and allowing the debt limit to rise between $2,100 billion and $2,400 billion in three stages, the latter two subject to congressional disapproval. Once the BCA was enacted, a presidential certification triggered a $400 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $14,694 billion, and a second $500 billion increase on September 22, 2011, as a disapproval measure (H.J.Res. 77) only passed the House. A January 12, 2012, presidential certification triggered a third, $1.2 trillion increase on January 28, 2012. On January 18, 2012, the House passed a disapproval measure (H.J.Res. 98) on a 239-176 vote. The Senate declined to take up a similar measure (S.J.Res. 34), on a 44-52 vote on January 26, 2012. On December 26, 2012, the U.S. Treasury stated that the debt will reach its limit on December 31. Extraordinary measures will then be used to meet federal payments. CBO estimates those measures could fund the government until mid-February or early March 2013. Congress has always placed restrictions on federal debt. The form of debt restrictions, structured as amendments to the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917, evolved into a general debt limit in 1939. Congress has voted to raise the debt limit 11 times since 2001, due to persistent deficits and additions to federal trust funds. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 the U.S. Treasury asked Congress for another increase, which passed in May 2003. In June 2004, the U.S. Treasury asked for another debt limit increase and again in October 2004, enacted on November 19, 2004. In 2005, reconciliation instructions in the FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95) included a debt limit increase. After warnings from the U.S. Treasury, Congress passed an increase that the President signed on March 20. In 2007, Congress approved legislation (H.J.Res. 43) to raise the debt limit by $850 billion to $9,815 billion that the President signed September 29, 2007. The recent economic slowdown led to sharply higher deficits in recent years, which led to a series of debt limit increases. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221), signed into law (P.L. 110-289) on July 30, 2008, included a debt limit increase. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424), signed into law on October 3 (P.L. 110-343), raised the debt limit again. The debt limit rose a third time in less than a year to $12,104 billion with the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 on February 13, 2009 (ARRA; H.R. 1), signed into law on February 17, 2009 (P.L. 111-5). Following that measure, the debt limit was subsequently increased by $290 billion to $12,394 billion (P.L. 111-123) in a stand-alone debt limit bill on December 28, 2009, and by $1.9 trillion to $14,294 billion on February 12, 2010 (P.L. 111-139), as part of a package that also contained the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.

Total federal debt can increase in two ways. First, debt increases when the government sells debt to the public to finance budget deficits and acquire the financial resources needed to meet its obligations. This increases debt held by the public. Second, debt increases when the federal government issues debt to certain government accounts, such as the Social Security, Medicare, and Transportation trust funds, in exchange for their reported surpluses. This increases debt held by government accounts. The sum of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts is the total federal debt. Surpluses reduce debt held by the public, while deficits raise it. On August 2, 2011, President Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; S. 365; P.L. 112-25), after an extended debt limit episode. The federal debt had reached its legal limit on May 16, 2011, prompting Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to declare a debt issuance suspension period, allowing certain extraordinary measures to extend Treasury's borrowing capacity. The BCA included provisions aimed at deficit reduction and allowing the debt limit to rise between $2,100 billion and $2,400 billion in three stages, the latter two subject to congressional disapproval. Once the BCA was enacted, a presidential certification triggered a $400 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $14,694 billion. That certification also triggered a second $500 billion increase on September 22, 2011, as a disapproval measure (H.J.Res. 77) only passed the House. A January 12, 2012, presidential certification will trigger a third, $1.2 trillion, increase after 15 days unless a disapproval measure, which would be subject to veto, were enacted. On January 18, 2012, the House passed such a measure (H.J.Res. 98) on a 239-176 vote. Congress has always placed restrictions on federal debt. The form of debt restrictions, structured as amendments to the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917, evolved into a general debt limit in 1939. Congress has voted to raise the debt limit 11 times since 2001, due to persistent deficits and additions to federal trust funds. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 the U.S. Treasury asked Congress for another increase, which passed in May 2003. In June 2004, the U.S. Treasury asked for another debt limit increase and again in October 2004. A debt limit increase was enacted on November 19, 2004. In 2005, reconciliation instructions in the FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95) included a debt limit increase. After warnings from the U.S. Treasury, Congress passed an increase that the President signed on March 20. In 2007, Congress approved legislation (H.J.Res. 43) to raise the debt limit by $850 billion to $9,815 billion that the President signed September 29, 2007. The recent economic slowdown led to sharply higher deficits in recent years, which led to a series of debt limit increases. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221), signed into law (P.L. 110-289) on July 30, 2008, included a debt limit increase. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424), signed into law on October 3 (P.L. 110-343), raised the debt limit again. The debt limit rose a third time in less than a year to $12,104 billion with the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 on February 13, 2009 (ARRA; H.R. 1), which was signed into law on February 17, 2009 (P.L. 111-5). Following this measure, the debt limit was subsequently increased by $290 billion to $12,394 billion (P.L. 111-123) in a stand-alone debt limit bill on December 28, 2009, and by $1.9 trillion to $14,294 billion on February 12, 2010 (P.L. 111-139), as part of a package that also contained the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.